Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment

Abstract

Inquiry in student affairs plays a critical role in advancing equity efforts since it is utilized for the improvement of programs and services supporting student learning and experiences. Assessment practices, when undergirded by a critical theoretical framework, employs intentional approaches corresponding to each phase of the assessment cycle. Critical practitioners begin by acknowledging their own subjectivity and the ways their positionality influences their practice. Further, they acknowledge the agency of participants as knowers and collaborators in this work. Additionally, practitioners employ methodological diversity and center marginalized voices not only in evidence gathering, but also in interpretation and when implementing change. Employing such approaches enriches assessment practice and enables data to be used in transformative ways in the pursuit of equity. This article explores critical theory and its implications for assessment practice. Examples and considerations are provided throughout as well as questions posed for institutional and personal practice reflection.

Full text

Vol. 3, Issue 1, 2017
Examining Critical
Theory as a Framework to
Advance Equity Through
Student Affairs
Assessment
Ciji A. Heiser Krista Prince and Joseph D. Levy*
Apr 14, 2017
TTags:ags: critical theory, critical practitioner, equity, assessment cycle
Institution:Institution: University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, National Loius University
Department:Department: See "about the authors"
*

AbstractAbstract
Inquiry in student affairs plays a critical role in advancing equity
efforts since it is utilized for the improvement of programs and
services supporting student learning and experiences. Assessment
practice, when undergirded by a critical theoretical framework,
employs intentional approaches corresponding to each phase of
the assessment cycle. Critical practitioners begin by
acknowledging their own subjectivity and the ways their
positionality influences their practice. Further, they acknowledge
the agency of participants as knowers and collaborators in this
work. Additionally, practitioners employ methodological diversity
and center marginalized voices not only in evidence gathering, but
also in interpretation and when implementing change. Employing
such approaches enriches assessment practice and enables data
to be used in transformative ways in the pursuit of equity. This
article explores critical theory and its implications for assessment
practice. Examples and considerations are provided throughout
as well as questions posed for institutional and personal practice
reflection.
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
1

Assessment is a practice deeply rooted in accountability related
to the costs of higher education. The rise of assessment for
accountability in the 1980s influenced traditional assessment goals
such as evaluating student learning, examining programs, and
determining institutional effectiveness (DeLuca Fernández, 2015;
Wall, Hursh, & Rodgers III, 2014). In an age where increasing
scrutiny is seen as the answer to higher education limitations,
assessment has served as a form of control (Wall et al., 2014).
More recently, external accountability is starting to be
complemented by internal curiosity about the impact of programs
on student learning (Kuh, Jankowski, Ikenberry, & Kinzie, 2014).
At its core, assessment in higher education is “designed to help
faculty and staff improve instruction, programs, and services, and
thus student learning, continuously” (Banta & Palomba, 2015, p.
3). Efforts to identify the impact of student affairs could be made
more comprehensive and inclusive through the incorporation of
an equity orientation.
Assessment in higher education is uniquely positioned to
transform inquiry into a more inclusive practice in pursuit of
equity because it draws “on a wealth of scholarly traditions in
order to critique the status quo, interrogate power, theorize
agency, and work toward social justice” (Pasque, Carducci, Kuntz,
& Gildersleeve, 2012 p. 17). Critical theory is grounded in notions
of justice and centering marginalized voices in order to promote
emancipation, liberation, and equity (Levinson, 2011). While an
axiology of accountability differs vastly from one motivated by
equity and justice, the latter motivations can strengthen
approaches guided by the former. Core components of assessment
practice outlined by the assessment cycle (Maki, 2010, p.7) include
evidence gathering, interpretation, and implementing change;
these components are vastly enhanced when supported by a
critical theoretical framework. Critical approaches have been
examined with regard to research, qualitative inquiry (Pasque et
al., 2012), the study of higher education (Martinez-Alemán,
Pusser, & Bensimon, 2015), and addressing achievement gaps in
higher education (Bensimon, 2005); but have only begun to be
examined in student affairs assessment practices (DeLuca
Fernández, 2015). Strengthened by critical theory, traditional
best-practice approaches to student affairs assessment become
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
2

