Browse Database – Assessment for Learning at Boston College

Assessment Details

Academic Year: 2020-2021 Level: Graduate

Campus Department: Lynch School of Education & Human Development [UG and Grad]

Program Type: Major [UG] / Program [Grad]

Program Name: School Counseling MA (Link)

Description of Data Collection:

a. To assess the first learning outcome, which is to provide foundational training in, and foster identification with, the field of psychology generally, and counseling and school counseling, specifically, the following evidence and analytical approaches are utilized:
i. Annual review by entire counseling faculty of students’ academic performance and professional development.
ii. Assessment by lab instructors in the first-year practicum seminar as well as by the full-practicum seminar instructors in the second year of each student’s development as a school counselor.
iii. Performance on a comprehensive examination given in the spring semester of the final year in which students are assessed on their foundational knowledge of school counseling theory and technique.
iv. Annual surveys of exiting students, alumni who graduated within the last three years, and clinical supervisors as well as periodic surveys of employers. In surveys of exiting students and alumni, respondents are asked to rate the extent to which Boston College has provided them with foundational training in school counseling, specifically pertaining to theory and applied knowledge. Exiting students and alumni are also asked to rate the extent to which their training at Boston College has fostered their identification as a school counselor. Similarly, clinical supervisors and employers are asked to rate the extent to which students/alumni display foundational knowledge of the field of school counseling and the degree to which they have developed an identity as a school counselor.
b. To assess the second learning outcome, which is to train students to become competent as practitioners, and knowledgeable of the ways in which science influences practice and how practice can inform scientific investigation, the following evidence and analytical approaches are utilized:
i. Annual review by entire counseling faculty of students’ clinical performance.
ii. Assessment by lab instructors in the first-year practicum seminar as well as by the full-practicum seminar instructors in the second year of each student’s counseling skills.
iii. Quantitative and qualitative assessments by site supervisors of each student’s competency as a practitioner near the end of the fall and spring semesters of the second-year full practicum placement. Students are rated on progress in performance on 11 standards of practice developed by the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
iv. Student self-report ratings on progress in acquisition of relevant subject matter knowledge competencies during the fall and spring of their second year in the program. Specifically, as it pertains to the program’s learning outcome of training students to become competent as practitioners, students are asked to rate themselves on their counseling knowledge and skills as well as on their consultation and collaboration.
v. Annual surveys of exiting students as well as alumni who graduated within the last three years in which they are asked to rate the extent to which they integrate research into practice. Similarly, annual reports by clinical supervisors as well as periodic surveys of employers in which they rate the degree to which students/alumni are knowledgeable about the ways science influences practice.
c. To assess the third learning outcome, which is to train students to promote social justice in their professional work, the following evidence and analytic approaches are utilized:
i. Successful completion of relevant courses, particularly Multicultural Issues in Counseling (APSY 7528).
ii. Performance on a comprehensive examination given in the spring semester of the second year in which students are assessed on their knowledge of social justice issues within the context of school counseling as well as of culturally-competent practice.
iii. Ratings by lab instructors in the first-year practicum seminar as well as by the full-practicum seminar instructors in the second year of each student’s awareness and sensitivity to issues of diversity.
iv. Quantitative and qualitative assessments by site supervisors of each student near the end of the fall and spring semesters of the second-year full practicum placement. Specifically, as it pertains to the learning outcome of training students to promote social justice, site supervisors evaluate students on the extent to which they value cultural diversity and inclusivity and the degree to which they serve as an advocate for all students.
v. Annual surveys of exiting students as well as alumni who graduated within the last three years in which they are asked to rate the extent to which they have been trained be aware of social justice issues and to work with individuals from diverse backgrounds. Similarly, annual reports by clinical supervisors as well as periodic surveys of employers in which they rate the degree to which students/alumni incorporate social justice issues into their work and utilize professional skills to work in multidisciplinary and culturally-diverse school settings.

Review Process:

a. The full faculty meets each week to discuss program-related issues, including student performance and feedback related to the learning outcomes specified in Question 1. In addition, the Master’s Coordinating Committee (consisting of four faculty and the practicum director) meet monthly to follow-up on program and student issues.
b. With respect to individual student data, as noted above, the entire counseling faculty participates in an annual review of student performance. However, there is ongoing communication at organized, collaborative levels of support available for process and response to real time data received from individual instructors and/or field supervisors during the semester. Communication and process may include instructors, student, program coordinator, student adviser, practicum director, the entire faculty, and the office of graduate students (if necessary).
c. With respect to program changes, the program coordinator will typically take the lead along with members of the Master’s Coordinating Committee in presenting proposals to the full-faculty for collaborative decision making.

Resulting Program Changes:

In data gathered from students through both formal (e.g., surveys) and informal (e.g., individual conversations with faculty advisors, program coordinator meetings with student cohort representatives) mechanisms, students expressed a desire for increased documentation regarding the requirements for their pre-practicum and practicum training as well as for more contact with program alumni. To fulfill the request for more information regarding practicum training expectations, a comprehensive Canvas site was developed for both the pre-practicum and full practicum years. These sites clearly outline all expectations, including a schedule for meeting each expectation, and serve as a depository for students to upload materials related to their field experiences (e.g., self-evaluations, portfolio items, etc.). To fulfill the request for additional contact with program alumni, increased efforts have been made to bring alumni back to discuss a variety of topics (e.g., school counselors’ roles in anti-racism efforts, school violence, college counseling, secondary trauma, etc.) with students during their practicum groups.

Date of Most Recent Program Review:

Attachments (if available)