University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Assessment of General Education
Spring 2010
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 iii Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Table of Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Core Goals Mapping by Measurement Instrument
General Education, Core Goal 1 ......................................................................................................... 5 General Education, Core Goal 2 ......................................................................................................... 5 General Education, Core Goal 3 ......................................................................................................... 6 General Education, Core Goal 4 ......................................................................................................... 6
General Education Core Goals by SAAC Achievement Topics
General Education, Core Goal 1 ...................................................................................................... 7-8 General Education, Core Goal 2 ......................................................................................................... 9 General Education, Core Goal 3 .................................................................................................. 10-11 General Education, Core Goal 4 .................................................................................................. 12-13
Assessment of General Education: Goal 1 ....................................................................................... 15
Reading
Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 16 Evidence Source 2, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 17
Critical Thinking
Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 18 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, Q2b ............................................. 19 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, Q2d ............................................. 20 Evidence Source 4, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, Q2c ................................. 21
Writing
Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 22 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, Q3d ............................................. 23 Evidence Source 3, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, Q1a ................................. 24 Evidence Source 4, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, Q1d ................................. 25 Evidence Source 5, Writing Competency Portfolio ..................................................................... 26 Mean comparisons, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College ..................................... 27-30
Oral Communication
Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1b ................................................ 31 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11d .............................................. 32 Evidence Source 3, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 33
Assessment of General Education: Goal 2 ........................................................................................ 35 Depth
Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 36 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11b .............................................. 37 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 7a ................................................ 38 Evidence Source 4, National Survey of Student Engagement, 2e ................................................ 39 Evidence Source 5, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2g ..................................... 40
Breadth Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile, Humanities .................................................................... 41 Evidence Source 2, Proficiency Profile, Social Sciences ............................................................. 41 Evidence Source 3, Proficiency Profile, Natural Sciences ........................................................... 42 Evidence Source 4, Proficiency Profile, Scaled/Combined Score ................................................ 42 Evidence Source 5, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11a .............................................. 43 Evidence Source 6, Proficiency Profile, Native and Transfer Scaled Score ................................. 44
Assessment of General Education: Goal 3 ........................................................................................ 45 Technology
Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1L ................................................ 46 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11g .............................................. 47 Evidence Source 3, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 48
Information Literacy Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 49
Presentations
Evidence Source 1, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2i ...................................... 50 Evidence Source 2, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2h ..................................... 51 Evidence Source 3, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 52
Research Evidence Source 1, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2d ..................................... 53 Evidence Source 2, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2f ..................................... 54 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 7d ................................................ 55 Evidence Source 4, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 56
Self-Guided Learning
Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, llj ................................................. 57 Evidence Source 2, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 58
Quantitative Abilities Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 59 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11f ............................................... 60
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 v Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Learning Activities Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1d ................................................ 61 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 2c ................................................ 62 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11m ............................................ 63 Evidence Source 4, National Survey of Student Engagement, 6d ................................................ 64 Evidence Source 5, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 4b .................................... 65
Assessment of General Education: Goal 4 ....................................................................................... 67
Community Involvement
Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 7b ................................................ 68 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1k ................................................ 69 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11o .............................................. 70
Values and Ethics Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, lln ............................................... 71
Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 72
Knowledge of Global Issues Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 73
Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1g ................................................ 74 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1h ................................................ 75 Evidence Source 3, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 3g .................................... 76 Evidence Source 4, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 77
Diversity and Inclusiveness Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1e ................................................ 78 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11L ............................................. 79 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 6e ................................................ 80 Evidence Source 4, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1u ................................................ 81 Evidence Source 5, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1v ................................................ 82 Evidence Source 6, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 83
Appendix A: Instruments Used to Assess General Education........................................................ 84
ETS Proficiency Profile Proficiency Level Definitions ................................................................................................. 84-85 Writing ......................................................................................................................................... 85 Mathematics ................................................................................................................................. 85 Reading ......................................................................................................................................... 86 Critical Thinking .......................................................................................................................... 86
Composition Portfolio ..................................................................................................................... 86
National Survey of Student Engagement ...................................................................................... 87
Consortium for the Study of Writing in College .......................................................................... 87
Combined Alumni Survey .............................................................................................................. 87
Appendix B: Performance, Current and Prior Years by Outcome and College ........................... 88
General Education Core Goals by SAAC Achievement Topics, Prior Years General Education, Core Goal 1 .............................................................................................. 88-89 General Education, Core Goal 2 .................................................................................................... 90 General Education, Core Goal 3 .............................................................................................. 91-93 General Education, Core Goal 4 .............................................................................................. 93-95
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 3 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
The Student Achievement Assessment Committee (SAAC) is tasked with proposing and guiding
general education assessment activities, submitting their proposals and reports to the Educational Policy and
University Standards Committee (EPUS) of the Faculty Assembly for approval, and transmitting the report to
the colleges for consideration. This report contains the most recently collected data from the UCCS General
Education Assessment project. It has been ten years since the baseline data was originally collected. Therefore,
in the interest of taking a fresh look at ourselves as we head towards our reaccreditation visit in the 2016-2017
academic year, we are not including previously reported data in the body of the report. We have included the
historical ‘areas of concern’ matrix in Appendix B (pg. 88) for your reference. Additionally, you can locate
prior year general education assessment reports on the assessment website at www.uccs.edu/assess.
Data collected from direct and indirect measures are included in this report. The direct measurement
instruments are the ETS Proficiency Profile (PP) and the UCCS Writing Department Writing Portfolio. The
indirect measures are The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), The Consortium for the Study of
Writing in College (CSWC) and The Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate (Alumni). We have also re-
vamped the presentation of the results to make them more visually accessible and easily interpretable.
The Proficiency Profile (previously known as The Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress)
and The National Survey of Student Engagement have been administered as part of the campus wide general
education assessment process since the inception of the project. The Combined Alumni Survey –
Undergraduate is a redesigned combination of the graduate and undergraduate alumni surveys. The questions
and response options that were used to address the sub-goals remain the same. For more detailed information
about the instruments including the sampling process associated with each instrument, please refer to Appendix
A (pg. 84), in this report or contact the Assessment Office.
The majority of this information was collected at the college level. Thus, a comparison of student
achievement among UCCS undergraduate colleges in the core goal areas of general education is constructed for
review by each undergraduate college. This report contains a number of positive findings where students are
meeting or exceeding the general education achievement targets at the college and/or university levels. For
example, the Proficiency Profile results indicate that our students are meeting the campus achievement target
for math. Unfortunately, there are also areas where student achievement is deficient at the college and/or
university levels. For example, the Proficiency Profile Reading/Critical Thinking results indicate that our
students are not performing as well as similar students nationally.
It is hoped that the findings will be informative and useful to the colleges and the university as we plan
for the future and continue to strive to provide a productive learning environment for our students. As the
General Education Curriculum Committee is currently meeting to review and revise the campus core goals, we
will of course be reviewing and revising the assessment process to identify and add instruments to appropriately
measure our student achievement.
The measurement goal for each general education objective includes an estimated standard error +/-
6%. This is the average standard error found in the Proficiency Profile test questions and the National Survey of
Student Engagement response items. College data must fall within a 6% margin of the measurement goal to
meet expectations. A college may want to pay particular attention to those areas where their scores fall below
the 6% margin.
Findings for each of the student learning achievement outcomes that are associated with each General
Education Core Goal are presented in the body of the report. Each learning achievement outcome topic is
followed by findings from direct and indirect measurement instruments that we have used to provide evidence
of student learning achievement related to that specific core goal and achievement outcome. The data reflected
in these pages are made available for the colleges use in assessing and addressing their student achievement
where applicable.
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 5 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Core Goals Mapping by Measurement Instrument
In the tables below and on the following page the core goals and related student learning outcome
topics are cross-referenced with the direct and indirect instruments that are used to measure student
achievement.
Instruments:
ETS Proficiency Profile (PP), Direct
UCCS Writing Portfolio, Direct
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), Indirect
Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (CSWC), Indirect
The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey – Alumni, Indirect
General Education, Core Goal 1: Students will be able to read, write, listen, and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes
Direct Measures Indirect Measures
Proficiency Profile
UCCS Writing Portfolio
Misc: NSSE CSWC (new)
UCCS Alumni
1a. Reading √ √ 1b. Critical and Analytic Thinking √
2b, 2d 2c
1c. Writing √ √
3d 1a, 1d
1d. Oral Communication Oral Comm.
Skills Rubric - to be designed
1b, 11d √
General Education, Core Goal 2: Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience in other fields. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes
Direct Measures Indirect Measures
Proficiency Profile
UCCS Writing Portfolio
Misc: NSSE CSWC (new)
UCCS Alumni
2a. Depth
2e, 7a,
11b 2g √
2b. Breadth √ 11a
2c. Breadth – Students who began at UCCS versus transfer students
√
General Education, Core Goal 3: Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes
Direct Measures Indirect Measures
Proficiency Profile
UCCS Writing Portfolio
Misc: NSSE CSWC (new)
UCCS Alumni
3a. Technology
1L, 11g √
3b. Information Literacy
Planned; to design and include topic specific questions on testing instruments for Spring 2011 MAPP administration
√
3c. Presentations Oral Comm Rubric 2h, 2i √
3d. Research 7d 2d, 2f √
3e. Self-guided Learning 11j √
3f. Quantitative Abilities √ 11f
3g. Learning Activities
Capstone projects?
1d, 2c,11m,
6d 4b
General Education, Core Goal 4: Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society – locally, nationally, and globally. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes
Direct Measures Indirect Measures
Proficiency Profile
UCCS Writing Portfolio
Misc: NSSE CSWC (new)
UCCS Alumni
4a. Community Service/Volunteer Work
1k, 7b,
11o
4b. Personal Values and Ethics
Planned; to design and include topic specific questions on testing instruments for Spring 2011 MAPP administration
11n
4c. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues
√
4d. Knowledge of Global Issues
√
4e. Working Collaboratively 1g, 1h 3g √
4f. Diversity/Inclusiveness
1e, 11L, 6e, 1u,
1v √
4g. Sustainability
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 7 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
General Education Core Goal’s with SAAC General Education Achievement Topics The measurement goal for each general education objective includes an estimated standard error 6%.
This is the average standard error found in Proficiency Profile test questions and the National Survey of Student
Engagement response items. College data must fall within a 6% margin of the measurement goal to meet
expectations. 1 Each of the four tables on pages 7 - 13, indicate the core goals and related student learning
outcomes, as well as the instrument and variables used to address that topic. The column running down the
right side of each table indicates the colleges performing below the minimal acceptable range for that variable.
A college with scores below the 6% margin for the most recent data is listed in this right hand column and
should consider this as an area of concern. The page number in parenthesis with each variable indicates the
location of a chart and further information related to the achievement target and college level performance. The
percentage amount to the right of each college indicates how far below the achievement target each college is.