transformative for all students by considering the positionality of
the evaluator, recognizing agency of the participants, employing
methodological diversity, and extending analysis strategies.
Critical Social Theory and AssessmentCritical Social Theory and Assessment
Cultural theorists began their work at the Institute for Social
Research within the Frankfurt School in 1923 (Hanks, 2011, p.
81). Forerunners such as Karl Marx, analyzing capitalism as a
form of domination, brought to light the ways in which market
values left power in the hands of few (Levinson, Gross, Link, &
Hanks, 2011, p. 26). In the context of assessment, this critique
of capitalism is relevant today given how assessment has served
to answer calls for institutional accountability; to show that
institutions are creating workers and knowledge for economic
development (Wall et al., 2014). For example, reporting systems
often emphasize “graduation rates, job placement, and
debt-to-earnings ratios” (Banta & Palomba, 2015, p. 6) rather than
student learning. Drawing on Marx’s work, Max Horkheimer
named critical theory and described emancipation as its central
feature. In pursuit of a more just society, he and others sought
to better understand and expose the systems and institutions that
regulate behavior and perpetuate inequitable outcomes. He named
critical theory to highlight a change-oriented approach in contrast
to traditional theories that only sought understanding. While it
was originally concerned specifically with the effects of capitalism
and its structures on socioeconomic status, now “critical social
theories are those conceptual accounts of the social world that
attempt to understand and explain the causes of structural
domination and inequality in order to facilitate human
emancipation and equity” (Levinson, 2011, p. 2). Such theories
question common sense assumptions and taken for granted
norms. Critical inquiry’s multiple branches include critical race
theories, LatCrit, queer theory, critical feminist theories, critical
discourse analysis, and theories of power and marginalization.
Critical theory, in any of its many forms, centers lived experiences
in order to “identify and locate the ways in which societies
produce and preserve specific inequalities through social, cultural,
and economic systems” (Martinez-Alemán et al., 2015, p. 8). In
this way, critical approaches oriented towards equity differ from
those motived by economics and accountability.
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
3

An emphasis on economic outcomes for higher education has
led to assessment for accountability, whereby evaluators employ
positivistic and detached approaches. Assessment may be pursued
using unreflective procedural notions emphasizing fair, neutral,
valid, rational, functional, normative, value-free, apolitical
approaches (Martinez-Alemán et al., 2015; McArthur, 2015; Wall
et al., 2014). These approaches leave considerations of power and
privilege largely unexamined if assessment does not interrogate
“by and for whom?” (McArthur, 2015; Wall et al., 2014; DeLuca
Fernández, 2015). Traditional approaches to assessment reinforce
notions of neutrality, sameness, and objectivity, which hinder
potential for transforming inequitable policies, procedures, and
outcomes. Critical practitioners attend to the differences between
groups and seek to remedy underlying systemic inequities that
produce differential outcomes. Critical assessment “expose[s] and
address[es] power, privilege, and structures; consider[s]
thoughtfully histories and contexts; make[s] explicit assumptions
and intentions; [and] eschew[s] colorblind and ideological neutral
claims” (DeLuca Fernández, 2015, p. 5). Thus, critical approaches
enable us to transgress the limitations of, and strengthen,
traditional assessment approaches. While it is not meant to be
prescriptive, practitioners can embody critical principles through
their approach to student affairs assessment work. In order for
assessment to be critical, practitioners must adopt an equity
orientation when approaching each phase of the assessment cycle
by considering positionality, agency, methodological diversity,
and analysis.
PrPractitioner Pactitioner Positionality and Subjectivityositionality and Subjectivity
Ethical standards in assessment and evaluation include
maintaining objectivity, limiting bias, avoiding conflicts of
interest, maintaining confidentiality, determining political risks
of data, and being aware of the impact of data on stakeholders
(American College Personnel Association, 2007; Association for
Institutional Research, 2013). A critical framework challenges the
ability of practitioners to be neutral and unbiased because the
practice of assessment is inextricably linked to the identities held
by the practitioner such that,
as individual leaders, we practice within norms, assumptions, values, beliefs,
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
4

