Reference no: EM133306903

Assignment: Some years ago I was involved in a project assessing the correlates of students' participation in a first-year learning community program with student learning and well-being outcomes, including the indicators of depressive symptomology. Though student participation in the study was voluntary and confidential, I was challenged by the school's legal counsel to reveal the name of any student who responded with high levels of depressive symptoms and, particularly, any who indicated they frequently had suicidal thoughts. The advisement was that these students were "at risk" and should be referred to the counseling center. Bound by my professional ethics as a sociologist and the guarantee of confidentiality, I did not want students "flagged" for any reason. To receive institutional board review (IRB) clearance, an alternative depression scale that did not contain items related to suicidality was used, and the student consent form was amended to include contact information for the counseling center. In retrospect, I now question whether protecting students' identity was in the best interests of their health, safety, and ability to thrive. Additionally, I missed the opportunity for a rich and robust dialogue with colleagues, faculty, and staff, about the priorities for the research. What did we value most in terms of the goals for the research: data for program improvement, or did we have deeper questions about student well-being? How were we prepared to support students in the study? In what ways might we, as a research team, have better communicated with students about the rationale for including well-being in a survey that also asked about learning?The difficulties that come with conducting assessment often pose challenging ethical considerations. This is not because forms of assessment inherently contradict ethical guidelines or principles, but because there are inevitable ethical nuances when conducting inquiry about learning and student success within the environment of most postsecondary institutions. It is an environment in which the demarcations between objective researcher and subject are not always clear, where objectivity may not necessarily be desirable, and where evidence might only need to be good enough-not perfect.To conduct assessment for the good of institutional advancement, evaluators will likely encounter a number of ethical gray areas. First, ambiguities arise when researchers focus on students and products of students' demonstrated learning as the evidence within assessment. Second, evaluators must navigate around the ethical use and implementation of data on campuses for the goals of institutional advancement by considering the ways in which data has been collected, the degree to which it is representative of the intended population, and the extent to which it can be constructively analyzed for empirical use. The core of this issue is what evidence is needed, or is "good enough," to help inform institutional advancement. Researchers must also consider who should be allowed to use and interpret evidence in order to make decisions about programmatic or institutional improvement.p.700Note that we should not assume assessment on college campuses is solely in the domain of institutional researchers. Increasingly, assessment efforts are carried out by faculty members, assessment committees, and other campus educators, such as student affairs professionals. Thus, when thinking about who may have a role in the ethical stewardship of assessment, the circle may include a range of campus constituents. The ethics pertaining to the use and interpretation of data, therefore, is often a shared responsibility.Ethical guidelines are an essential part of the assessment process. The aim of this chapter, however, is to complicate the application of those principles within the context of institutional advancement and student success. After providing an overview of the ethical principles that govern the treatment of human subjects and data, the chapter reexamines those principles through the lens of campus advancement. The idea of practical ethics is discussed as a means for balancing ethical guidelines with the need to move campuses forward.

Question: after reading see below:

1. Which topic or issue resonates the most with you? Why?
2. What big question remains unanswered? The question can be about something that you want more information about, or it can be something that takes the conversation in an entirely different direction.
3. What did you gain from this reading?
4. Be sure the question is pertinent to the topic for this week.
5. Include your own experience explain why you agree or disagree with the information

2. Imagine you were recently hired as the provost of Progress University. You are required to hold monthly meetings with your staff and colleagues. While leading one of these monthly meetings, you observe that several individuals within your unit tend to use the words assessment and evaluation interchangeably. You are concerned that this misunderstanding could have an impact on how they interpret upcoming policies and practices related to both concepts.

1. What practical experiences would you use to help your colleagues to have a more precise understanding of both concepts?
2. Include your own experience , explain why you agree or disagree with the information.