Goal 1: Students will be able to read, write, listen and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought. 1a. Reading - Students will demonstrate the ability to read, such that they can evaluate and analyze arguments, can handle interpretation, inductive generalizations or causal explanations.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: PP, direct – Reading (pg. 14) None Below Minimum Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey/ Undergrad, indirect
Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your reading skills education at UCCS? (pg. 17)
EAS -11%
1b. Critical & Analytic Thinking - Students will demonstrate critical, analytic and creative thinking skills.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: PP, direct – Reading/Critical Thinking (pg. 18) None Below Minimum
Instrument: NSSE, indirect – During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized:
2b. Q. analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as examining a particular case or situation in depth and considering its components? (pg. 19)
None Below Minimum
2d. Q. making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing the soundness of their conclusions? (pg. 20)
COB EAS LAS
-9% -21% -7%
Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 2c. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: analyze or evaluate something you read, researched, or observed? (pg. 21)
COB EAS
-20% -13%
1 2007 General Education Assessment Report, (Student Achievement Assessment Committee)
Goal 1, continued
1c. Writing - Students will demonstrate the ability to write, including proper mechanics, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: PP, direct - Writing (pg. 22) Beth-El COB
-13% -12%
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 3d. Q. During the current school year, about how many papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages have you written? (pg. 23)
Beth-El COB
-25% -10%
Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 1a. Q. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments have you: brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment. (pg. 24)
Beth-El COB EAS LAS
-3% -1% -23% -3%
1d. Q. received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final assignment. (pg. 25)
Beth-El EAS LAS
-16% -24% -12%
Instrument: Writing Portfolio (pg. 26) None Below Minimum
1d. Oral Communication - Students will be able to speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE Instrument: Rubric, to be designed. To be administered in senior level courses with oral presentation requirements across colleges.
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1b. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you made a class presentation? (pg. 31)
Beth-El LAS EAS
-9% -22% -13%
11d. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in speaking clearly and effectively. (pg. 32)
Beth-El EAS LAS
-15% -16% -8%
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in oral communication skills? (pg. 33)
EAS -14%
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 9 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Goal 2: Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience in other fields.
2a. Depth - Students will experience a good understanding in their major. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. UCCS prepared me well for my field of specialization. (pg. 36)
LAS -7%
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11b. Q. To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills? (pg. 37)
EAS LAS
-9% -23%
7a. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do any of the following; practicum, internship, field experience, clinical assignment or co-op assignment, before you graduate from UCCS? (pg. 38)
None Below Minimum
2e. Q. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations? (pg. 39)
None Below Minimum
Instrument: CSWC – indirect 2g. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you write in the style and form of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology, etc.) (pg. 40)
None Below Minimum
2b. Breadth - Students will demonstrate a breadth of knowledge across disciplines. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: PP, direct – Humanities, Social Science, Natural Science and Overall (pg. 41-42)
None Below Minimum
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11a. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring a broad general education? (pg. 43)
Beth-El EAS LAS
-12% -19% -11%
2c. Breadth - Students who began as first-time freshman at UCCS will demonstrate a greater breadth of knowledge across disciplines than transfer students.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: PP – Scaled Score (pg. 44) None Below Minimum
Goal 3: Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge. 3a. Technology - Students will demonstrate technological skills and knowledge in the use of tech devices/methods such as; learning management systems, blogs, chat groups or podcasts
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1L. Q. During the current school year, about how often did you use an electronic medium (listserv, chat group, internet, im, etc.) to discuss or complete an assignment? (pg. 46)
Beth-El EAS LAS
-10% -23% -13%
11g. Q. To what extent has UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in using computing and information technology? (pg.47)
LAS -11%
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in computer skills. (pg. 48)
EAS -9%
3b. Information Literacy - Students will demonstrate the ability to locate, evaluate, select and use appropriately necessary information.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in information gathering skills (library, reference). (pg. 49)
None Below Minimum
3c. Presentations - Students will be able to communicate through the use of visual rhetoric.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: CSCW, indirect 2i. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as PowerPoint, etc.)? (pg. 50)
Beth-El EAS LAS
-19% -7% -12%
2h. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your written assignment? (pg. 51)
Beth-El LAS
-25% -14%
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your education in graphic communication (using charts and graphs to present information). (pg. 52)
None Below Minimum
3d. Research - Students will demonstrate research skills and knowledge relevant to their field/discipline.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: CSWC: indirect 2d. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.? (pg. 53)
Beth-El LAS
-17% - 9%
2f. Q. explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data? (pg. 54) Beth-El LAS
-9% -12%
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7d. Q. Have you worked on a research project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements or do you plan to do so before you graduate from UCCS? (pg. 55)
COB -12%
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 11 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Goal 3 – outcome 3d, continued Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect
Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in scientific reasoning skills? (pg. 56)
COB -17%
3e. Self Guided Learning - Students will demonstrate the ability to learn on their own and desire to become life-long learners.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11j. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on your own? (pg. 57)
COB EAS LAS
-18% -24% -12%
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your UCCS education in motivating you to pursue knowledge. (pg. 58)
COB EAS
-9% -24%
3f. Quantitative Abilities - Students will demonstrate skills and knowledge in analyzing and completing quantitative problems.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: PP, direct – Mathematics (pg. 59) None Below Minimum
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11f. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative problems?(pg. 60)
LAS -9%
3g. Learning Activities - Students will demonstrate the ability to engage in learning activities.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1d. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources? (pg. 61)
EAS -12%
2c. Q. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex interpretations and relationships? (pg. 62)
COB -12%
11m. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in solving complex real-world problems? (pg. 63)
Beth-El COB LAS
-8% -13% -19%
6d. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue? (pg. 64) EAS -10%
Instrument: CSWC, indirect 4b. Q. Have you or do you plan to submit work you wrote or co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work, etc.)? (pg. 65)
None Below Minimum
Goal 4: Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society - locally, nationally, and globally. 4a. Community Involvement - Students will develop an understanding of the value of community involvement and participate in community service/volunteer work as part of a course or group exercise or on their own.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7b. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do community service or volunteer work prior to graduating from UCCS? (pg. 68)
EAS -19%
1k. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you participated in a community-based project (e.g. service learning) as part of a regular course? (pg. 69)
COB EAS LAS
-9% -13% -11%
11o. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in contributing to the welfare of your community? (pg. 70)
COB EAS LAS
-25% -21% -21%
4b. Values and Ethics - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of their personal code of values and ethics.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11n. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in developing a personal code of values and ethics? (pg. 71)
COB EAS LAS
-14% -26% -22%
4c. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of local, state, and domestic issues.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate your gain in knowledge of social/domestic issues while attending UCCS? (pg. 72)
Beth-El COB EAS
-15% -8% -36%
4d. Knowledge of Global Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of global issues.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate your gain in knowledge of international issues while attending UCCS? (pg. 73)
Beth-El EAS
-32% -32%
4e. Working Collaboratively - Students will demonstrate the ability to work effectively with others, including individuals from different backgrounds.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1g. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with other students on projects during class? (pg. 74)
LAS -12%
1h. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments? (pg. 75)
LAS -15%
Instrument: CSCW, indirect 3g. Q. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments has your instructor asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project? (pg. 76)
Beth-El LAS
-18% -12%
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 13 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Goal 4 - outcome 4e, continued
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in working with others.
(pg. 77) None Below Minimum
4f. Diversity/Inclusiveness - Students will demonstrate an awareness of and understanding of people/groups that are different from them.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1e. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussions or writing assignments? (pg. 78)
EAS -44%
11L. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds? (pg. 79)
Beth-El COB EAS LAS
-13% -28% -34% -7%
6e. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective? (pg. 80)
EAS -18%
1u. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own? (pg. 81)
Beth-El -7%
1v. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values?(pg. 82)
None Below Minimum
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your education at UCCS in multi-cultural awareness (sensitivity to others unlike you). (pg. 83)
COB EAS
-12% -43%
4g. Sustainability - Students will demonstrate an awareness and understanding of the value of sustainability.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 15 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Assessment of General Education: Goal 1
Students will be able to read, write, listen, and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical,
and creative thought.
READING Sub-Goal 1a. Students will demonstrate the ability to read, such that they can evaluate and analyze arguments,
can handle interpretation, inductive generalizations or causal explanations.
In this section, direct and indirect results related to students reading ability are presented. Direct measures are
taken from the Proficiency Profile. Indirect measures are taken from the UCCS Combined Alumni Survey -
Undergraduate.
Reading Skill Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile
Level 1 Reading: At Level 1, a student recognizes and comprehends discrete pieces of information (e.g., a
single detail, information presented in a single sentence), as well as relationships or connections explicitly
stated in a passage and understands words and phrases in context.2 For more details, please refer to Appendix A.
Most Recent Administration: 2009 – Spring, JR/SR and Fall, Freshman
Chart 1. PP Reading Skill by Proficiency Level 1 or Above, by Percent
National data is reflective of student’s performance for comparable Carnegie Classification institutions from Jan ’03 – July ‘07 Source of data: UCCS Assessment Office
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 72% (+/- 6%) of students reading at Level 1 or above. The
minimal acceptable percentage of student reading at Level 1 or above is 66%. The blue dotted line running
across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement
level.
Note: The target sample size for the upper-class administration was 300. We achieved a total of 225 tests
completed, resulting in a response rate of 75%. Although the goal was to test 100% senior level students, 31%
of the sample ended up being junior level students. In spite of this, as a group, UCCS seniors outperformed the
National senior group.
2 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001)
87
80
68
67
76
56
72
52
7
8
15
18
12
27
17
25
7
12
17
15
13
17
11
23
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
COB, n=81, JR/SR
Beth‐El, n=33, JR/SR
UCCS, n=225, JR/SR
UCCS, n=210, FR
Nat'l SR
Nat'l FR
Proficient Marginal Reading Not Proficient
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 17 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Reading Skill Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Results (replaces
Undergraduate Combined Alumni Survey)
Most Recent Administration: 2008, n= 277, 27% response rate
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “How would you rate the overall quality of your
reading skills education at UCCS?”
Chart 2. Alumni Rate Overall Quality of Their Reading Skills Education, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5
Table 1. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed a rating of “good/excellent” from 66% (+/- 6%) of our alumni,
with a minimum acceptable percentage of 60%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to
bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
36
9
18
22
29
34
46
42
39
37
26
36
33
36
29
4
5
3
4
2
10
3
1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=173
EAS, n=11
COB, n=57
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=277
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS
x̄ 3.78 3.68 3.55 4.02 3.92
CRITICAL THINKING
Sub-Goal 1b. Students will demonstrate critical, analytic and creative thinking skills. Direct and indirect results are presented in this section. Direct measures are taken from the Proficiency Profile.
Indirect results are taken from the National Survey of Student Engagement.
Critical Thinking Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile
Level 3 – Critical Thinking: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 reading skills successfully, students
at Level 3 can evaluate and analyze arguments and, within an academic field, handle interpretation, inductive
generalizations, or causal explanations. 3 For more details, please refer to Appendix A.
Note: Level 3 skills are differentiated within these areas as follows: Humanities: Evaluate views and interpretations Social Sciences: Evaluate claims, disputes, and inductive generalizations Natural Sciences: Evaluate explanatory hypotheses and draw conclusion
Most Recent Administration: 2009 – Spring, JR/SR and Fall, Freshman
Chart 3. PP Critical Thinking - Reading, Level 3, by Percent
National data is reflective of student’s performance for comparable Carnegie Classification institutions from Jan ’03 – July ‘07 Source of data: UCCS Assessment Office
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 12% (+/- 6%) of our students performing at Level 3, with a
minimal acceptable percentage of 6%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Note: Reading and critical thinking are treated within the PP test and results as a single dimension because of
the close relationship between the two. Critical thinking may be considered as a higher level reading process.4
3 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001) 4 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001)
23
16
6
9
13
1
6
2
64
64
62
58
63
55
66
50
14
20
32
33
25
44
28
48
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
COB, n=81, JR/SR
Beth‐El, n=33, JR/SR
UCCS JR/SR
UCCS FR
Natl, SR
Natl, FR
Proficient Level 3 – Critical Thinking Proficient Level 1‐2 Not Proficient/Marginal
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 19 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Critical Thinking Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2b
Most Recent Administration: 2008, Spring - Freshman, n = 342 (response rate 23%) and Senior, n = 428
(response rate 31%)
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your
coursework emphasized analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as examining a
particular case or situation in depth and considering its components?”
