Global Security and Intelligence Studies Volume 4, Number 1, Spring/Summer 2019 | Page 28

Forging Consensus? Approaches to Assessment in Intelligence Studies Programs
tion or having no personal connection to the faculty in the program (Larry Valero,
Telephone interview with author, November 6, 2017). It may be that subject-matter
organizations with certification or accreditation programs (e.g., IAFIE) may
resolve these challenges to this assessment method (Table 2).
Table 2. Assessment Types by Program
Institution
Degree
Level
Thesis
External
Review
Portfolio
Capstone
Writing
Samples
Stand. Test
Student
Surveys
Reflective
Assignment
Angelo State
University
Masters X — — X — — — —
The Citadel Masters — — X — — — X X
University of
Texas at El
Paso
Angelo State
University
Coastal
Carolina
University
Notre Dame
College
Masters — X — — X — — —
Bachelors — — — X — — — —
Bachelors — — — X X X — —
Bachelors — — — X — — — —
The Citadel Bachelors — — X — — X X X
University
of Arizona
South
Bachelors — — — X X — X —
Indirect Assessment Measures
Indirect measures are typically based on opinions. These opinions are most commonly
obtained from current students or alumni. While this may seem inherently
subjective, that is actually the point. As Allen notes, “Indirect techniques ... make
unique contributions to program assessment because they allow us to pursue issues
in depth and to solicit advice from important stakeholders” (Allen 2004, 103).
Surveys of student perceptions about the state of their knowledge, the impact of
the educational experience on their learning, and the extent that the education
prepared them for subsequent education or career experiences can provide important
cues to a program. As the saying goes, it doesn’t matter what is true, it matters
what people believe to be true. And while most of these are in-house surveys,
some institutions utilize standardized tests such as the National Survey for Student
Engagement (NSSE) in support of this function.
17