and behaviors originating in our multiple identities…In addition, identity
influences experiences and perceptions of power or lack thereof and affects
how we think about and practice within power structures of colleges and
universities. (Chávez & Sanlo, 2013, p. 9)
Attention to our identities and experiences is imperative because
“our positionalities -how we see ourselves, how we are perceived
by others, and our experiences- influence how we approach
knowledge, what we know, and what we believe to know” (Bettez,
2015, p. 934-935). In order to address the influence of one’s
subjectivity on their work, a critical practitioner continually
engages in self-reflexivity by interrogating “how [their]
experiences, knowledge, and social positions might impact each
aspect and moment” (Bettez, 2015, p.940) of the assessment cycle.
The influence of one’s positionalities is pervasive, reaching even
the most fundamental of assessment practices such as the notion
of asking the right questions. When designing instruments and
employing different methodologies, acknowledging the myriad
of intersecting identities that shape one’s own lens may lead to
the conclusion that this notion of asking the right questions is
influenced by one’s experiences and biases. Inviting additional
voices to discuss assessment processes such as determining what
to measure, which questions to ask, what methods to use, and
how to analyze and report findings can address positionality and
subjectivity as well as give agency to stakeholders. For example,
a white, cisgender, heterosexual, female assessment practitioner
does not have identities congruent with the assessment of a
program designed to serve men of color. This does not make such
a practitioner ineffective; however, a more effective approach to
assessment would include individuals with similar positionality.
Including students and staff who share the identities of the
population being assessed helps practitioners challenge power
dynamics, be more inclusive of diverse identities, address
assumptions, disrupt ideological neutral claims, and acknowledge
implicit biases throughout the assessment process. This is critical
given the ways positionality can unknowingly influence
practitioners responsible for the data collection and
interpretation.
Practitioners operating from primarily dominant identities may
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
5

further amplify instances lacking perspective. Critical inquiry
encourages evaluators to account for implicit biases pertaining to
one’s identities. Implicit bias is “a descriptive term encompassing
thoughts and feelings that occur independently of conscious
intention, awareness, or control” (Nosek & Riskind, 2012, p. 115).
Thus, our exposure to societal messages and our experiences may
subconsciously influence our associations both about groups to
which we belong and those we do not. For example, when career
coaches evaluate resumes they may subconsciously associate either
positively or negatively with student name, perceived race/
ethnicity, education background, experience, or geographical
location; but a rubric may mitigate the effects these associations
could have on review and feedback. When utilizing rubrics,
recommended practices of calibration and norming activities help
ensure reliability and work to minimize subjectivity of the
evaluator. Having a well-designed rubric and conducting
calibration activities can norm evaluators with content and
scoring, ultimately aiming to account for existing subjectivity or
implicit biases. Beyond assisting the practitioner, rubrics support
students by clearly communicating examined content and how
scores are determined. Sharing rubrics with students ahead of an
intervention as in the example of reviewing a resume provides
transparency, while also enabling students to set themselves up
for success and familiarizes them with process prior to interacting
with a career coach. Critical approaches such as this work to
navigate positionality and subjectivity, while improving
traditional approaches to assessment, by empowering students
and honoring their agency as subjects in the assessment effort.
Agency of the PAgency of the Participantsarticipants
Rather than positioning the participant as the object of study,
critical practitioners acknowledge the agency of the human
“subject,” who is expert and authority on their own experiences
because “all critical inquiry is grounded in lived experiences, and
power relations and social justice are central concerns”
(Martinez-Alemán et al., 2015, p. 3; Steinberg & Cannella, 2012).
Facilitating collaborative processes by inviting stakeholders to
operate as partners in assessment work, rather than objects of
it, recognizes agency of participants and strengthens assessment
work. Collaboration can occur in multiple elements of assessment
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
6

practice: mapping learning experiences and programs provided to
larger outcomes or competencies of the institution, writing and
approving learning outcomes, and identifying what is meaningful
and measurable. Of note is that time is a significant consideration
for many practitioners. Culp and Dungy (2012) assert that
institutional leaders should encourage their staff to block off time
on their calendars for assessment related activities such as analysis
and reporting. Incorporating collaborative approaches to
assessment work may be more time intensive than initially
planned, but such approaches build both assessment culture and
competence - which is strongly supported throughout assessment
literature as not only appropriate, but necessary.
Engaging in collaborative processes brings the voices of students,
staff, and faculty from across the institution to the assessment
table. Accreditation standards and criteria already expect students
to be consulted and engaged by institutions in decision making
and providing feedback on university goals and overall
governance processes, not to mention be actively engaged in
assessment (Commission on Institutions of Higher Education,
2016; Higher Learning Commission, 2014; Middle States
Commission on Higher Education, 2015; WASC Senior College
and University Commission, 2013). The responsibility rests with
the institution to execute and determine how to engage students
and ensure all student voices and needs are represented. Maki
(2010) reinforces this concept, stating, “assessment is not a task
for small groups of experts but a collaborative activity; its aim is
wider, better-informed attention to student learning by all parties
with a stake in its improvement” (p. 41). Inviting stakeholders
to operate as collaborative partners in assessment work honors
agency of the stakeholders by prioritizing how their experiences
inform data collection and provide meaningful insight during data
analysis.
One suggestion for considering the agency of the participant is
empowering students as content developers. Seeking perspectives
from minoritized populations for experiential feedback when
creating educational workshops related to race, diversity, or social
justice is one example. Frustrations, concerns, and fears, as well
as points of pride and praise, could also be coupled with theory
and existing needs or campus climate data to generate workshop
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
7