Chart 4. NSSE “Coursework emphasized analyzing the basic elements of an idea,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little =1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4
Table 2. Mean for University, Colleges and Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.29 3.23 3.24 3.47 3.36 3.06 3.11 3.27* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 85% (+/- 6%) of our students experiencing coursework that
emphasizes analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory “quite a bit/very much.” The
minimal acceptable percentage at “quite a bit/very much” is 79%. The blue dotted line running across the bars,
from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Note: College breakouts indicated in the NSSE charts and tables in this report represent only those respondents
that identified their major. The Public Master’s category includes UCCS and all comparable Carnegie
Classifications institutions that participated in this administration cycle.
54
49
42
46
48
31
43
35
40
33
42
38
41
46
42
44
6
12
15
17
10
21
14
19
6
2
0.5
1
2
1
2
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=214, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=412, SR
UCCS, n=308, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Critical Thinking Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2d
Most Recent Administration: 2008, Spring - Freshman, n = 342 (response rate 23%) and Senior, n = 428
(response rate 31%)
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your
coursework emphasized making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as
examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing the soundness of their conclusions?”
Chart 5. NSSE “Coursework emphasized making judgments,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit =3and Very Much = 4
Table 3. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
NSSE Pub Mstr’s FR
NSSE Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.26 2.83 2.61 2.99 2.94 2.75 2.94*** 3.05* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of our students engaging in coursework that
emphasizes making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods “quite a bit/very much.”
The minimal acceptable percent is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
38
27
32
45
35
20
35
28
30
27
34
38
33
44
40
42
26
24
19
15
25
28
21
25
6
21
15
2
8
9
4
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213 SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=410, SR
UCCS, n=309, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 21 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Critical Thinking Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges - NSSE,
CSWC 2c
Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 – Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your
writing assignments did you analyze or evaluate something you read, researched or observed?”
Chart 6. CSWC “Analyze or evaluate something you read, researched or observed,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few = 2, Some = 3, Most = 4 and All = 5
Table 4. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 3.58 3.61 3.59 3.62 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 60% of students indicating that they analyzed or evaluated
something they read, researched or observed, for “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable
percentage is 56%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Note: UCCS is participating in the Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges in collaboration with the
NSSE. These questions were administered in conjunction with the Spring 2008 NSSE.
14
15
13
16
19
18
10
18
44
45
50
44
39
24
39
52
32
28
27
24
32
33
13
21
8
8
7
12
7
18
29
9
2
3
3
3
4
7
10
1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=224, FR
UCCS, n=338, SR
Beth‐El, n=54, SR
COB, n=45, SR
EAS, n=31, SR
LAS, n=200, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments Few Assignments No Assignments
WRITING Sub-goal 1c: Students will demonstrate the ability to write, including proper mechanics, grammar, punctuation
and sentence structure.
Writing Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile
Level 1 Writing: At Level 1, a student can recognize agreement among basic grammatical elements (e.g., nouns,
verbs, pronouns, conjunctions); recognize appropriate transition words; recognize incorrect word choice; order
sentences in a paragraph; order elements in an outline.5
Most Recent Administration: 2009 – Spring, JR/SR and Fall, Freshman
Chart 7. PP Proficiency in Writing Level One or Above, by Percent
National data is reflective of student’s performance for comparable Carnegie Classification institutions from Jan ’03 – July ‘07 Source of data: UCCS Assessment Office
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 71% of our students writing at Level 1 or above. The
minimum acceptable percentage is 65%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Note: Nationally and for UCCS, 56% of entering freshman have level 1 or above writing skills. It would seem
reasonable to expect that our Spring 2009 JR/SR results would be comparable to national senior level results
(71% demonstrate writing skills at Level 1 or above). However, UCCS results are well below national levels,
with 66% of the Spring 2009 students demonstrating writing skills at Level 1 or above. This indicates that, with
the exception of the EAS majors, UCCS students are not making the same gains in their most basic writing
skills, as comparable students nationally, during their academic experience at UCCS.
5 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001)
67
76
62
58
66
56
71
56
28
16
25
30
24
31
21
29
5
8
14
12
10
13
8
15
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
COB, n=81, JR/SR
Beth‐El, n=33, JR/SR
UCCS, n=225, JR/SR
UCCS, n=210, FR
Nat'l SR
Nat'l FR
Proficient Level 1 Writing or Above Marginal Writing Not Proficient Writing
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 23 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Writing Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 3d Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current year, about how many papers or
reports between 5 and 19 pages have you completed?
Chart 8. NSSE “Papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages,” by Percent
Source of Data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: None = 1, 1 to 4 = 2, 5 to 10 = 3, 11 to 20 = 4 and >20 writing assignments = 5
Table 5. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.21 2.38 2.61 2.73 2.58 2.34 2.26 2.55 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed the university performance, with 46% (+/- 6%) of students
writing at least five to ten papers “between 5 and 19 pages” in length during their most recent academic year.
The minimum acceptable percent is 40%. To illustrate, 21% of Beth-El students indicated that they wrote at
least five papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages and 36% of College of Business students indicated that they
wrote at least five papers or reports between 5and 19 pages. These are both currently below the minimal
acceptable percentage of 40%. Whereas, 42% of EAS students indicated that they wrote at least five papers or
reports between 5 and 19 pages. Thus, EAS is above the minimal acceptable percentage but not quite at the
achievement target. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
6
12
2
4
5
1
4
2
13
15
6
2
12
5
11
6
38
15
28
15
29
32
30
24
33
36
57
69
44
50
45
53
10
21
8
10
10
12
10
15
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, SR
EAS, SR
COB, SR
Beth‐EL, SR
UCCS SR
UCCS FR
NSSE PubMstr's SR
NSSE PubMstr's FR
> 20 writing assignments 11 to 20 5 to 10 1 to 4 None
Writing Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges - NSSE, CSWC 1a Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, for how many of your
writing assignments have you brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop
your ideas before your started drafting your assignment?”
Chart 9. CSWC “Brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.)” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few = 2, Some = 3, Most = 4 and All = 5
Table 6. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 3.13 3.43 3.52 3.35*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 50% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they brainstormed
before drafting an assignment for “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is 46%.
The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
19
17
22
14
13
26
7
14
36
33
29
26
30
19
16
29
28
27
27
29
33
19
36
29
13
17
15
21
15
21
32
21
4
7
7
10
9
15
10
8
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=228, FR
UCCS, n=343, SR
Beth‐El, n=54, SR
COB, n=47, SR
EAS, n=31, SR
LAS, n=225, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments
Few Assignments No Assignments
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 25 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Writing Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges - NSSE, CSWC 1d Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, for how many of your
assignments have you received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final
assignment?”
Chart 10. CSWC “Received feedback from your instructor,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few = 2, Some = 3, Most = 4 and All = 5
Table 7. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 2.47 3.19 3.36* 2.85*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 31% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they received
feedback from the instructor prior to turning in final assignment for “most/all” assignments. The minimal
acceptable percentage is 25%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the
achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
17
9
17
4
2
9
5
32
22
25
16
13
30
7
14
29
30
30
26
19
17
36
29
14
24
17
28
30
21
36
29
8
15
11
25
36
23
23
24
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=228, FR
UCCS, n=342, SR
Beth‐El, n=53, SR
COB, n=47, SR
EAS, n=31, SR
LAS, n=203, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments Few Assignments No Assignments
Writing Evidence Source 5, Instrument: Writing Competency Portfolio Table 8. Writing Center First-year Freshman Portfolio Results by Percent 2007-2008 Writing Portfolio Summary
College Native FY*/Transfer* Grand Total
Competent Comp-high
Comp-low NA Needs work
Beth-El 100 95% 3% 2% 0% 0%
Native FY Freshman 33 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Transfer 67 93% 4% 3% 0% 0%
EAS 51 88% 8% 4% 0% 0%
Native FY Freshman 34 94% 3% 3% 0% 0%
Transfer 17 76% 18% 6% 0% 0%
COB 96 86% 2% 10% 1% 0%
Native FY Freshman 29 86% 3% 10% 0% 0%
Transfer 67 87% 1% 10% 1% 0%
LAS 467 87% 8% 4% 0% 1%
Native FY Freshman 114 87% 8% 5% 0% 0%
Transfer 353 87% 8% 4% 0% 1%
SPA 1 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Transfer 1 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Grand Total 715 88% 7% 5% 0% 0%
Native FY Freshman 210 90% 5% 5% 0% 0%
Transfer 505 87% 7% 5% 0% 1% August 2007 through August 2008. Native FY refers to candidates for degree that began their academic career with UCCS as freshman. Transfers include all registration types except first-time freshmen. 2008-2009 Writing Portfolio Summary
College Native FY/Transfer Grand Total
Competent Comp-high
Needs work
Grand Total
Beth-El 137 99% 1% 1% 100% Native FY Freshman 47 98% 0% 2% 100% Transfer 91 99% 1% 0% 100% EAS 59 100% 0% 0% 100% Native FY Freshman 29 100% 0% 0% 100% Transfer 30 100% 0% 0% 100% COB 126 98% 0% 2% 100% Native FY Freshman 43 100% 0% 0% 100% Transfer 83 98% 0% 2% 100% LAS 606 95% 2% 3% 100% Native FY Freshman 193 96% 1% 3% 100% Transfer 413 94% 3% 3% 100% SPA 7 71% 0% 29% 100% Native FY Freshman 2 50% 0% 50% 100% Transfer 5 80% 0% 20% 100% Grand Total 936 96% 2% 2% 100% Native FY Freshman 314 97% 0% 3% 100% Transfer 622 95% 2% 2% 100% August 2008 through August 2009. Native FY refers to candidates for degree that began their academic career with UCCS as freshman. Transfers include all registration types except first-time freshmen.
Note: The writing portfolio is supposed to be submitted by students for review during their junior year. Plans
are in place to enforce submission deadlines with the new enrollment system. Ultimately, this will enable a
more effective and compelling evaluation and intervention process.
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 27 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Consortium for the Study of Writing in College
Various items from the NSSE-CSWC tables have been highlighted in the General Education Assessment
Report. Please see Appendix for more details related to the CSWC project.
NSSE 2009 Mean Comparisons a6
Consortium for the Study of Writing in College University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Table 9. CSWC-NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium
UCCS
UCCS compared with
CSWC
Class Mean Mean Sig b Effect size c
1. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments have you done each of the following?
1a. Brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment
FY 3.43 3.52 -.08
SR 3.13 3.36 *** -.19
1b. Talked with your instructor to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment
FY 2.93 3.03 -.09
SR 2.66 2.86 ** -.18
1c. Talked with a classmate, friend, or family member to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment
FY 3.27 3.31 -.04
SR 3.07 3.20 * -.12
1d. Received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final assignment
FY 3.19 3.36 * -.15
SR 2.47 2.85 *** -.32
1e. Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment
FY 3.22 3.23 -.01
SR 2.78 2.89 -.09
1f. Visited a campus-based writing or tutoring center to get help with your writing assignment before turning it in
FY 2.12 2.03 .07
SR 1.78 1.69 .09
1g. Used an on-line tutoring service to get help with your writing assignment before turning it in
FY 1.74 1.67 .07
SR 1.40 1.44 -.04
1h. Proofread your final draft for errors before turning it in
FY 4.32 4.28 .05
SR 4.47 4.35 * .11 Scale: 1 = No assignments, 2 = Few assignments, 3 = Some assignments, 4 = Most assignments, 5 = All Assignments
6 The National Survey for Student Engagement – Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (Indiana University for Postsecondary Research, 2008)
Table 10. CSWC-NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium7
UCCS
UCCS compared with
CSWC
Class Mean Mean Sig b Effect size c
2. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you:
2a. Narrate or describe one of your own experiences
FY 2.38 2.75 *** -.36
SR 2.16 2.51 *** -.33
2b. Summarize something you read, such as articles, books, or on-line publications
FY 3.13 3.24 -.12
SR 3.01 3.18 ** -.17
2c. Analyze or evaluate something you read, researched, or observed
FY 3.61 3.59 .03
SR 3.58 3.62 -.04
2d. Describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.
