CP Logo

University of Maine at Fort Kent College Portrait

Home Compare At A Glance Contact

EXPLORE THIS COLLEGE PORTRAIT

University of Maine at Fort Kent Learning Outcomes

The University of Maine at Fort Kent has a system of assessment in place that is widely shared and evaluated for continuous quality improvement. As part of its dedication to institutional improvement, the Council on Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment (CIEA) with broad campus representation serves as a coordinating body and central feedback loop mechanism. The CIEA is responsible for developing and monitoring a systematic, broad-based comprehensive process for assessing institutional effectiveness and student learning outcomes as a basis for sustaining quality and self-improvement. For example, analysis of the most recent National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) in 2011 led to the creation of an action plan to use results to implement curricular and co-curricular change in the First-Year Experience (e.g., passport, learning communities).




University of Maine at Fort Kent administered the ETS Proficiency Profile in 2009 - 2012.

University of Maine at Fort Kent conducted a Value-added administration of the ETS Proficiency Profile in 2009 - 2012. The results are displayed below in the SLO Results tab.

For additional information on UMFK’s process for administering ETS Proficiency Profile, please click on the Assessment Process Tab below. For information on the students included in the administration, please click the Students Tested Tab.

Why did you choose the ETS Proficiency Profile for your institutional assessment?

The Proficiency Profile enables us to test more than one cohort and combine results . This is the only way a very smalli nstitution like UMFK can measure learning gains. The Proficiency Profile is also simpler to administer and more familiar in style and process to our students. 


Which University of Maine at Fort Kent students are assessed? When?

UMFK administers the Proficency Profile to incoming first year students as soon as possible after entry - sometime in late fall or early spring of their first year. If a scond administration is necessary, we repeat the same process with the following year's incoming studentsd. Seniors are tested in the spring of their presumed graduation year.


How are assessment data collected?

All Proficiency Profile tests are administered online, and the process is managed by ETS. Students are given several opportunities to respond to the study, and UMFK does considerable publicity to encourage support and participation.


How are data reported within University of Maine at Fort Kent?

ETS performs the initial analysis of the results, and provides concise reports to UMFK on testing outcomes.  These reports allow us to accurately benchmark and evaluate the progress our student shave made, and the progress we have made in building stronger programs.


How are assessment data at UMFK used to guide program improvements?

Proficiency Profile reports are discussed in a variety of forums, including campus wide development sessions, workshops among academic departments, and administrative review sessions. In each of these areas, the information provided by the Proficiency profile on where and how much our students are achieving UMFK learning goals is used to pinpoint areas for improvement and crieteria for successful change.


Of 163 freshmen students eligible to be tested, 149 (91%) were included in the tested sample at University of Maine at Fort Kent.


Of 109 senior students eligible to be tested, 101 (93%) were included in the tested sample at University of Maine at Fort Kent.


Probability sampling, where a small randomly selected sample of a larger population can be used to estimate the learning gains in the entire population with statistical confidence, provides the foundation for campus-level student learning outcomes assessment at many institutions. It's important, however, to review the demographics of the tested sample of students to ensure that the proportion of students within a given group in the tested sample is close to the proportion of students in that group in the total population. Differences in proportions don't mean the results aren't valid, but they do mean that institutions need to use caution in interpreting the results for the groups that are under-represented in the tested sample.

Undergraduate Student Demographic Breakdown

  Freshmen Seniors
Eligible Students Tested Students Eligible Students Tested Students
Gender Female 55% 55% 63% 63%
Male 41% 42% 37% 37%
Other or Unknown 4% 3% <1% <1%
Race/
Ethnicity
US Underrepresented Minority 8% 7% 6% 5%
White / Caucasian 81% 87% 83% 83%
International 7% 3% 6% 6%
Unknown 4% 2% 6% 6%
Low-income (Eligible to receive a Federal Pell Grant) 96% 66% 100% 81%

Because we are a smnall school the group of students who are tested is nearly identical to our target group. The results of the Proficency Profile are considered to be very representative of the cmapus as a whole.

The VSA advises institutions to follow assessment publisher guidelines for determining the appropriate number of students to test. In the absence of publisher guidelines, the VSA provides sample size guidelines for institutions based on a 95% confidence interval and 5% margin of error. So long as the tested sample demographics represent the student body, this means we can be 95% certain that the "true" population learning outcomes are with +/- 5% of the reported results. For more information on Sampling, please refer to the Research Methods Knowledge Base

The increase in learning on the performance task is at or near what would be expected at an institution testing students of similar academic abilities.

The increase in learning on the analytic writing task is at or near what would be expected at an institution testing students of similar academic abilities.


Critical Thinking Detail

The chart below shows the distribution of student scores on the ETS Proficiency Profile Critical Thinking test. Students are scored as Not Proficient, Marginal, or Proficient.



Written Communication Detail

The charts below show the distribution of student scores on the three levels of the ETS Proficiency Profile Writing Test. Students are scored as Not Proficient, Marginal, or Proficient on each level. Writing 3 represents more advanced writing skill than Writing 2, which represents more advanced writing skill than Writing 1.