content. These approaches establish minoritized students as
subject matter experts on the topic of their lived experiences,
enhances engagement, and may attract students to attend given
their role in program development. Student feedback and
positioning may also inform the methodological approaches taken
to collect relevant data.
Methodological DivMethodological Diversityersity
An emphasis on economic outcomes has led many practitioners
to employ positivistic and detached methodological approaches.
Critical approaches to methodology encourage practitioners to
consider what to measure and how, using multiple modalities
for triangulation, and questioning whether a tool measures the
intended topic for different groups. These practices, guided by
principles of critical theory, compliment the notion that learning
is complex and multifaceted; it needs methodological approaches
that work for students engaged in the learning process who are
equally complex and multifaceted (Maki, 2010).
Practitioners employing approaches to assessment grounded in
critical theory reflect thoroughly on the implications of what is
measured and how. In determining what to measure and how,
critical evaluators consider the effects of economic drivers and
which values are attached to what is measured (DeLuca
Fernández, 2015). For example, the outcome that students living
on campus will have higher average grade point averages than
those living off campus may be driven by the economic need to
boost occupancy, by the level of academic support provided to
students living in the residence halls, or both.
The different ways in which participants make meaning and
process information around their experiences influences how
their experience is measured. Approaches to measurement
undergirded by critical theory include exploring multiple
modalities and multiple methods of data collection. Because
learning can be multifaceted and non-linear, Maki (2010)
encourages “…employing a diverse array of methods, including
those that call for actual performance, using them over time so as
to reveal change, growth, and increasing degrees of integration”
(p. 40). Such methods cannot be grounded in normative
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
8

assumptions or they fail to interrogate underlying disparity
(Martinez-Alemán et al., 2015). When selecting assessment
methods, practitioners operating from an equity orientation pose
questions such as: Will this method reinforce a power dynamic?
Does this method work for this population (e.g. survey or
storytelling)? What additional method would provide a more
comprehensive narrative around a program or service?
Employing multiple measures can open new possibilities and
resistance to a universal truth or interpretation of data. This is
important given traditional approaches to data interpretation of
single or isolated sources of data, as well as potential biases from
positionality or identities.
Not only are multiple measures encouraged, critical approaches
to assessment support the employment of a wider variety of
methods. The most common methodological approach to
assessment is surveying, with an increase in recent years in the
use of rubrics and portfolios (Kuh et al., 2014). Methodological
approaches such as rubrics, journaling, focus groups, interviews,
surveys, and portfolios could be complemented with approaches
such as ethnography, textual analysis, historiography, literary
analysis, aesthetic criticism, theatrical and dramatic ways of
observing (Steinberg & Cannella, 2012, p. 21). Including diverse
methods allows assessment practitioners to leverage the collection
of data as a tool for equity by creating the space for students to
share data around their learning and development in ways that are
as rich and complex as their learning processes and intersecting
identities.
Consider context and audience when determining methodological
approaches. Lacking direct contact with the intended populations
for assessment, a survey might be the best chance to capture data.
When a captive audience or engagement is possible, it affords
opportunities for populations to be engaged in focus groups,
interviews, observations, case studies, reflections, and perhaps
even pre- and post-tests; all direct measures as opposed to likely
indirect survey measures. Knowing specific demographic
information can further shape the approach, allowing or enabling
given populations to share their stories in meaningful and familiar
ways. Critical approaches challenge notions of correctness,
validity, and truth. When considering ideas of validity and truth,
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
9