FY 2.53 2.84 *** -.27
SR 2.57 2.91 *** -.28
2e. Argue a position using evidence and reasoning
FY 3.30 3.35 -.05
SR 3.03 3.12 -.08 2f. Explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data
FY 2.22 2.36 -.12
SR 2.34 2.50 * -.14
2g. Write in the style and format of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology, etc.)
FY 2.84 2.77 .06
SR 3.43 3.20 ** .18
2h. Include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your written assignment
FY 2.23 2.40 * -.16
SR 2.59 2.80 ** -.19
2i. Create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as PowerPoint, etc.)
FY 2.48 2.43 .04
SR 2.76 2.90 * -.12
Scale: 1 = No assignments, 2 = Few assignments, 3 = Some assignments, 4 = Most assignments, 5 = All Assignments 7 The National Survey for Student Engagement – Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (Indiana University for Postsecondary Research, 2008)
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 29 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Table 11. CSWC-NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium8
UCCS
UCCS compared with
CSWC
Class Mean Mean Sig b Effect size c
3. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments has your instructor done each of the following?
3a. Provided clear instructions describing what he or she wanted you to do
FY 3.89 3.93 -.04
SR 3.74 3.91 *** -.20
3b. Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn
FY 3.64 3.71 -.08
SR 3.44 3.70 *** -.26
3c. Explained in advance the criteria he or she would use to grade your assignment
FY 3.92 3.86 .07
SR 3.71 3.86 * -.15
3d. Provided a sample of a completed assignment written by the instructor or a student
FY 2.88 2.91 -.03
SR 2.42 2.68 *** -.22
3e. Asked you to do short pieces of writing that he or she did not grade
FY 2.41 2.71 *** -.25
SR 1.87 2.19 *** -.28
3f. Asked you to give feedback to a classmate about a draft or outline the classmate had written
FY 3.17 3.03 .12
SR 1.98 2.22 *** -.21
3g. Asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project
FY 2.55 2.66 -.10
SR 2.48 2.69 *** -.19
3h. Asked you to address a real or imagined audience such as your classmates, a politician, non-experts, etc.
FY 2.99 2.82 * .14
SR 2.38 2.52 * -.11
Scale: 1 = No assignments, 2 = Few assignments, 3 = Some assignments, 4 = Most assignments, 5 = All Assignments
8 The National Survey for Student Engagement – Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (Indiana University for Postsecondary Research, 2008)
Table 12. CSWC - NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium9
UCCS
UCCS compared with
CSWC
Class Mean Mean Sig b Effect size c
4a. Prepare a portfolio that collects written work from more than one class FY .06 .14 *** -.22
SR .36 .19 *** .43
4b. Submit work you wrote or co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work, etc.) FY .05 .05 .00
SR .08 .09 -.03
Scale: 1 = Have not decided, 2 = Do not plan to do, 3 = Plan to do, 4 = Done
9 The National Survey for Student Engagement – Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (Indiana University for Postsecondary Research, 2008)
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 31 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
ORAL COMMUNICATION
Sub-Goal 1d: Students will be able to speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative
thought.
Oral Communication Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1b
Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you made a class presentation?”
Chart 11. NSSE “How often have you made a class presentations,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4 Table 13. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS
UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.67 3.25 2.52 2.63 2.72 2.23 2.34** 2.85** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 64% (+/- 6%) of seniors experiencing opportunities to make
class presentations “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable percentage of seniors indicating “often/very
often” by college or for the university is 58%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Note: Although UCCS seniors indicated a 25% increase from freshman to senior ratings of making class
presentations “often/very often,” and the National Public institutions demonstrate a 26% increase freshman to
senior year ratings, the National Public seniors (64%) indicate that they experience more opportunities than
UCCS seniors (57%) to make class presentations.
18
18
52
15
22
7
10
27
33
24
27
40
35
25
28
37
43
49
15
44
36
54
28
31
6
9
6
2
7
15
12
6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=51, SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=428, SR
UCCS, n=340, FR
PubMstr's FR
PubMstr's SR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
Oral Communication Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in speaking clearly and effectively?”
Chart 12. NSSE “Development in speaking clearly and effectively,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4
Table 14. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.71 3.06 2.67 2.91 2.87 2.73 2.92*** 3.04*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 73% of seniors indicating that UCCS contributed “very
much/quite a bit” to their knowledge, skills and development in speaking clearly. The minimal acceptable
percent responding “very much/quite a bit” is 67%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to
bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
32
24
36
25
30
21
36
30
33
33
42
33
34
41
37
39
31
27
15
29
28
29
21
24
5
15
8
13
8
9
5
7
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, 53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=386, SR
UCCS, n=289, FR
NSSE PubMstr's SR
NSSE PubMstr's FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 33 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Oral Communication Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Results
(replaces Undergraduate Alumni Survey)
Most Recent Administration: 2008, n=277, 27% Response Rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “How would you rate the overall quality of your oral
communication skills at UCCS?”
Chart 13. Alumni Rate Overall Quality of Their Oral Communication Skills Education, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5
Table 15. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed a rating of “good/excellent” from 69% (+/- 6%) of our alumni,
with a minimum acceptable percent of 63%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
28
16
17
23
36
55
70
56
46
29
18
14
17
24
5
27
6
5
2
6
2
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=173
EAS, n=11
COB, n=57
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=277
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS
x̄ 3.72 4.02 3.27 3.84 3.84
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 35 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Core Curriculum for General Education: Goal 2
Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience
in other fields.
DEPTH Sub-Goal 2a. Objective: Students will develop a deep knowledge of and understanding of their field of
specialization.
Indirect results related to students depth of understanding of their majors and breadth of experience across
disciplines are presented in this section. Measures are taken from the UCCS Combined Alumni Survey, the
National Survey of Student Engagement and from the Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges.
Depth Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Results. Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “UCCS prepared me well for my field of
specialization.”
Chart 14. Alumni Rate Preparation for Field of Specialization, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Office of Institutional Research Legend: Strongly Disagree = 1, Disagree = 2, Neutral = 3, Agree = 4 and Strongly Agree = 5
Table 16. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 62% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating “agree/strongly agree” that
the specific knowledge, skills and expertise they acquired at UCCS has been useful in their present occupation.
The minimal acceptable percentage indicating “agree/strongly agree” is 56%. The blue dotted line running
across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement
level.
19
9
21
39
22
36
82
44
36
40
29
9
28
17
26
12
5
6
9
4
2
3
3
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=172
EAS, n=11
COB, n=57
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=276
Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS
x̄ 4.03 3.77 4.00 3.55 3.67
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 37 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Depth Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11b Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at this institution
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring job or work-related knowledge
and skills?”
Chart 15. NSSE “Acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4
Table 17. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE – Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.25 3.13 2.91 2.58 2.79 2.66 2.81*** 3.11*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at
UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring
job or work-related knowledge and skills. The minimal acceptable percentage of respondents indicating “quite a
bit/very much” is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the
achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
22
33
42
56
31
17
41
27
30
33
38
15
29
42
34
37
32
24
13
27
26
31
19
27
16
9
8
2
13
10
6
10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=212, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=385, SR
UCCS, n=289, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Depth Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 7a
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you done or do you plan to do any of the
following; practicum, internship, field experience, clinical assignment or co-op assignment, before you graduate
from UCCS?
Chart 16. NSSE “Practicum, internships, field experience,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Do Not Plan to Do, Have Not Decided & Plan to Do = 0, Done = 1
Table 18. Mean for University and College for the Variable “Done”
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ .73 .38 .45 .33 .38 .05 .07 .49*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 49% (+/- 6%) of respondents indicating “done” for NSSE 7a.
The minimal acceptable percentage indicating “done” for “practicum, internship, field experience, clinical
assignment or co-op assignment” is 43%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
33
46
38
73
38
35
49
7
23
39
19
19
26
40
26
73
16
9
32
2
12
16
9
15
28
6
11
6
23
9
16
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=402, SR
UCCS, n=297, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Done Plan to Do Have Not Decided Do Not Plan to Do
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 39 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Depth Evidence Source 4, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2e Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your
coursework emphasized applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations?”
Chart 17. NSSE “Applying theories or concepts to practical problems,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3, and Very Much = 4
Table 19. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.54 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.22 3.02 3.05 3.25 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 82% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating their coursework
emphasized applying theories or concepts “quite a bit/very much.” The minimum acceptable percentage is
76%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
44
55
40
58
34
45
34
46
37
21
43
38
38
37
40
36
16
15
15
4
24
15
22
16
3
9
2
4
4
4
3
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS,n=214, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=308, FR
UCCS, n=411, SR
PubMstr’s FR
PubMstr’s SR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Depth Evidence Source 5, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE, CSWC 2g
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your
writing assignments did you write in the style and form of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology,
etc.)”
Chart 18. CSWC “Write in the style and form of a specific field” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few Assignments = 2, Some Assignments = 3, Most Assignments = 4 and All Assignments = 5
Table 20. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 3.43 2.84 2.77 3.20** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 46% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they wrote in the
style and format for a specific field for “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is
40%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
9
18
15
31
57
22
26
30
21
28
18
23
13
18
29
26
30
24
25
18
21
18
10
18
20
15
20
15
6
16
23
15
20
15
22
13
4
27
13
12
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=224, FR
UCCS, n=333, SR
Beth‐El, n=53, SR
COB, n=45, SR
EAS, n=31, SR
LAS, n=196, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments
Few Assignments No Assignments
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 41 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
BREADTH Sub-Goal 2b. Students will demonstrate a breadth of knowledge across disciplines Breadth Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Humanities Most Recent Administration: Spring 2009, Seniors/Fall 2009, Freshman
Chart 19. PP Student Mean Scores for Breadth of Knowledge in Humanities
Source of Data: UCCS Assessment Office Possible Score for Each Category: 100-130
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed mean score of 115.8 (+/- 6%). Minimum acceptable score is
108.9. The blue dotted line running across the columns, from left to right, indicates the achievement target and
the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Breadth Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Social Sciences Chart 20. PP Student Mean Scores for Breadth of Knowledge in Social Science
Source of Data: UCCS Assessment Office Possible Score for Each Category: 100-130
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed mean score of 114.5 (+/- 6%). Minimum acceptable score is
107.6. The blue dotted line running across the columns, from left to right, indicates the achievement target and
the minimal acceptable achievement level.
