Talking Stick - July/August 2017 - 51

The ability to remain
calm, thoughtful,
trusted, and curious
will encourage smart
thinking.

Let's look more
closely at the
content.

What
methods &
measures
were used?

to methods and propose alternative
explanations for results based on the
methods. Other team members, who
may also have helped design the assessment model, need a deep understanding of the content of the assessment, allowing them to serve as the
subject matter experts. These people
can ask questions about content issues
that could impact results. For example,
if the assessment is related to training,
the group should include someone
familiar with the goals of the training,
the theory behind the training, the
topics covered, and the methods used.
Specific knowledge about the training
could clarify results or point to alternative perspectives about the results.

Student
perspective?

Context?

Or, as another example, if the project
involved student participants, then
the team should have a person with
a deep understanding of the student
experience. That person can describe
findings from the student perspective,
including alternative understandings
of interview language, survey questions, or student comments. Finally,
the team needs to include someone
who knows the context of the assessment. Specifically, someone needs to
understand not only how the assessment was conducted but also the
campus context in which it was conducted. That person would be aware
of current issues, major events, and
important campus conversations.

Along with knowledge, a strong
team will also include a variety of
perspectives. Specifically, three
perspectives should be represented:
a big-picture thinker, a detail person,
and a challenger. These categories are
common in many discussions and
are critical to effective discussions of
assessment results. The big-picture
thinkers ensure that results are evaluated for usefulness and importance.
These thinkers will also consider how
the results fit with department goals.
The big-picture perspective prevents
situations of analysis-paralysis and
dilemma-tizing. The detail-oriented
people play an important role because
their ability to dig into results can
be used to find nuggets that explain
high-level unexpected findings. Their
probes can also be used to find deeper
patterns that point out which results
are anomalies and which are widespread. Finally, the role of challenger
is integral to the team - and not just to
avoid group-think. They may use questions to challenge the traditional narratives that reinforce what was done
in practice or during the assessment
project. Though challengers are often
involved in the design and analysis
phases, some should also be included
in the discussion of results.
Overall, the collection
of smart, thoughtful, curious, and calm people to
discuss results is good practice for any
assessment project. Finding unexpected results and experiencing any
resulting fallout can feel lonely. Working with team members who are both
supportive and productive can enhance
the ability to think through results and
explore alternatives. In addition, this
group can preview the range of issues
that may come up if the results are
shared with a broader audience. However, housing professionals will need
more than a core team; they also need
a set of specific strategies for thinking
through the actual results.

July + august 2017

Talking Stick - July/August 2017

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Talking Stick - July/August 2017