critical approaches question whether a specific tool measures the
intended topic across diverse groups. Matsuda et al. (1993)
recommend:
recognizing the experiential knowledge of people of color. Such recognition
is filtered through counterstorytelling, narrative, biographies, and life
histories. When the experiences and knowledges of people of color are
shared, the process allows for a more authentic and unique understanding
how they experience racist, oppressive structures. (p. 197)
Intentionally asking questions that resonate across groups, and
not just for the majority population, in ways that empower diverse
groups to respond with their truth provides richer,
contextualized, and valid data for practitioners. The medium and
method with which practitioners can collected data also provide
opportunities for sharing.
Data Analysis and ReportingData Analysis and Reporting
The transformation of data from a raw mass of material to easily
digestible information is a core component of assessment practice.
Making data easily understandable is fundamental for the usability
of the data in order to facilitate data-driven discussion and
decisions that influence students, staff, and other stakeholders.
Making meaning of the data through analysis and reporting makes
data actionable and closes the assessment loop. Employing critical
approaches to data analysis and reporting, assessment
practitioners begin to ask: how do one’s identities or lived
experiences influence data analysis? Do institutional values and
norms influence data processing? Who are the findings serving?
Critical theory can be used to strengthen core assessment practices
and advance equity efforts by centering the lived experiences of
populations typically left at the margins by examining how
meaning is assigned to data and employing collaborative
approaches to analysis and reporting.
A common practice for the analysis of quantitative data is
reporting the average or mean of the data. Generally, it is thought
that by aggregating individual measures, evaluators can find group
trends that guide decision-making about curriculum, policy,
services, and programs. The common practice of reporting
aggregated data has positive merits including the identification of
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
10

patterns throughout variables and across time. A critical approach
must interrogate what knowledge such objective, apolitical,
neutral approaches to assessment might obscure, and consider
alternative methods of inquiry that attempt to address and remedy
systemic inequities. Aggregation may not tell the complete story.
While an aggregate story may be positive, differing narratives
from specific populations may emerge. Disaggregating data serves
as a tool for advancing equity because analyzing data by different
populations allows practitioners to identify if programs and
services are equitably meeting the needs of all students across
the institution. Data disaggregation can complement aggregated
findings by allowing professionals to identify if programs are
meeting established outcomes for all students
Disaggregating the data can center the lived experiences of
historically marginalized populations and creates space for such
voices to be heard. For example, when breaking down a large
data set by different subgroups, a practitioner may find that eight
students who self-identified as transgender responded to a survey
lower than the rest of the responding population. Regardless of
statistical significance, critical practitioners acknowledge that
significance and importance are not synonymous; they would
encourage dialogue around the data by sharing it with
stakeholders supporting this population.
Critical inquiry is grounded in lived experiences with power
relations and social justice as concerns, thus reciprocity between
the practitioner and participants is key. Therefore, DeLuca
Fernández (2015) advises practitioners to discuss how they attach
meaning to data. Practitioners’ intersecting identities frame their
worldview, perceptions, and how they make meaning from data.
Using uncritical, neutral, or objective approaches could lead
practitioners to reject underrepresented voices, over-privilege
existing ways of knowing, and reproduce systemic inequality
(DeLuca Fernández, 2015, p. 12). As previously discussed, one
way to balance practitioner positionality and power relations is to
invite additional perspectives to analyze and report on the data.
This approach can help moderate biases held by the practitioner,
while also working to address power dynamics or inequities of
programs or services identified in data collected. Critical
approaches to data analysis and reporting can serve as an
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
11

important step toward redressing inequity by utilizing a
collaborative approach to discussions and interpretations of data,
When only looking at end-results or metrics according to external
entities, the importance and meaning can be lost on the student
experience. This includes factors influencing success and elements
contributing to a safe, encouraging, and inclusive learning
environment. Consequently, there becomes less incentive to
examine the interaction of identity or diversity elements with
institutional interventions. This can have dangerous
consequences such that “the implications of methodological
conservatism for individuals and communities who regularly
encounter individual, institutional, and/or societal oppression
include the preservation of discriminatory educational practices,
policies, and environments and perpetuation of the inequitable
status quo” (Pasque et al., 2012 p. ix). It becomes increasingly
important to treat data sets as part of an inclusive batch of
information rather than in a silo or vacuum. For example, while
student success rates point to particular courses as critical to
success, early interventions for students struggling in those
courses may need to be tailored to their identities or
circumstances. One student on scholarship may struggle in
chemistry because they are not studying enough or taking
advantage of tutoring resources available to them. Another
student may struggle in chemistry because their job, which
provides income necessary for them to make tuition payments,
prohibits them from making their lab section every other week.
Intervention for this latter student needs to be different from the
former, as there are additional circumstances for consideration in
which to offer guidance beyond coaching time management or
study skills.
Implications for Inquiry and EquityImplications for Inquiry and Equity
Pasque et al. (2012) asserts that, “equity concerns are foundational
to students’ lives: marginalized identities, opportunity to learn,
access, persistence, attainment, pedagogy, and the social
stratification produced by participation in higher education” (p. 7).
The application of critical theory positions assessment practices
to expose inequalities. An integral component of assessment work
is sharing and using data to make decisions for improvement.
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
12