100.0
105.0
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
130.0
UCCS, n=210, FR
Nat'l FR COB, n=81, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
Beth‐El, N=33, JR/SR
UCCS, n=225, JR/SR
Nat'l, SR
113.3 113.0 114.9 116.8 117.3114.2 115.8 115.8
100.0
105.0
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
130.0
UCCS, n=210, FR
Nat'l FR COB, n=81, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
Beth‐El, N=33, JR/SR
UCCS, n=225, JR/SR
Nat'l, SR
112.1 111.7 113.2116.0 117.2
114.2 115.1 114.5
Breadth Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Natural Sciences Chart 21. PP Student Mean Scores for Breadth of Knowledge in Natural Sciences
Source of Data: UCCS Assessment Office Possible Score for Each Category: 100-130
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed mean score of 115.9 (+/- 6%). Minimum acceptable score is
111.3. The blue dotted line running across the columns, from left to right, indicates the achievement target and
the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Breadth Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Scaled Score Chart 22. PP Scaled Score Mean for “Overall Breadth of Knowledge”
Source of Data: UCCS Assessment Office Possible Score for Each Category: 400-500
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed a mean score of 447.9 (+/- 6%). The minimum acceptable
score is 421.0. The blue dotted line running across the columns, from left to right, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
100.0
105.0
110.0
115.0
120.0
125.0
130.0
UCCS, n=210, FR
Nat'l FR COB, n=81, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
Beth‐El, N=33, JR/SR
UCCS, n=225, JR/SR
Nat'l, SR
114.0 113.3115.7
117.7 117.4 117.4 116.6 115.9
400.0410.0420.0430.0440.0450.0460.0470.0480.0490.0500.0
UCCS, n=210, FR
Nat'l FR COB, n=81, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
Beth‐El, n=33, JR/SR
UCCS, n=225, JR/SR
Nat'l, SR
438.7 437.9445.3
456.7 453.5 449.5 449.8 447.9
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 43 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Breadth Evidence Source 5, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11a Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring a broad general education?”
Chart 23. NSSE “Development in acquiring a broad general education,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4 Table 21. Mean for University, Colleges and Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.81 3.08 2.67 3.05 2.99 2.94 3.16*** 3.26*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 83% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at
UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to their development in acquiring a broad general education.
Minimum acceptable percent is 77%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
37
15
36
17
33
26
45
38
35
49
43
54
39
48
38
44
22
24
13
23
21
21
14
16
5
12
8
6
6
5
3
3
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=212, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=385, SR
UCCS, n=286, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Breadth, Sub-Goal 2c. Native Students will demonstrate a greater breadth of knowledge across disciplines
than transfer Students.
Breadth Evidence Source 6, Instrument: Proficiency Profile, Scaled Score Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2009/Fall, 2009
Table 22. PP Scaled Score Mean for Native Compared to Transfer Students
Native Students Transfer Students
UCCS SR 446.8 453.0 Source of Data: UCCS Assessment Office Possible Score 400 – 500
Achievement Target: Native students must exceed a score of 453 (+/- 6%). The minimum acceptable score is 425.8. Please Note: Native FY refers to candidates for degree that began their academic career with UCCS as freshman. Transfers include all registration types except first-time freshmen.
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 45 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Core Curriculum for General Education: Goal 3
Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge.
TECHNOLOGY
Sub-Goal 3a. Students will demonstrate technological skills and knowledge in the use of technological
devices/methods such as; learning management systems, blogs/chat groups, podcasts.
Indirect results related to students technology knowledge and skills are presented in this section. Indirect
measures are taken from the National Survey of Student Engagement and The UCCS Combined Alumni
Survey.
Technology Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1L Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often did
you use an electronic medium (listserv, chat group, internet, im, etc.) to discuss or complete an assignment?”
Chart 24: NSSE “Listserv, chat group, internet, instant message, etc.,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3, Very Often = 4
Table 23. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.6 2.79 2.24 2.57 2.56 2.47 2.61* 2.87*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 62% (+/- 6%) of our students indicating that they use
electronic mediums to discuss or complete an assignment “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable
percentage is 56%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
28
24
34
35
28
20
35
25
21
15
30
17
22
29
27
28
33
21
17
21
28
29
27
31
19
39
19
27
22
22
11
17
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=214, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=418, SR
UCCS, n=324, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 47 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Technology Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11g Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has UCCS contributed to your
knowledge, skills, and personal development in using computing and information technology?”
Chart 25. NSSE “Using computing and information technology,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3,and Very Much = 4
Table 24. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.23 3.36 3.42 2.95 3.24 3.08 2.97 3.21 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 81% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that UCCS contributed to
their knowledge, skills and personal development with computing and information technology “quite a bit/very
much.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 75%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to
bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
31
55
53
50
46
38
46
33
39
36
32
25
34
35
35
38
24
6
13
23
17
24
16
23
6
3
2
2
3
4
3
6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=386, SR
UCCS, n=288, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Technology Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in
computer skills.”
Chart 27. Alumni Rate the Quality of UCCS Education in Computer Skills, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5
Table 25. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 63% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their
UCCS education in computer skills was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 57%. The
blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal
acceptable achievement level.
22
18
26
22
23
39
36
46
36
40
28
36
21
33
27
10
9
4
6
8
2
4
3
2
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=174
EAS, n=11
COB, n=57
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=278
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 3.69 3.88 3.64 3.7 3.73
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 49 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
INFORMATION LITERACY Sub-Goal 3b. Students will demonstrate the ability to locate, evaluate, select and use appropriately necessary
information.
Indirect results related to students information literacy skills are presented in this section. Indirect measures are
taken from The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey. Direct measurement instruments are being reviewed and
considered for use in measuring this topic.
Information Gathering Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in
information gathering skills (library, reference).
Chart 27. Alumni Rate the Quality of UCCS Education in Information Gathering, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5
Table 26. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 69% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their
UCCS education in information gathering was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 63%.
The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
34
18
24
28
31
36
46
45
42
38
22
27
21
25
22
7
9
10
3
7
2
3
1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=174
EAS, n=11
COB, n=58
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=279
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 3.89 3.83 3.73 3.93 3.90
PRESENTATIONS
Sub-Goal 3c. Students will be able to communicate through the use of visual aids (PowerPoint, drawings,
tables, photos, screen shots)
Indirect results related to student’s skills in the use of visual aids are presented in this section. Indirect
measures are taken from The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey and The Consortium for the Study of Writing in
College.
Presentations Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE,
CSWC 2i
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your
writing assignments did you create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as
PowerPoint, etc.)?”
Chart 28. CSWC “Create the project with multimedia,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few Assignments = 2, Some Assignments = 3, Most Assignments = 4 and All Assignments = 5
Table 27. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 2.76 2.48 2.43 2.90* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 30% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they created writing
assignments with multi-media, for “most/all” assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is 24%. The
blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal
acceptable achievement level.
5
7
6
6
22
10
3
12
23
11
19
11
46
13
15
30
36
31
33
49
15
30
36
28
20
30
27
30
9
37
30
25
14
22
15
9
9
10
16
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=222, FR
UCCS, n=333, SR
Beth‐El, n=53, SR
COB, n=46, SR
EAS, n=30, SR
LAS, n=196, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments
Few Assignments No Assignments
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 51 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Presentations Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE,
CSWC 2h
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your
writing assignments did you include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your
written assignment?”
Chart 29. CSWC “Include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few Assignments = 2, Some Assignments = 3, Most Assignments = 4 and All Assignments = 5
Table 28. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR x̄ 2.59 2.43 2.40* 2.80** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 29% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they included
drawings, tables, photos, or other visual content in “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable
percentage is 23%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
Note: Although CSWC seniors (x̄ = 2.80) indicated that they used visual content in their writing assignments
significantly (p<.001) more frequently than UCCS seniors (x̄ = 2.59), this translates into “few/some”
assignments for the University, highlighting that we are somewhat behind the movement in the use of multi-
media.
4
7
6
6
22
26
1
13
21
10
20
4
39
42
14
29
33
18
24
30
15
19
24
28
22
32
27
26
20
13
32
26
16
34
24
40
4
29
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=221, FR
UCCS, n=335, SR
Beth‐El, n=53, SR
COB, n=46, SR
EAS, n=31, SR
LAS, n=197, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments
Few Assignments No Assignments
Presentations Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your education in graphic
communication (using charts and graphs to present information).
Chart 30. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Using Charts and Graphs, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5
Table 29. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 48% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their
UCCS education in using charts and graphs was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is
42%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
17
25
11
16
28
9
37
39
32
40
46
28
31
38
12
9
7
11
11
3
36
3
6
4
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=173
EAS, n=11
COB, n=57
Beth‐El, n=35
UCCS, n=276
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 3.40 3.72 3.73 3.44 3.45
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 53 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
RESEARCH
Sub-Goal 3d. Students will demonstrate research skills and knowledge relevant to their field/discipline. Indirect results related to students research skills and knowledge are presented in this section. Indirect measures
are taken from The Alumni Survey and the CSWC. Frequent use of the items evaluated on the following pages
could be considered integral components for an institution interested in achieving research university status. At
the very least, these findings are important in disciplines where students need to make data-driven arguments.
Research Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE, CSWC 2d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your
writing assignments did you describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work,
a survey project, etc.”
Chart 31. CSWC “Describe your methods or findings related to data you collected,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few Assignments = 2, Some Assignments = 3, Most Assignments = 4 and All Assignments = 5
Table 30. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 2.57 2.53 2.84*** 2.91*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 34% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they describe
methods or findings related to data in writing for “most/all” assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is
28%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
8
9
7
5
2
11
10
5
22
25
17
18
23
24
32
12
33
30
26
27
38
20
26
26
21
20
19
27
19
26
10
32
16
16
30
23
19
20
23
24
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=226, FR
UCCS, n=339, SR
Beth‐El, n=53, SR
COB, n=46, SR
EAS, n=31, SR
LAS, n=201, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments
Few Assignments No Assignments
Research Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE, CSWC 2f
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your
writing assignments did you explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data.”
Chart 33. CSWC “Explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few Assignments = 2, Some Assignments = 3, Most Assignments = 4 and All Assignments = 5
Table 31. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 2.34 2.22 2.36 2.50* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 21% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they explained the
meaning of numerical or statistical data in writing for “most/all” assignments. The minimal acceptable
percentage is 15%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
4
5
5
5
2
15
16
2
13
16
9
11
10
15
26
7
27
29
26
27
39
33
29
23
26
25
24
26
27
26
19
28
30
25
36
30
23
11
10
41
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=223, FR
UCCS, n=333, SR
Beth‐El, n=52, SR
COB, n=46, SR
EAS, n=31, SR
LAS, n=196, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments
Few Assignments No Assignments
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 55 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Research Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 7d
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you or do you plan to work on a research
project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements prior to graduation from UCCS?”
Chart 33. NSSE “Work on research project with faculty member,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Do Not Plan to Do, Have Not Decided & Plan to Do = 0, Done = 1
Table 32. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s for variable “Done”
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ .19 .38 .21 .17 .15 .04 .05 .16 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 16% (+/- 6%) of seniors having worked on a research project
with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements prior to graduation. The minimum acceptable
percentage is 10%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
17
21
4
19
15
4
16
5
12
12
6
2
10
27
13
31
53
42
70
75
57
27
51
24
18
24
21
4
18
42
20
39
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=401, SR
UCCS, n=297, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Done Plan to Do Have Not Decided Do Not Plan to Do
Research Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “How would you rate the overall quality of your
education at UCCS in scientific reasoning skills?”
Chart 34. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Scientific Reasoning Skills, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5
Table 33. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 68% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their
UCCS education in scientific reasoning skills “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 62%.
The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
25
55
13
28
24
43
36
38
61
44
22
9
36
8
22
9
14
9
1
3
1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=173
EAS, n=11
COB, n=56
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=276
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 4.11 3.48 4.45 3.83 3.80
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 57 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
SELF-GUIDED LEARNING Sub-Goal 3e. Students will demonstrate the ability to learn on their own and the desire to become life-long
learners.
