 Report
a Concern |
| Submit
a C.A.R.E Report (Concerning
And /or Risky Event) regarding a student, community member or event. |
Important News
Student & Campus Life Departments |
Selecting Assessment Tools |
Interpretation |
Interviews & Focus Groups |
Assessment Series 2012 |
CampusLabs |
Selecting Assessment Tools
There are a variety of ways to collect information to answer specific questions about your program. We refer to these different data-gathering techniques as “assessment tools.” There are two general categories of assessment tools:
It is important to note, however, qualitative and quantitative research is NOT compartmentalized separate elements. Rather qualitative and quantitative assessment tools are co-functioning and co-existing complementary tools.
The tools you select should be consistent with the type of information you seek. In some cases, several tools may be needed to address a breadth of issues. Using a variety of tools is often beneficial because the information gathered by some tools can be compared with information from other tools (this allows one to confirm findings from one source with another source), or can deepen your understanding about issues raised in one method. Some researchers purposely use a variety of different tools to see if they reveal similar findings and to supplement and deepen understanding about the information – this is one form of “triangulation.”
Many of the types of assessments that student affairs units want to consider are what we call “Indirect indicators.” These commonly involve self-reports through surveys or interviews of students, alumni, or employers on their experiences and perspectives about a unit, service, or program.
Below we summarize some of the advantages and disadvantages of a few selected types of tools.
Assessment Tools- Advantages & Disadvantages
| Tool | Advantages |
Disadvantages |
Survey |
Inexpensive. Can be quickly administered to a group. Best suited for simple and short questions. Can reach every participant. |
No control for misunderstood questions, missing data, untruthful responses. Not suited for exploration of complex issues. |
Survey |
Comparatively inexpensive. Can attempt to reach participants over a wide geographical area. |
No control for misunderstood questions, missing data, untruthful responses. Not suited for exploration of complex issues. Sometimes low response rate. Takes time to receive responses. |
Interview |
Relatively inexpensive. Best suited for relatively short and non-sensitive topics. Can attempt to reach participants over a wide geographical area. |
Sometimes difficult to reach audience (especially alumni). Usually requires a sample of respondents. Not suitable for lengthy questionnaires and sensitive topics. Respondents lack privacy and anonymity. Interviewer requires skills. |
Interview |
Interviewer can probe evasive answers and explore topics in depth, and clarify questions. With good rapport, may obtain useful open-ended comments. Usually yields richest data, details and insights. Best if in-depth information is wanted. Permit face-to-face contact with respondents. |
Same as above. Often time-consuming to analyze due to volume and qualitative nature of data. Interviewee may distort information through recall error, selective perceptions, desire to please interviewer. |
InterviewFocus group interviews |
Useful to gather ideas, different viewpoints, new insights, improving questions design. |
Must take a sample. Limits time that each individual has to contribute. Lacks individual privacy, thus could reduce accuracy of results. |
Tests/Standardized certifications |
Provide comparative information across populations. May be relatively easy to administer. |
Available instrument may be unsuitable for population. Tests may contain unfairness or bias. Developing and validating new project-specific tests may be expensive and time consuming. Test may be narrow in scope and thus not allow student to demonstrate complexity of understanding. |
Portfolios |
Gathers information from variety of sources over time. Usually respondent self-reflects and rates own work. Requires development of clear criteria for judgment. |
Without clear criteria, judgment is subjective. |
*This table is modified from the User-Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation: Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Education, Directorate for Education and Human Resources, Division of Research, Evaluation and Communication, National Science Foundation. Exhibit 5.