Because issues of equity are central to students’ experiences in
higher education, and critical approaches to assessment facilitate
the exposure of inequities in programs and services offered,
practitioners taking a critical approach to assessment will be better
able to serve all students.
To that end, it is important to examine assessment practices,
processes, and resources for opportunities to integrate critical
approaches. As plans are put together, is consideration given to
involving appropriate stakeholders? When designing an
instrument, are demographics and identity-related components
stressed for inclusion? Could report templates have built-in
sections or prompts encouraging reflection of overall data? Are
findings disaggregated with respect to particular populations or
identities? Such questions should be posed by assessment
professionals, integrated in areas involved in assessment work,
and focused on populations that are often the subject of inquiry.
To best inform focus and approach, institutional needs should
be considered. As critical inquiry examines identity and
equity-related topics, professionals need to be knowledgeable
about the populations of students served and existing institutional
equity issues. Examining pain points, areas to improve, and
strengths surrounding these topics could give purposeful direction
when integrating new approaches for programs and services.
Knowing institutional priorities and trends could provide a
baseline or framework with which to direct initial efforts. This
may mean priorities themselves are challenged to evolve and serve
equity aims.
Finally, integrated reflection of practice and efficacy will be
crucial. Examining over time if professionals are truly taking a
critical approach or exemplifying needed inquiry. If not,
additional education or professional development may be needed.
Questions to help facilitate this reflection may include: Has
assessment effectiveness been impacted positively or negatively
after integrating critical inquiry? Is critical assessment yielding
actionable and meaningful data in relation to inquiry and equity
needs at the institution? Like any other assessment approach,
where problems, barriers, or opportunities for improvement
exist, , iterate for improvement.
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
13

ConclusionConclusion
Traditional approaches to assessment characterized by
impartiality, validity, and objectivity may provide useful data in
the age of reporting and accountability based on economic
measures of success. However, such objective approaches to
assessment may obscure critical questions, methods, and data
interpretations that would enable us to uncover and respond to
systemic inequities that render differential outcomes in learning
or experience for students. Therefore, evaluators should ground
their assessment in critical theory, in order for assessment to
advance equity in programs and services at institutions of higher
education. Critical approaches can be applied and positively
influence every facet of assessment work. Grounding assessment
approaches in critical theory enables practitioners to examine
further learning and development experiences of all students and
collect evidence through a wider array of methods meaningful for
triangulation.
About the authors:About the authors:
Ciji A. Heiser is the Assistant Director for Assessment and
Strategic Initiatives at the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill. Krista Prince is the Coordinator for Leadership Development
in the Department of Housing and Residential Education at The
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She is also a doctoral
student in Educational Studies/Cultural Foundations
concurrently pursuing a certificate in Women's and Gender
Studies at UNC-Greensboro. Joe Levy is the Director of
Assessment at National Louis University, with responsibility to
guide university level assessment, support academic program
assessment, and coordinate student affairs assessment. Joe is
passionate about data-informed decision making, accountability,
and promoting a student-centered approach inside and outside of
the classroom. Joe earned his MS in Student Affairs in Higher
Education from Colorado State University and his BA in English
from Baldwin-Wallace College.
ReferencesReferences
ACPA-College Student Educators International. (2007).
ASK
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
14

standards: Assessment skills and knowledge content standards for
student affairs practitioners and scholars
. Washington, D. C.:
American College Personnel Association (ACPA).
Association for Institutional Research (AIR). (2013, May 2). Code
of ethics and professional practice (CODE). Retrieved from
Association for Institutional Research (AIR) website: https://ww
w.airweb.org/Membership/Pages/CodeOfEthics.aspx
Banta, T., & Palomba, C. (2015). *Assessment essentials: Planning,
implementing, and *
improving assessment in higher education
(2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Bensimon, E. M. (2005). Closing the achievement gap in higher
education: An organizational learning perspective.
New
Directions for Higher Education
, 2005: 99–111.
Bettez, B.C. (2015). Navigating the complexity of qualitative
research in postmodern contexts: assemblage, critical reflexivity,
and communion as guides.
International Journal of Qualitative
Studies in Education, 28
(8), 932-954.
Chávez, A. F., & Sanlo, R. (Eds.). (2013).
Identity and leadership:
Informing our lives,informing our practice
. Washington, DC:
NASPA Publications.
Commission on Institutions of Higher Education (CIHE). (2016).
Standards for accreditation: Commission on institutions of higher
education. Burlington, MA: New England Association of Schools
and Colleges.
Culp, M.M., & Dungy, G. (Eds). (2012).
Building a culture of
evidence in student affairs: A guide for leaders and practitioners.
Washington, DC: NASPA Publications.
DeLuca Fernández, S. (2015).
Critical Assessment
[PDF of
PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from http://studentaffairsassessme
nt.org/structured-conversations
Hanks, C. (2011). The double-edge of reason: Jürgen Habermas
and the Frankfurt School. In B.A.U.Levinson (Ed.),
Beyond
critique: Exploring critical social theories and education
(pp.
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
15

80-112). Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
Higher Learning Commission (2014). The Criteria for
accreditation and core components. Retrieved from: https://w
ww.hlcommission.org/Criteria-Eligibility-and-Candidacy/criteri
a-and-core-components.html
Kuh, G. D., Jankowski, N., Ikenberry, S. O., & Kinzie, J. (2014).
Knowing what students know and can do: The current state of
student learning outcomes assessment in US colleges and
universities
. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois and Indiana
University, National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment
(NILOA).
Levinson, B.A.U. (2011). Introduction: Exploring critical social
theories in education. In B.A.U.
Levinson. (Ed.),
Beyond critique: Exploring critical social theories
and education
(pp. 1-24). Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
Levinson, B.A.U., Gross, J.P. K., Link, J., & Hanks, C. (2011).
Forerunners and foundation builders: Origins of western critical
social theory tradition.
Beyond critique: Exploring critical social
theories and education
(pp. 25-50). Boulder, CO: Paradigm
Publishers.
Maki, P. L. (2010).
Assessing for learning: Building a sustainable
commitment across the institution
(2nd ed.). Stylus Publishing
LLC: Sterling, VA.
Martinez-Alemán, A. M., Pusser, B., & Bensimon, E. M. (Eds.).
(2015).
Critical approaches to the study of higher education: A
practical introduction
. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University
Press.
Matsuda, M. J., Lawrence, C., Delgado, R., & Crenshaw, K. (Eds.).
(1993).
Words that wound: Critical race theory, assaultive speech,
and the First Amendment
. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
McArthur, J. (2016). Assessment for social justice: The role of
assessment in achieving social justice.
Assessment and Evaluation
in Higher Education, 41
, 7, 967-981.
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
16

Middle States Commission on Higher Education. (2015).
Standards for accreditation and requirements of affiliation (13th
ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Middle States Commission on Higher
Education.
Nosek, B.A., & Riskind, R.G. (2012). Policy implications of
implicit social cognition.
Social Issues and Policy Review, 6
,
113-147.
Pasque, P., Carducci, R., Kuntz, A., & Gildersleeve, R. (2012).
Qualitative inquiry for equity in higher education: Methodological
innovations, implications, and interventions.
ASHE Higher
Education Report
,
37
.
Steinberg, S., R. and Cannella, G. (Eds.). (2012).
Critical
qualitative research.
NY: Peter Lang Publishers.
Wall, A. F., Hursh, D., & Rodgers, J. W. (2014). Assessment for
whom: Repositioning higher education assessment as an ethical
and value-focused social practice.
Research and Practice in
Assessment
,
9
, 5-17.
WASC Senior College and University Commission. (2013).
Standard 4: Creating an organization committed to quality,
assurance, institutional learning, and improvement. Retrieved
from: https://www.wascsenior.org/resources/handbook-accredit
ation-2013/part-ii-core-commitments-and-standards-accreditati
on/wasc-standards-accreditation-2013/standard-4-creating-orga
nization-committed-quality-assurance-institutional-learning-and
Examining Critical Theory as a Framework to Advance Equity Through Student Affairs Assessment
The Journal of Student Affairs Inquiry
17