Indirect results related to student’s inspiration to become life-long learners are presented in this section.
Indirect results are taken from the National Survey on Student Engagement and The UCCS Combined Alumni
Survey.
Self-Guided Learning Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11j Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on your own?”
Chart 35. NSSE “Learning effectively on your own,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office 1 = very little, 2 = some, 3 = quite a bit, 4 = very much
Table 34. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.94 2.75 2.48 2.80 2.76 2.84 2.99** 3.05*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that UCCS contributed
“quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on their
own.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to
bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
28
12
28
31
26
20
36
31
35
39
29
40
34
46
39
42
26
33
33
17
29
31
20
22
11
15
10
10
11
3
6
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=210, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=51 SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=375, SR
UCCS, n=284, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Self-guided Learning Evidence Source 2, Instrument: The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey -
Undergraduate
Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in
motivating you to pursue knowledge?”
Chart 36. Alumni Rate Quality of Education in Motivating You to Pursue Knowledge, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5
Table 35. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 78% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their
UCCS education in being motivated to pursue knowledge as “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable
percentage is 72%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
46
18
29
42
41
35
36
40
47
37
14
46
24
8
17
6
5
5
2
3
0.5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=174
EAS, n=11
COB, n=58
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=279
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 4.25 3.90 3.73 4.21 4.13
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 59 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
QUANTITATIVE ABILITIES Sub-Goal 3f. Students will demonstrate competency in their skills and knowledge in analyzing and completing
quantitative problems.
Direct and indirect results related to student’s mathematics ability are presented in this section. Direct measures
are taken from the Proficiency Profile. Indirect measures are taken from the National Survey of Student
Engagement.
Quantitative Abilities Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile
Level 1 – Mathematics: A student at Level 1 demonstrates basic number sense and skills in arithmetic
operations and relationships and in elementary geometry and measurement. A student at this level can read and
interpret information from simple graphs or charts, solve simple equations or evaluate expressions, and solve
simple and routine word problems.
Most Recent Administration: 2009 – Spring, JR/SR and Fall, Freshman Chart 37. PP Mathematics Proficiency Level 1 or Above, by Percent
National Results are reflective of student’s performance for comparable Carnegie Classification institutions from Jan ’03 – July ‘07 Source of data: UCCS Assessment Office
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 58% (+/- 6%) of students performing at Math Proficiency
Level 1 or above. The minimum acceptable percentage is 52%. The blue dotted line running across the bars,
from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
67
86
63
58
68
55
47
58
18
10
26
30
19
22
29
26
15
4
11
12
13
23
24
16
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=61, JR/SR
EAS, n=50, JR/SR
COB, n=81, JR/SR
Beth‐El, n=33, JR/SR
UCCS, n=225, JR/SR
UCCS, n=210, FR
Nat'l FR
Nat'l SR
Proficient ‐Mathematics, Level 1 or Above Marginal ‐Mathematics
Not Proficient ‐Mathematics
Quantitative Abilities Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11f Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative problems?”
Chart 38. NSSE “Personal development in analyzing quantitative problems,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3, and Very Much = 4
Table 36. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.13 3.23 3.45 2.87 3.02 2.81 2.93* 3.08 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that UCCS contributed
“quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative
problems. The minimum acceptable percentage is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top
to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
27
49
43
47
34
23
38
29
39
49
38
26
38
42
37
42
28
2
17
21
23
28
20
24
6
2
6
5
7
4
6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=209, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=379, SR
UCCS, n=288, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 61 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
LEARNING ACTIVITIES Indirect measures related to students learning activities are presented in this section. Measures are taken from
the National Survey for Student Engagement and the Consortium for the Study of Writing in College.
Learning Activities Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources?”
Chart 39. NSSE “Integrating ideas or information from various sources,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3, and Very Much = 4
Table 37. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.50 3.34 3.09 3.39 3.34 3.04 3.13 3.36 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 87% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they worked on
papers/projects requiring the integration of ideas or information from various sources “often/very often.” The
minimum acceptable percentage is 81%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
55
39
49
56
50
32
35
50
32
36
40
38
36
43
44
37
11
18
8
6
12
21
19
12
2
6
4
2
4
2
1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=428, SR
UCCS, n=341, FR
PubMstr's FR
PubMstr's SR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
Learning Activities Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2c
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your
coursework emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex
interpretations and relationships?”
Chart 40. NSSE “Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3, and Very Much = 4
Table 38. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 3.35 2.89 2.97 3.13 3.06 2.79 2.90* 3.08 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 76% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their coursework
emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences “quite a bit/very much.” The
minimum acceptable percentage is 70%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
38
36
30
50
36
20
35
26
40
36
34
35
38
46
41
42
20
15
30
15
22
28
21
27
2
12
6
4
7
3
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=212, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=409, SR
UCCS, n=306, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 63 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Learning Activities Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11m
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in solving complex real-world problems?”
Chart 41. NSSE “Solving complex real-world problems,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3, and Very Much = 4
Table 39. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.81 2.58 2.94 2.39 2.55 2.50 2.71*** 2.80*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 63% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at
UCCS contributed to their skills in solving complex real-world problems “quite a bit/very much.” The
minimum acceptable percentage is 57%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
15
30
21
36
21
16
27
23
29
36
29
19
30
35
36
37
36
30
37
34
33
33
27
30
20
3
14
11
16
16
10
10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=211, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=52, SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=378, SR
UCCS, n=284, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Learning Activities Evidence Source 4, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 6d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue?”
Chart 42. NSSE “Examined strengths and weakness of your own views,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4
Table 40. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.90 2.77 2.45 2.83 2.78 2.57 2.60 2.72 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 58% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating they examined the
strengths and weakness of their own views “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 52%.
The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
28
12
32
29
27
17
22
18
35
36
25
38
33
37
36
34
30
36
32
27
32
34
34
37
7
15
11
6
8
13
8
10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=402, SR
UCCS, n=299, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 65 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Learning Activities Evidence Source 5, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE,
CSWC 4b
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you or do you plan to submit work you wrote or
co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work,
etc.)
Chart 43. CSWC “Plan to submit work you wrote or co-wrote” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office
Table 41. Mean for University and CSWC for the Variable “Done” UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ .08 .05 .05 .09 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 9% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they have submitted
work they wrote or co-wrote. The minimal acceptable percentage is 3%. The blue dotted line running across the
bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
5
9
5
8
9
7
10
9
24
15
22
14
9
14
16
15
38
21
34
15
13
5
7
19
33
55
40
63
69
75
68
57
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC, FR
CSWC, SR
UCCS, n=221, FR
UCCS, n=337, SR
Beth‐El, n=58, SR
COB, n=55, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
LAS, n=225, SR
Done Plan To Do Have Not Decided Do Not Plan To Do
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 67 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
Core Curriculum for General Education: Goal 4
Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society- locally, nationally, and globally.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Sub-Goal 4a. Students will develop an understanding of the value of community involvement and participate in
community service/volunteer work individually, with a group, or as part of a course.
Indirect results related to student’s community involvement are presented in this section. Indirect measures are
taken from the National Survey of Student Engagement.
Community Involvement Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 7b Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you done or do you plan to do community
service or volunteer work prior to graduating from UCCS?”
Chart 44. NSSE “Have done or plan to do community service or volunteer work,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Do Not Plan to Do, Have Not Decided & Plan to Do = 0, Done = 1
Table 42. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s for Variable “Done”
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ .75 .52 .36 .54 .53 .35 .36 .55 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 55% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating “done” for community
service or volunteer work. The minimum acceptable percentage is 49%. The blue dotted line running across
the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
54
36
52
75
53
35
55
36
15
15
10
8
15
40
17
42
10
24
10
2
22
9
16
7
21
24
29
15
11
16
11
15
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=212, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=52, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=399, SR
UCCS, n=299, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Done Plan to Do Have Not Decided Do Not Plan to Do
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 69 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Community Involvement Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1k Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you participated in a community-based project (e.g. service learning) as part of a regular course?”
Chart 45. NSSE “Participated in a community-based project,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a bit = 3, and Very Much = 4
Table 43. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,
SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.52 1.36 1.38 1.42 1.54 1.45 1.56** 1.73*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 19% (+/- 6%) of students participating in a community-based
project as part of a regular course. Minimum acceptable percentage is 13%. The blue dotted line running
across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement
level.
3
3
2
27
5
2
7
4
5
3
8
23
8
8
12
9
22
22
15
25
22
21
29
25
70
72
76
25
65
68
52
62
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=214, SR
EAS, n=32, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=417, SR
UCCS, n=323, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Community Involvement Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11o Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in contributing to the welfare of your
community?”
Chart 46. NSSE “Development in contributing to the welfare of your community,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4
Table 44. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.5 1.77 1.82 2.10 2.08 2.27 2.47*** 2.49*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 48% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at
UCCS contributed to their knowledge and skills in contributing to the welfare of their community “quite a
bit/very much.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 42%. The blue dotted line running across the bars,
from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
12
8
23
12
9
21
18
15
27
15
25
17
30
27
29
44
27
23
31
36
38
32
33
29
46
54
21
34
22
20
19
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=209, SR
EAS, n=53, SR
COB, n=33, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=377, SR
UCCS, n=284, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 71 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
VALUES AND ETHICS
Sub-Goal 4b. Students will develop an awareness and understanding of their personal code of values and
ethics.
Values and Ethics Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11n Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in developing a personal code of values and
ethics?”
Chart 47. NSSE “Developing a personal code of values and ethics,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3, and Very Much = 4
Table 45. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.67 2.25 2.24 2.30 2.35 2.46 2.74*** 2.75*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 59% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at
UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to the development of their personal code of values and ethics. The
minimum acceptable percentage is 53%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
19
21
12
27
19
16
29
26
18
12
33
29
21
35
30
34
38
36
25
27
34
29
26
27
24
30
31
17
25
20
14
12
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=211, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=52, SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=379, SR
UCCS, n=284, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
KNOWLEDGE OF LOCAL AND DOMESTIC ISSUES Sub-Goal 4c. Students will develop an awareness and understanding of local, state, and domestic issues. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Evaluate the degree of personal development or gain
which resulted from your attendance at UCCS in knowledge of social/domestic issues”
Chart 48. Alumni Evaluate Development or Gain in Knowledge of Social/Domestic Issues, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: 1 = No Gain, 2 = Some, 3 = Average, 4 = Above Average, 5 = High Average
Table 46. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 54% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that their attendance at
UCCS informed their knowledge of social/domestic issues to an “above average/higher average.” The
minimum acceptable percentage is 48%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,
indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
23
9
9
17
19
38
9
37
22
35
24
46
39
47
31
9
36
12
6
10
6
2
8
5
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS n = 173
EAS, n = 11
COB, n = 57
Beth‐El, n = 36
UCCS, n = 277
Higher Average Above Average Average Some No Gain
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 3.33 3.39 2.91 3.62 3.43
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 73 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
KNOWLEDGE OF GLOBAL ISSUES Sub-Goal 4d. Students will develop an awareness and understanding of global issues. Knowledge of Global Issues Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate your gain in personal development related
to knowledge of international issues that resulted from your attendance at UCCS.”
Chart 49. Alumni Rate Development in Awareness of International Social and Political Issues, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: 1 = No Gain, 2 = Some, 3 = Average, 4 = Above Average, 5 = High Average
Table 47. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 41% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that they experienced
“above average/higher average” development in their knowledge of international issues resulting from their
attendance at UCCS. The minimum acceptable percentage is 35%. The blue dotted line running across the
bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
17
9
7
3
13
31
40
6
28
27
27
33
42
30
20
55
21
28
23
5
9
22
7
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS n = 173
EAS, n = 11
COB, n = 58
Beth‐El, n = 36
UCCS, n = 278
Higher Average Above Average Average Some No Gain
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 2.39 3.33 2.45 3.34 3.18
WORKING COLLABORATIVELY
Sub-Goal 4e. Students will demonstrate the ability to work effectively with others, including individuals from
different backgrounds.
