Date post: | 27-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | laureen-evans |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Assessment of Student LearningProgram Level Enhancement…and more!
Sarah Robb – Coordinator of Assessment
Overview• Program Assessment Reports
• Review of Noel-Levitz/CCSSE data (faculty concerns)
• General Education
• Assessment and Program Review Committee
Program Assessment ReportsAccounting MarketingAllied Health MathematicsArt Medical AssistantBiology Medical CodingBusiness Administration Medical TranscriptionChemistry & Pre-Chemical Engineering MusicComputer Information Systems NursingComputer Support Specialist Occupational Therapy AssistantConstruction Technology Level I Office Technology (Office Assistant)Construction Technology Level II Office TechnologyCriminal Justice PhlebotomyElementary Education Physics & Pre-EngineeringEnergy Management Personal TrainerEnglish PsychologyForensic Science Secondary EducationGeneral Education Social ScienceHealth Information Technology SociologyHistory Surgical TechnologyIndustrial Engineering Technology TheatreIndustrial Engineering/Pre-Engineering Technology WeldingManagement
Program Assessment Reports – 10-11 RE-DO• New Questions
– Should any of the student learning goals and course/program outcomes be considered for revision and why?
– Which program assessment elements can be identified as being the strongest, and can those be used to enhance other program level elements? How?
– Are there any new program level assessment strategies that can be identified for future consideration, and how might these add value to the assessment process?
Program Assessment Reports – 10-11 RE-DO• Location
– T:\Assessment 10-11\10-11 Prgm Outcome Reports - Templates
• Save in – T:\Assessment 10-11\10-11 Program Outcome Reports - Sept 15
FINAL
• Be looking for an email with detailed instructions
DUE: September 15, 2012
11-12 Program Assessment Reports• Data and templates will be available in October for your
completion.
• Reports will be included in the HLC self-study process
DUE: December 17, 2012
Instructional Effectiveness (Noel-Levitz)
2000 2001 2003 2005 2006 2007 2008 2010 20124.00
4.20
4.40
4.60
4.80
5.00
5.20
5.40
5.60
5.80
6.00
Instructional Effectiveness(Satisfaction Average)
Faculty Concerns (Noel-Levitz)• The quality of instruction I receive in most of my classes
is excellent.
• Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students.
(Remember, this is what the students perceive to be true…)
Faculty Concerns(CCSSE 2011)• Statistically Significant Low Scores
– Made a class presentation
– Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in
– Worked with other students on projects during class
– Exams that are challenging students to do their best work
– Encouraging students to spend significant amounts of time studying
– Using computers in academic work
Faculty Concerns (CCSSE 2011)• More Low Scores
– Acquiring a broad and general education
– Writing clearly and effectively
– Speaking clearly and effectively
– Thinking critically and analytically
– Solving numerical problems
GENERAL EDUCATION….
General Education Goals
• Analytical Thinking
• Practice Responsible Citizenship
• Communicate Effectively
• Live a Healthy Lifestyle
General Education - Scores
Analytical Thinking Citizenship Communication Healthy Lifestyle
2009/2010 0.76 0.81 0.92 0.72
2010/2011 0.73 0.87 0.88 0.81
2011/2012 0.72 0.85 0.88 0.83
5%
15%
25%
35%
45%
55%
65%
75%
85%
95%
Analytical Thinking• Think analytically through:
• Utilizing quantitative information in problem solving,• Utilizing the principles of systematic inquiry,• Utilizing various information resources including technology for research and data collection
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
70%
71%
72%
73%
74%
75%
76%
77%
What’s going on?• CSIS 100 – outcomes 6 and 7
– Spreadsheets and databases
• ECON 200 and 201 – outcome 2 (both classes)– Evaluate product markets and models of fiscal properties
• ENGL 113 – outcome 3– Evaluate the style of dramas, short fiction, and poetry
• MATH 113 – outcome 4– translation and solution for application (verbal) problems
Assessment/Program Review Committee• Provides a more efficient way to “close the
loop” of assessment at the program level
• New assessment requirements in the program review
• Review a possible new “schedule” for reports
Transfer Programs
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Collect Course Assessment Data Analyze Data
through comprehensive
Program Review and propose
changes for next cycle.
Program Assessment Program
Assessment
Career and Tech Ed
Program Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 All Programs Collect Course Assessment Data Analyze Data
through comprehensive
Program Review and
propose changes for next cycle.
Program Length 1 year or less
Program Assessment
Program Assessment
Program Assessment
Program Assessment
Program Length greater than 1 year
Program
Assessment
Program
Assessment
Assessment/Program Review Committee• Review of “Narrative”
– Peer review of your comments at the course level to provide appropriate feedback through program review
• Comments?