Indirect measures related to student’s ability to work in collaborative situations are presented in this section.
Measures are taken from the National Survey on Student Engagement, The Consortium for the Study of Writing
in College and the Undergraduate Alumni Survey.
Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1g
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you worked with other students on projects during class?”
Chart 50. NSSE “Worked with other students on projects during class,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4
Table 48. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.47 3.00 2.48 2.36 2.50 2.51 2.49 2.62** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 52% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they worked with
other students on projects during class “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 46%. The
blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal
acceptable achievement level
10
15
38
9
16
10
13
19
30
30
30
38
30
40
34
33
45
42
26
45
42
41
42
38
15
12
6
9
12
9
11
10
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=427, SR
UCCS, n=340, FR
PubMstr's FR
PubMstr's SR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 75 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1h
Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments?”
Chart 51. NSSE “Worked with classmates outside of class,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4
Table 49. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.77 3.17 2.76 2.39 2.61 2.30 2.37 2.71* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 56% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they worked on
projects, “often/very often” outside of the classroom with classmates. The minimal acceptable percentage is
50%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
13
24
45
19
21
12
12
23
28
36
28
45
29
26
29
33
45
30
25
30
38
42
43
34
15
9
2
6
11
20
16
9
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=214, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=430, SR
UCCS, n=342, FR
PubMstr's FR
PubMstr's SR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 3, Instrument: The Consortium for the Study of Writing in
College, CSWC 3g
Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, for how many of your
writing assignments has your instructor asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project?”
Chart 52. CSWC “Write with classmates to complete a group project,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: 1 = No Gain, 2 = Some, 3 = Average, 4 = Above Average, 5 = High Average
Table 50. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR
x̄ 2.48 2.55 2.66 2.69*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 24% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that for “most/all”
writing assignments their instructor asked them to write with classmates. The minimal acceptable percentage is
18%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
6
6
8
3
13
3
2
16
18
12
17
6
57
19
10
32
34
30
28
57
13
32
23
28
23
28
29
24
11
23
36
18
18
22
23
13
7
23
29
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
CSWC FR
CSWC SR
UCCS, n=219, FR
UCCS, n=337, SR
Beth‐El, n=54, SR
COB, n=46, SR
EAS, n=30, SR
LAS, n=197, SR
All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments
Few Assignments No Assignments
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 77 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Combined Alumni - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in
working with others.”
Chart 53. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Working With Others, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: 1 = No Gain, 2 = Some, 3 = Average, 4 = Above Average, 5 = High Average
Table 51. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 77% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating “good/excellent” to
quality of UCCS education in working with others. The minimum acceptable percentage is 71%. The blue
dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal
acceptable achievement level.
35
36
37
39
33
38
55
54
53
44
22
9
4
6
15
5
5
4
3
1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=174
EAS, n=11
COB, n=57
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=278
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 4.25 4.23 4.27 4.03 4.11
DIVERSITY/INCLUSIVENESS Sub-Goal 4f. Students will demonstrate an awareness of and understanding of people/groups that are different from them. Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1e Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussions
or writing assignments?
Chart 54. NSSE “How often have you included diverse perspectives,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4
Table 52. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.98 2.77 1.76 2.97 2.77 2.78 2.84 2.89* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 65% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they “often/very
often” included diverse perspectives in class discussions or writing assignments. Minimum acceptable
percentage is 59%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
30
6
23
26
25
23
25
30
43
15
45
49
39
39
39
35
23
27
19
23
25
31
30
29
5
52
13
2
11
7
6
6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=212, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=47, SR
UCCS, n=428, SR
UCCS, n=340, FR
PubMstr's FR
PubMstr's SR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 79 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11L Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS
contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in understanding people of other racial and
ethnic backgrounds?”
Chart 55. NSSE “Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4
Table 53. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.40 2.12 1.88 2.59 2.42 2.37 2.74*** 2.70*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 58% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at
UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in
understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds. The minimum acceptable percentage is 52%. The
blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal
acceptable achievement level.
20
12
12
13
17
13
26
25
31
12
18
32
27
32
32
35
33
27
41
34
35
35
30
29
14
49
29
17
20
21
13
11
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=209, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=51, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=376, SR
UCCS, n=281 FR
NSSE PubMstr’s SR
NSSE PubMstr’s FR
Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little
Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 6e Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her
perspective?”
Chart 56. NSSE “Imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4
Table 54. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.94 2.79 2.45 2.99 2.88 2.76 2.80 2.88 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 66% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they tried to
understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective “often/very
often.” Minimum acceptable percentage is 60%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to
bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
.
33
18
25
28
29
20
26
24
37
30
38
40
36
43
40
38
25
30
30
30
28
31
29
32
5
21
8
2
6
7
5
6
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=213, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=53, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=402, SR
UCCS, n=302, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 81 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 4, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1u Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own?”
Chart 56. NSSE “Serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: 1 = never, 2 = sometimes, 3 = often, 4 = very often.
Table 55. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.56 2.42 2.67 2.68 2.59 2.56 2.61 2.69 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 55% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they had
conversations “often/very often” with students of a different race or ethnicity. Minimum acceptable percentage
is 49%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and
the minimal acceptable achievement level.
25
27
19
21
23
22
27
25
27
33
30
27
27
29
28
27
38
18
25
40
36
31
33
32
9
21
26
13
14
18
13
16
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=214 SR
EAS, n=33 , SR
COB, n=53 , SR
Beth‐El, n=48 , SR
UCCS, n=411, SR
UCCS, n=313, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 5, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1v Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428
Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have
you had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs,
political opinions, or personal values?”
Chart 57. NSSE “Serious conversations with students of different beliefs, opinions or values,” by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3, Very Often = 4
Table 56. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR
UCCS, FR
Pub Mstr’s FR
Pub Mstr’s, SR
x̄ 2.88 2.56 2.85 2.76 2.73 2.75 2.68 2.73 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 57% (+/- 6%) of students indicating they engaged in serious
conversations “often/very often” with students who are very different from them. The minimum acceptable
percentage is 51%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement
target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.
28
33
25
31
28
29
27
26
28
33
27
29
28
28
30
29
36
18
27
35
34
30
33
33
8
15
21
4
10
12
11
12
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=214, SR
EAS, n=33, SR
COB, n=52, SR
Beth‐El, n=48, SR
UCCS, n=411, SR
UCCS, n=314, FR
PubMstr’s SR
PubMstr’s FR
Very Often Often Sometimes Never
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 83 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 6, Instrument: Combined Alumni - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in
multi-cultural awareness.”
Chart 58. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Multi-cultural Awareness, by Percent
Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4, and Excellent = 5
Table 56. Mean for University and Colleges
Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 70% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their
UCCS education in multi-cultural awareness was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is
64%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the
minimal acceptable achievement level.
36
9
18
39
32
39
18
40
39
38
20
55
30
14
22
6
18
11
6
7
2
3
1
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
LAS, n=174
EAS, n=11
COB, n=57
Beth‐El, n=36
UCCS, n=278
Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor
Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 4.06 3.61 3.18 4.05 3.79
Appendix A: Instruments Used to Assess General Education
ETS Proficiency Profile formerly titled Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress and prior to that,
Academic Profile
The Proficiency Profile focuses on the academic skills developed through general education courses
rather than on the knowledge acquired about the subjects taught in these courses. It does this by testing college-
level reading, college-level writing, critical thinking, and mathematics in the context of humanities, social
sciences, and natural sciences. The short form version of the Academic Profile has a reliability coefficient of
0.82 (Educational Testing Service, 1998). In addition, the Proficiency Profile is identified as having adequate
content and construct validity (Educational Testing Service, 1998).
Scores for the Proficiency Profile come in two forms, norm-referenced10 and criterion-referenced.11
Eight norm-referenced scores are reported, one for each of the areas mentioned above, plus a total score. These
scores are expressed as “scale scores.” The total score is on a scale of 400-500; the sub-scores are on a scale of
100-130. It is important to note that scores across test areas are not comparable. In other words, a score of 125
in critical thinking does not connote the same level of performance as a score of 125 on college-level reading;
the scores are independent. A more thorough description of Proficiency Profile norm-referenced scores is
available in a separate, but related, ETS Proficiency Profile report.
Three criterion-referenced proficiency level scores are reported for the groups tested in the areas of
writing, mathematics, and reading/critical thinking.12 One benefit of using the Proficiency Profile is the access
to national benchmark data that are well suited to use for student performance in general education within
strategic indicators of institutional effectiveness.
The campus’ chosen method for administering the Proficiency Profile has long been to identify
appropriate upper-division classes in each college with a high concentration of seniors. Faculty teaching these
classes are solicited to volunteer their class to have the test administered during class time, often because the
professor needed an alternate assignment for that period anyway. As a result, the resulting sample is clearly not
random, but also does not have the more obvious biases of some convenience sampling methods. The target
sample size for each college was 75.
Proficiency Level Definitions for ETS Academic Profile13
The Proficiency Profile reports three criterion-referenced proficiency level scores in the areas of writing,
mathematics, and reading/critical thinking. These scores are each presented on a table with nine cells. These
cells present percentages of students scoring at each of three levels of proficiency (not proficient, marginally
10 Norm-referenced scores have meaning only when compared with scores of other students or the same students at different points in time. Examples of other norm-referenced tests include: SAT, GRE, and ACT. 11 Criterion-referenced scores have intrinsic meaning in and of themselves. They are based on meeting certain criteria, such as proficiency levels. 12 Reading and critical thinking are treated as a single dimension because of the close relationship between the two. Critical thinking may be considered as a higher level reading process. 13 The Academic Profile User’s Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 1998)
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 85 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
proficient, and proficient) for each of the three levels. Specific definitions of what skills students have at each
level for each skill dimension have been established and are described on the following pages.
WRITING
Level 1 – WRITING A student at Level 1 recognizes agreement among basic elements (nouns, verbs,
pronouns) in the same clause or phrase. This student avoids gross errors in short or simple structures and can
logically select and order main ideas or divisions in a sustained paragraph using appropriate transition words.
Students at this level demonstrate a basic understanding of appropriate writing.
Level 2 – WRITING: In addition to performing successfully at Level 1, a student who is proficient at Level 2
recognizes appropriate agreement among basic elements when they are complicated by intervening words or
phrases, avoids errors in relatively long and complicated constructions, and is able to recast several simple
clauses using a single, more complex combination. Students performing at this intermediate level can recognize
and use the elements of good writing.
Level 3 – WRITING: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 skills successfully, a student at Level 3
can recognize logical statements and comparisons and is able to solve difficult or subtle writing problems, such
as appropriate use of parallelism. These students can make fine distinctions among closely related root words
and grammatical structures characteristic of a mature writing style.
MATHEMATICS
Level 1 – MATHEMATICS: A student at Level 1 demonstrates basic number sense and skills in arithmetic
operations and relationships and in elementary geometry and measurement. A student at this level can read and
interpret information from simple graphs or charts, solve simple equations or evaluate expressions, and solve
simple and routine word problems.
Level 2 – MATHEMATICS: In addition to performing successfully at Level 1, a student who is proficient at
Level 2 understands number systems, including order magnitude, and relationship of integers, fractions, and
decimals. A student at this level can solve moderately difficult equations and inequalities, evaluate complex
formulas, compare and apply information from more complex charts and graphs, and apply reasoning,
geometry, and measurement skills in solving moderately complex problems, including word problems.
Level 3 – MATHEMATICS: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 skills successfully, a student at
Level 3 can generalize and apply mathematical knowledge and skills in nonroutine situations, and demonstrates
real comprehension of exponents, variables, geometry, and measurement. A student at this level can solve
multistep and nonroutine problems involving a range of reasoning skills.
READING/CRITICAL THINKING14
Level 1 – READING: At Level 1, a student recognizes and comprehends discrete pieces of information (e.g., a
single detail, information presented in a single sentence), as well as relationships or connections explicitly
stated in a passage and understands words and phrases in context.
Level 2 – READING: In addition to performing successfully at Level 1, students who are proficient at Level 2
can gather information from different sections of a passage and recombine it. These students recognize
relationships that can be inferred but are not explicit; they can recognize summaries and alternative ways of
stating information, interpret figurative language, and recognize the point or purpose of a passage as a whole oz
significant portions of a passage.
Level 3 - CRITICAL THINKING: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 skills successfully, students
at Level 3 can evaluate and analyze arguments and, within an academic field, handle interpretation, inductive
generalizations, or causal explanations.
Level 3 skills are differentiated within those areas as follows:
o Humanities: Evaluate views and interpretations
o Social Sciences: Evaluate claims, disputes, and inductive generalizations
o Natural Sciences: Evaluate explanatory hypotheses and draw conclusions
Composition Portfolio
The UCCS Writing Program supervises and administers the rising junior writing competency portfolio
as a general education assessment process. Transfer students and native students alike must submit a writing
portfolio within 30 hours of completion of their writing requirements as defined by their undergraduate degree
plans. The portfolio consists of two student-selected essays that demonstrate the student’s ability to
independently manage writing problems beyond those assigned and assess within their two, required, general
education writing courses. The two papers are generally analytical, argumentative or documented research
papers they have written for general education courses at UCCs, or courses required within their undergraduate
majors. Portfolio outcomes include: Needs Work (NW); Competent: and Highly Competent. The essays are
assessed for: focus, organization, development of ideas, integration of sources, language control and
conventions. The portfolio enables The Writing Program to assess whole-text competencies beyond the
sentence-level competencies currently assessed within the ETS Proficiency Profile.
14 Reading and critical thinking are treated as a single dimension because of the close relationship between the two. Critical thinking may be considered as a higher level reading process.
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 87 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
National Survey of Student Engagement
The survey asks students about how and where they spend their time, the nature and quality of their
interactions with faculty members and peers, and what they have gained from their classes and other aspects of
their college experience. The response options are standard likert scale design. The survey is administered
nationally and allows for us to compare our student responses to similar institutions in our Carnegie
Classification. The NSSE uses random sampling, is administered via e-mail and will be administered next in
the spring of 2011.
Consortium for the Study of Writing in College
The Consortium for the Study of Writing in College is a partnership between the Council of Writing
Program Administrators (WPA) and the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). At the national, inter-
institutional level, the consortium investigates how students’ writing experiences are related to their overall
engagement, learning, and attainment. In 2008 and 2009, over 65,000 undergraduates at 157 schools have taken
the survey, providing a large and rich data source that is just beginning to yield answers about the ways that
writing contributes to learning, engagement, and general success of college students nationwide. The
Consortium also aids individual institutions and smaller groups of institutions conduct research that
complements NSSE data with local, institutional data. The CSWC uses the same methodology as the NSSE and
will be administered next in the spring of 2011.
Combined Alumni Survey
The Graduating Seniors survey has been discontinued by the Institutional Research Department. The
Baccalaureate Alumni Survey and Graduate Alumni Survey have been reconstructed into the Combined Alumni
Survey. The Combined Alumni Survey provides alumni with an opportunity to provide feedback about their
experiences at UCCS. In addition to asking basic demographic questions, the survey inquires into current career
status, requests ratings on the quality of education received at UCCS, and asks respondents to identify the level
of personal development in a variety of areas. Several questions in the surveys are designed to assess
citizenship and diversity. These questions were developed with the input of several campus experts in student
development concerning multicultural and global awareness.
Appendix B: Performance, current and prior years by outcome and college
The data in the matrix below indicates the ‘area of concern’ for the most recent administrations of the
instruments used to assess student achievement related to the indicated student learning outcomes in the 2010
column. The data in the 2007 columns ‘area of concern’ and ‘area for immediate attention’ is from the 2007
General Education Assessment Report. The 2007 ‘area of concern’ column lists colleges with scores that fell
below the minimal acceptable achievement target for the most recent administration only. The 2007 ‘area for
immediate attention’ column lists colleges with scores that have fallen below expectations for the most recent
data and one or more consecutive administrative cycles.
Goal 1: Students will be able to read, write, listen and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought.
1a. Reading - Students will demonstrate the ability to read, such that they can evaluate and analyze arguments, can handle interpretation, inductive generalizations or causal explanations.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
2010 2007 2007 Instrument: PP, direct COB Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey/ Undergrad, indirect.
Q. “How would you rate the overall quality of your reading skills education at UCCS?”
EAS COB
1b. Critical & Analytic Thinking - Students will demonstrate critical, analytic and creative thinking skills.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern Area for ImmediateAttention
2010 2007 2007
Instrument: PP, direct
Beth-El COB EAS LAS
Instrument: NSSE, indirect – During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized:
2b. Q. analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as examining a particular case or situation in depth and considering its components?
EAS
2d. Q. making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing the soundness of their conclusions?
COB EAS LAS
COB EAS
Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 2c. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: analyze or evaluate something you read, researched, or observed.
EAS COB
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 89 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Goal 1, continued 1c. Writing - Students will demonstrate the ability to write, including proper mechanics, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern Area for ImmediateAttention
2010 2007 2007
Instrument: PP, direct Beth-El COB
COB
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 3d. Q During the current school year, about how many papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages have you written?
Beth-El COB
COB EAS
Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 1a. Q. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments have you: brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment.
Beth-El COB EAS LAS Not administered
prior to 2008 1d. received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final assignment.
Beth-El EAS LAS
Instrument: Writing Portfolio
1d. Oral Communication - Students will be able to speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE Instrument: Rubric, to be designed. To be administered in senior level courses with oral presentation requirements across colleges.
2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1b. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you made a class presentation?
Beth-El EAS LAS
EAS LAS
11d. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in speaking clearly and effectively.
Beth-El EAS LAS
EAS
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in oral communication skills?
EAS
Goal 2: Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience in other fields.
2a. Depth - Students will experience a good understanding in their major. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. UCCS prepared me well for my field of specialization.
LAS
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11b. Q. To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills?
EAS LAS
7a. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do any of the following; practicum, internship, field experience, clinical assignment or co-op assignment, before you graduate from UCCS?
Instrument: CSWC – indirect 2g. Q. During the current school year, I how many of your writing assignments did you write in the style and form of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology, etc.)
Not administered Prior to 2008
2b. Breadth - Students will demonstrate a breadth of knowledge across disciplines. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern Area for ImmediateAttention
2010 2007 2007
Instrument: PP, direct COB
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11a. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring a broad general education?
Beth-El EAS LAS
2c. Breadth – Students who began as first-time freshman at UCCS will demonstrate a greater breadth of knowledge across disciplines than transfer students.
University Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern Area for ImmediateAttention
2010 2007 2007
Instrument: PP
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 91 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Goal 3: Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge.
3a. Technology - Students will demonstrate technological skills and knowledge in the use of tech devices/methods such as; learning management systems, blogs, chat groups or podcasts
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1L. Q. During the current school year, about how often did you use an electronic medium (listserv, chat group, internet, im, etc.) to discuss or complete an assignment?
Beth-El EAS LAS
11g. Q. To what extent has UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in using computing and information technology?
LAS Beth-El
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in computer skills.
EAS
3b. Information Literacy - Students will demonstrate the ability to locate, evaluate, select and use appropriately necessary information.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in information gathering skills (library, reference).
3c. Presentations - Students will be able to communicate through the use of visual rhetoric.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE
Instrument: CSCW, indirect 2h. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your written assignment
Beth-El EAS LAS Not administered
prior to 2008
2i. Q. create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as PowerPoint, etc.)
Beth-El LAS
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your education in graphic communication (using charts and graphs to present information).
Goal 3, continued 3d. Research - Students will demonstrate research skills and knowledge relevant to their field/discipline.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: CSWC: indirect 2d. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.
Beth-El LAS Not administered
prior to 2008
2f. explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data. Beth-EL LAS
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7d. Have you worked on a research project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements or do you plan to do so before you graduate from UCCS?
COB
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in scientific reasoning skills?
COB
3e. Self Guided Learning - Students will demonstrate the ability to learn on their own and desire to become life-long learners.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11j. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on your own?
COB EAS LAS
EAS
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your UCCS education in motivating you to pursue knowledge?
COB EAS
3f. Quantitative Abilities - Students will demonstrate skills and knowledge in analyzing and completing quantitative problems.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: PP, direct
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11f. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative problems?
LAS
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 93 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Goal 3, continued 3g. Learning Activities - Students will demonstrate the ability to engage in learning activities.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1d. During the current school year, about how often have you worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources.
EAS
2c. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex interpretations and relationships?
COB COB EAS
2e. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations?
11m. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in solving complex real-world problems?
Beth-El COB LAS
COB
6d. During the current school year, about how often have you examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue? EAS
Instrument: CSWC, indirect 4b. Q. Have you or do you plan to submit work you wrote or co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work, etc.)
Not administered prior to 2008
Goal 4: Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society- locally, nationally, and globally.
4a. Community Involvement - Students will develop an understanding of the value of community involvement and participate in community service/volunteer work as part of a course or group exercise or on their own.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7b. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do community service or volunteer work prior to graduating from UCCS?
COB EAS
1k. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you participated in a community-based project (e.g. service learning) as part of a regular course?
COB EAS LAS
11o. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in contributing to the welfare of your community?
COB EAS LAS
COB EAS
Goal 4, continued 4b. Values and Ethics - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of their personal code of values and ethics.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11n. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in developing a personal code of values and ethics?
COB EAS LAS
EAS LAS
4c. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of local, state, and domestic issues.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. pg21. Please rate your gain in knowledge of social/domestic issues while attending UCCS?
Beth-El COB EAS
4d. Knowledge of Global Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of global issues.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. pg21. Please rate your gain in knowledge of international issues while attending UCCS?
Beth-El EAS
4e. Working Collaboratively - Students will demonstrate the ability to work effectively with others, including individuals from different backgrounds.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1g. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with other students on projects during class?
LAS
1h. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments?
LAS
Instrument: CSCW, indirect 3g. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments has your instructor asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project.
Beth-El LAS
Not administered prior to 2008
General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 95 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office
Goal 4 – Outcome 4g, continued
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in working with others.
4f. Diversity/Inclusiveness - Students will demonstrate an awareness of and understanding of people/groups that are different from them.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
Area of Concern
Area for ImmediateAttention
NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007
Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1e. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussions or writing assignments?
EAS
11L. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds?
Beth-El COB EAS LAS
COB EAS
6e. During the current school year, about how often have you tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective?
EAS
1u. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own?
Beth-El
1v. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values?
COB
Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your education at UCCS in multi-cultural awareness (sensitivity to others unlike you).
4g. Sustainability - Students will demonstrate an awareness and understanding of the value of sustainability.
Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range
NO MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE