You are on page 1of 295

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Art Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday, August 06, 2010

Measures and Findings

Art Outcome Set
Outcomes

Resist Grade Inflation
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
100- and 200-level course grades
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for 100- and 200-level course grades
Summary of Findings: Fall 08 foundation studios awarded 14.6 A’s and 46.5% B’s (Total A’s and B’s 61.1%). Spring 09 foundation studios awarded 18.9% A’s and 58% B’s (Total A’s and B’s 76.9%). Percentages are based on 14-day enrollment figures. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : The department will continue to review all foundation coursework to insure both consistency and rigor throughout the foundations curriculum. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: The department will strive to meet a target A’s and B’s, in 100 and 200 level foundation studio courses based on 14-day enrollment. Target: No more than 30% A's No more than 40% B's Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: September Key/Responsible Personnel: Foundation faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Formal Competency
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Senior BFA Thesis Outcomes
Program level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Senior BFA Thesis Outcomes
Summary of Findings: 92% (mean) of rankings were “Satisfactory” (or higher) in formal competency. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: In the capstone BFA Senior Thesis Exhibition requirement, student outcomes for formal competency are assessed by departmental faculty. Target: Minimum mean average of 80% of "Satisfactory" or better in formal competency. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: April

1 of 5

8/6/2010 11:59 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

Key/Responsible Personnel: Departmental Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Sophomore Review BFA
Program level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Sophomore Review BFA
Summary of Findings: 23 students (of 25 total admitted into the BFA program) received a “C or above” evaluation in formal competency, for a total of 92%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Students admitted into the BFA studio programs will have demonstrated an appropriate level of formal competency as assessed in the Soph. Port Review. Target: 80% score B or above in "Formal Competency" in formal assessment by faculty jury. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: April Key/Responsible Personnel: UTC Department Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Sophomore Review BS
Program level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Sophomore Review BS
Summary of Findings: 2 students (of 3 total admitted into the BS program) received a “C or above” evaluation in formal competency, for a total of 66%. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : The total number of students seeking entry into the BS may not provide a large enough pool for this assessment measure to be meaningful. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Students admitted into the BS program in Art Education will have demonstrated an appropriate level of formal competency as assessed in the Soph. Port Review. Target: 80% score B or above in "Formal Competency" in formal assessment by faculty jury. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: April Key/Responsible Personnel: UTC Department Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Oral and Written Competency
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Senior BFA Thesis Outcomes
Program level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Senior BFA Thesis Outcomes
Summary of Findings: 92% (mean) of rankings were “Satisfactory” or higher in written competency. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: In the capstone BFA Senior Thesis Exhibition requirement, student outcomes for written competency are assessed by departmental faculty. Target: Minimum mean average of 80% of "Satisfactory" or better. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: April Key/Responsible Personnel: Departmental Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Sophomore Review BFA
Program level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Sophomore Review BFA
Summary of Findings: 22 students (of 27 total admitted

Details/Description: Students admitted into the BFA studio programs will have demonstrated an appropriate

2 of 5

8/6/2010 11:59 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

level of oral competency as assessed in the Soph. Port Review. Target: 80% score B or above in "Oral Competency" in formal assessment by faculty jury. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: April Key/Responsible Personnel: UTC Department Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

into the BFA programs) received a “C or above” evaluation in oral competency, for a total of 81%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Sophomore Review BS
Program level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Sophomore Review BS
Summary of Findings: 2 students (of 4 total admitted into the BFA programs) received a “C or above” evaluation in oral competency, for a total of 50%. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : The total number of students seeking entry into the BS may not provide a large enough pool for this assessment measure to be meaningful. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Students admitted into the BS program in Art Education will have demonstrated an appropriate level of oral competency as assessed in the Soph. Port Review. Target: 80% score B or above in "Oral Competency" in formal assessment by faculty jury. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: April Key/Responsible Personnel: UTC Department Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Student Preparedness
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Professional Objectives: Actual
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Professional Objectives: Actual
Summary of Findings: Of 17 graduating majors indicating intention to do so, 15 maintain a professional studio and or are employed full-time in an art/design related field, 0 have applied for and been accepted to a graduate program, 1 is teaching full-time in area primary or secondary art programs, accounting for 94% of our graduating majors. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Revise assessment to report student outcomes after three years to better reflect entry into graduate-level programs and residencies. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Measure of percentage of students (with intention) indicate actual application and/or acceptance into one or more graduate programs and/or indicate employment in an arts related profession. Target: Within one year, 80% of students with intention indicate application and/or acceptance into one or more graduate programs and/or indicate employment in an arts related profession. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: Report in September on May graduates Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Faculty Department Head reports Supporting Attachments:

Professional Objectives: Stated
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Professional Objectives: Stated
Summary of Findings: Of 18 graduating majors responding to the departmental exit survey, 17 (94%) indicate an intention to a) enter into an arts related profession and/or b) make application for entry into MFA/MBA programs upon graduation. Target Achievement: Exceeded

Details/Description: The department will look at data provided by its senior exit survey to gauge student objectives to engage professionally in the art/design field and/or to make application for entry into a graduate program upon graduation. Target: 70% of students responding indicate an

3 of 5

8/6/2010 11:59 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

intention to enter into an arts related profession and/or make application for entry into a graduate program upon graduation. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: April Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Faculty Department Head reports Supporting Attachments:

Recommendations : None Notes : Of 22 students completing the survey, 4 remain enrolled in coursework unrelated to their area of concentration. Those responses are not counted here. Substantiating Evidence:

Positive Educational Experience
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Departmental Quality
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Departmental Quality
Summary of Findings: 100% of students responding to the department's exit survey ranked departmental quality as 4 or above. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: The department will look at data provided by its senior exit survey to assess student perceptions regarding the quality of education received in the UTC Art Department. Target: 75% of students responding rank “4” or above on a “1” to “5” ranking Implementation Plan (timeline): Annually: April Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Program Quality BA
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Program Quality BA
Summary of Findings: None Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Develop mechanisms to insure that BA majors complete and return the department's exit survey. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: The department will look at data provided by its senior exit survey to assess student perceptions regarding the quality of education received in the specific degree program in the UTC Art Department. Target: 75% of students responding rank “4” or above on a “1” to “5” ranking Implementation Plan (timeline): Annually: April Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Program Quality BFA
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Program Quality BFA
Summary of Findings: 100% of students responding to the department's exit survey ranked programmatic quality as 4 or above. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: The department will look at data provided by its senior exit survey to assess student perceptions regarding the quality of education received in the specific degree program in the UTC Art Department. Target: 75% of students responding rank “4” or above on a “1” to “5” ranking Implementation Plan (timeline): Annually: April Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Faculty

4 of 5

8/6/2010 11:59 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

Program Quality BS
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Program Quality BS
Summary of Findings: 100% of students responding to the department's exit survey ranked programmatic quality as 4 or above. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: The department will look at data provided by its senior exit survey to assess student perceptions regarding the quality of education received in the specific degree program in the UTC Art Department. Target: 75% of students responding rank “4” or above on a “1” to “5” ranking Implementation Plan (timeline): Annually: April Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Faculty Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

B.S. Praxis and Practicum
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Praxis and Practicum
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Praxis and Practicum
Summary of Findings: 100% of students passed the Praxis II Exam; 100% the practicum. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Student preparedness to meet professional standards for K-12 teaching Target: At least 80% of students will pass the Praxis II Exam on the first attempt and 100% will pass the practicum. Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual: May Key/Responsible Personnel: Professor Anne Lindsey Department Head Reports Supporting Attachments:

5 of 5

8/6/2010 11:59 AM

4 In-Depth Course Work. Measures & Findings Meeting ACS standards Course level. The single negative response dealt with our move to temporary quarters.. but norming data are not yet available for this new exam.. 5. Analysis of the P Chem I exam indicates no pattern of missed questions. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Chemistry Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.3 Foundation Course Work. 2010 Measures and Findings Chemistry Outcome Set Outcomes Fundamentals of chemistry Mapped to: USA. 5. The average scores of chemistry students on ACS standardized exams in upper-level courses will be at or above the 50th percentile. We will place additional emphasis on pchem homework assignments.9.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : 11 out of 12 responses were very positive. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 1a.ACS.5 or higher on a scale of 1 to 5. Target: 4. Indirect .Survey Findings for Meeting ACS standards Summary of Findings: Survey response was 4..2 Introductory or General Chemistry.5 Laboratory Experience. Direct .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..taskstream. A and B students did very well on exam. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 1b. The average response from our majors to survey questions about receiving a sound education in chemistry and the attainment of ACS standards will be 4.Exam Findings for Meeting ACS standards Summary of Findings: Students attained the 91st percentile on the ACS Inorganic exam and the 43rd percentile on the Physical Chemistry I exam. 5.Guidelines for Bachelor's Programs: 5.asp?qy.. Students also took the ACS exam in P Chem II. August 06. Target: at or above the 50th percentile Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester that the course is taught Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty Supporting Attachments: Meeting ACS standards Program level.7 last year. C students did extremely poorly.5 or higher on a scale of 1 to 5 Implementation Plan (timeline): annual Key/Responsible Personnel: 486 instructor Supporting Attachments: 1 of 4 8/6/2010 12:02 PM . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Inorganic results are excellent. up from 4. 5.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.7 Cognate Courses.

.5 or higher on a scale of 1 to 5 Implementation Plan (timeline): annually Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty Supporting Attachments: Cognate measures Program level. Reading 96%. In open-ended surveys. Indirect . The average response from our majors to survey questions about their proficiency in cognate areas will be 4.Guidelines for Bachelor's Programs: 5. up from 4. Survey response on oral communication was 4.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and Science areas on the ACT-CAAP Exam will be at or above the 50th percentile. Math. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 2b.Other Findings for Cognate measures Summary of Findings: 19 out of 21 students in Chemistry 286 indicated more confidence in preparing and giving a scientific presentation.ACS. We will look for topics we can abbreviate or eliminate in order to include advanced material in our three communication courses. The average score of chemistry students on the English.taskstream. students in both classes indicated the classes were very useful and improved their oral communication skills. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : All written responses were very favorable. Cognate areas Mapped to: USA.5 last year.asp?qy.5 or higher on a scale of 1 to 5. Target: at or above the 50th percentile. Math 89%.6.4 last year.Exam Findings for Cognate measures Summary of Findings: The ACT-CAAP national percentile subscores were: Critical Thinking Skills 81%.Survey Findings for Cognate measures Summary of Findings: Survey response on writing proficiency was 4. Details/Description: 2a. The instructors in Chem 286 and Chem 486 will evaluate students' speaking skills using an available objective measure Target: students will recognize their own improvement in public speaking skills Implementation Plan (timeline): each semester Key/Responsible Personnel: 286 & 486 faculty Supporting Attachments: 2 of 4 8/6/2010 12:02 PM .5.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Measures & Findings Cognate measures Institution level. up from 4. Target: 4..7 Cognate Courses. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We will compare 286 and 486 measures to look for unnecessary redundancy in targeted speaking skills or for areas needing more improvement. Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 2c. and Science Reasoning 60%. Indirect . Implementation Plan (timeline): annually Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Cognate measures Institution level.

Measures & Findings Research methods Program level.4 Communication Skills. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Research Program level.4 last year.ACS.Guidelines for Bachelor's Programs: 4.5 or higher on a scale of 1 to 5 Implementation Plan (timeline): annually Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty 3 of 4 8/6/2010 12:02 PM . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We will examine ways to accommodate additional students in faculty-directed research.5 Chemical Safety Resources. Target: 4.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. 7..5 Team Skills.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Details/Description: 3a.... comprehensive.5 or higher on a scale of 1 to 5. 7.9. The average response from our students to survey questions about acquiring these essential skills will be 4. 4. An additional 5 out of 5 peer reviewed faculty/student co-authored abstract submissions to conferences were accepted. 4. Details/Description: 4a. Students participating in undergraduate research for ACS certification requirements must prepare a well-written. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We will examine requirements for these skills in our various lab courses in order to reduce redundancy and possibly introduce advanced requirements. Indirect .3 Computational Capabilities and Software.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): annually Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty Supporting Attachments: Research methods Mapped to: USA..Survey Findings for Research methods Summary of Findings: Student response on acquiring these essential skills was 4. Target: At least 50% acceptance and conference participation by students doing research Implementation Plan (timeline): annually Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty Supporting Attachments: We will examine closely plans to return to our renovated science building so that faculty-student research activities are not negatively impacted. Research Mapped to: USA. and 1 submission is in rewrite.ACS. and journal articles.Other Findings for Research Summary of Findings: 20 out of 20 peer reviewed student abstract submissions to conferences were accepted. Direct . We will assess the quality of student research by monitoring the success rate of peer-reviewed student research submissions: conference presentations.4 Chemical Information Resources.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 3b. Measures & Findings Research Program level. honors theses.. up from 4.5 Laboratory Experience. 4.Guidelines for Bachelor's Programs: 5. Target: Papers will be collected from all of these students. and well-documented research report including safety considerations. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue monitoring student work in research.2 Instrumentation.Student Artifact Findings for Research Summary of Findings: Each student prepared a paper approved by his/her research advisor. Direct . 7 out of 8 article submissions were accepted.

taskstream. 7. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 5b.1 Problem-Solving Skills. Target: 75% will indicate they were well prepared Implementation Plan (timeline): every 5 years Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty Supporting Attachments: 4 of 4 8/6/2010 12:02 PM ... 7.Survey Findings for Careers Summary of Findings: 11 out of 11 2008-09 graduates gave very positive comments on their UTC chemistry experience. Direct . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Investigate ways to obtain feedback from more graduates within the last ten years.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..8 Student Mentoring and Advising. 9 applicants to pharmacy school were accepted.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Measures & Findings Careers Program level. 75% or more of our graduating chemistry students applying to graduate or healthprofession programs will be admitted. 7.2 Chemical Literature Skills. 2 out of 3 applicants to dental school were accepted.5 Team Skills..asp?qy.4 Communication Skills. Indirect .ACS.6 Ethics.Guidelines for Bachelor's Programs: 7.. Feedback will be solicited from our former students in graduate and health-profession programs on how well they were prepared.. 7. 7 out of 9 applicants to medical school were accepted.. Supporting Attachments: Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Career outcome Mapped to: USA. 7. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 5a. Target: 75% acceptance Implementation Plan (timeline): annually Key/Responsible Personnel: faculty Supporting Attachments: Careers Program level. 7.Other Findings for Careers Summary of Findings: 6 out of 6 applicants to graduate school were accepted.3 Laboratory Safety Skills.. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We will review our current advising practices in order to guarantee that all chemistry majors receive effective advising from the very onset of their studies.

. Evaluation. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Criminal Justice: BS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.asp?qy. Tests are purchased from ETS by the Office of Planning. 2010 Measures and Findings 1.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: At least 75% of graduating seniors will score at or above the 75th percentile on the ETS Criminal Justice Exam which will be administered in the Senior Seminar.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.1 Mastery of Core Material Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 3.Other Findings for Exposure to Doctoral Level Faculty in Core Courses Summary of Findings: 64% (Fall 2008) and 56% (Spring 2009) of core courses were taught by tenure track faculty.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008-Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg 1 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . and Institutional Research.taskstream.Exam Findings for ETS Testing Summary of Findings: 75% of students taking the ETS exit exam scored at or above the 75th percentile (79% for All 2008 and 72% for Spring 2009) Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This is a survey administered by the faculty member teaching Senior Seminar. Evaluation. and Institutional Research Eigenberg Thompson All faculty teaching core courses Supporting Attachments: 1. August 06. Master Core Material Outcomes 1. Target: 75% of core courses above the 100 level will be taught by tenured or tenure track faculty. Direct . Notes : We had a tenure track position filled by a one Details/Description: This will be measured by using teaching roster assignments. Indirect . Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2008-Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Fill tenure track position.2 Comprehensive Exposure to Core Material Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exposure to Doctoral Level Faculty in Core Courses Program level.10 General Ed & Major Field Tests Measures & Findings ETS Testing Program level.

91% (Fall 2008) and 81% (Spring 2009) of core courses were taught by full time faculty members. Evaluation. There was a misunderstanding about how the survey was to be administered. and Institutional Research.taskstream.14 on this item. Indirect . Evaluation. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Ensure survey is administered in Senior Seminar (CRMJ 485) next year. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses the entire educational experience. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008-Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Thompson All program faculty Supporting Attachments: 2.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Supporting Attachments: year instructor.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.asp?qy. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2.1 Student Satisfaction with Overall Quality of Program Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Student Satisfaction Overall Quality of Program Program level.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered in Blackboard by the faculty member teaching CRMJ 485 (Senior Seminar).Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Evaluation.. Target: Graduates will have a mean score of 2.0 or lower on the Senior Exit Survey on these items.Survey Findings for Overall Student Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3.Survey Findings for Student Satisfaction Overall Quality of Program Summary of Findings: No findings are available. Student Assessment of Program Quality Outcomes 2. and Institutional Research All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 2 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . Indirect .2 Overall Satisfaction Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Overall Student Satisfaction Program level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Substantiating Evidence: 2.

Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2. Mastery of Practical Skills Outcomes 3.2 Student Satisfaction. 3. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This item is measured by student records kept by the Internship Coordinator. Indirect . and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC led them to acquire job or work related knowledge and skills.3 Experiential Learning Opportunities.Student Artifact Findings for Practical Skills Gained in Internship Program Summary of Findings: 100% of students enrolled in internships resulted in a passing grade. Target: At least 75% of the internships will result in a Passing grade . Spring 2009. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008..asp?qy. Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Garland All program faculty Supporting Attachments: Practical Skills Gained in University and Major Courses Program level. Measurable Outcome 1. Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 3.2 Student Internships Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 1. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Details/Description: This item is measured by student records kept by the Internship Coordinator. Measurable Outcome 1. Measurable Outcome 2. and Institutional Research.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.9 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Practical Skills Gained in Internship Program Course level. Measurable Outcome 2.taskstream.1 Practical Skills required for Career Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 1.3 Experiential Learning Opportunities. Measurable Outcome 2.1 Service Learning.1 Service Learning.1 Distinctive Experience Outside Class. Measurable Outcome 3.. Spring 3 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM .5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Measurable Outcome 2.1 Distinctive Experience Outside Class. Evaluation. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008. Direct .Student Artifact Findings for Demonstrate Mastry Practical Skills Summary of Findings: 100% of majors completing an internship were certified by the internship coordinator as having satisfactory work performance. Target: At least 75% of majors completing an internship will be certified by the internship coordinator as having satisfactory work performance.Survey Findings for Practical Skills Gained in University and Major Courses Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 2.71 on this item.2 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Demonstrate Mastry Practical Skills Course level. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.

Indirect .Survey Findings for Mastry of Writing Skills Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3. Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Garland Supporting Attachments: Substantiating Evidence: 3. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC added to their ability to write clearly and effectively.00 on this item. Evaluation.4 Service Learning Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This item is measured by enrollment data and course syllabi for CRMJ 485 and the internship course(s).asp?qy. 2009.1 Service Learning.Other Findings for Participation in Service Learning Summary of Findings: 100% of students in the program participated in some form of service learning. Measurable Outcome 2. Target: 100% of students in the program will participate in some form of service learning as evidenced by curriculum requirements related to the Senior Seminar course (485) and the internship program.1 Student Assessment of Writing Skills Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2. Evaluation. and Institutional Research Eigenberg All program faculty Supporting Attachments: 4 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . Measurable Outcome 1.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Indirect . Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Thompson Garland Supporting Attachments: 4. and Institutional Research. Mastery of Writing Skills Outcomes 4..2 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Mastry of Writing Skills Program level. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Faculty Report Exposure to Vavrious Assignments (Microsoft Word) Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.3 Experiential Learning Opportunities. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.. Target: The Criminal Justice program will achieve a mean score of 2.1 Distinctive Experience Outside Class Measures & Findings Participation in Service Learning Program level.taskstream.

and contributed to their ability to use 5 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM .taskstream.57 on these items.2 Exposure to Writing Assignments Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exposure to Writing Assignments Direct .Survey Findings for Student Satisfaction Writing Skills Summary of Findings: No findings are available. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Target: 100% of course at the 300/400 level will have a significant writing assignment. Target: 75% of students completing the Senior Survey will agree that they have good writing skills. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All program faculty teaching at the 300/400 level Supporting Attachments: 5. and Institutional Research.Survey Findings for Student Reports about Computer Skills Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 2. worked on an assignment where they used a computer.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail... Mastery of Computer Skills Outcomes 5.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether students used an electronic medium to discuss or complete an assignment.asp?qy. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered in Blackboard by the faculty member teaching CRMJ 485 (Senior Seminar). Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Thompson Supporting Attachments: 4. Indirect . Evaluation. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Ensure survey is administered in Senior Seminar (CRMJ 485) next year.2 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Student Reports about Computer Skills Program level. Target: The Criminal Justice program will achieve a mean score of 2. Indirect .1 Student Assessment of Computer Skills Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2. Evaluation.43.Other Findings for Exposure to Writing Assignments Summary of Findings: 100% of course at the 300/400 level had a significant writing assignment.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Student Satisfaction Writing Skills Program level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of faculty about their course requirements. 2. There was a misunderstanding about how the survey was to be administered. 3.43.

Target: 75% of students completing the Senior Survey will agree that they have good computer skills. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Thompson All program faculty Supporting Attachments: 5. technology.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of faculty about their course requirements. Indirect .taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 6 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . Indirect . Indirect .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.Other Findings for Exposure to Computer Assignments Summary of Findings: 87% of the criminal justice courses taught required at least one computer assignment. computing and informational technology. Evaluation..Other Findings for Exposure to Computer Assignments Summary of Findings: 100% of full time faculty used at least some component of Blackboard in their courses.. Target: 50% of full time faculty will require students to use at least some component of Blackboard in their courses. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All program faculty Supporting Attachments: Exposure to Computer Assignments Program level. There was a misunderstanding about how the survey was to be administered.2 Exposure to Computer Assignments Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exposure to Computer Assignments Program level.asp?qy. and Institutional Research Eigenberg All program Faculty Supporting Attachments: Student Reports about Computer Skills Program level. Target: At least 50% of the criminal justice courses taught will require students to conduct at least assignment involving computer.Survey Findings for Student Reports about Computer Skills Summary of Findings: No findings are available. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of faculty about their course requirements. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered in Blackboard by the faculty member teaching CRMJ 485 (Senior Seminar). Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Ensure survey is administered in Senior Seminar (CRMJ 485) next year.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All full time program faculty Supporting Attachments: 6.3 Expand use of technology in teaching and learning. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from annual EDO reports completed by faculty and the Department Head. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All adjunct faculty Supporting Attachments: 5. Direct .2 Expand Library Electronic Resources Measures & Findings Facuty Development Computer Technology Program level. Target: 100% of full time faculty will attend at least one faculty development workshop (internal or external) relating to technology so that they may better integrate it into their teaching and student assignments. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Continue to monitor EDOs and stress this goal.1 Student Assessment of Oral Communication Skills Mapped to: Measures & Findings Student Reports of Oral Communication Skills Program level. Target: 50% of adjunct faculty will require students to use at least some component of Blackboard in their courses.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All full time program faculty Supporting Attachments: Exposure to Computer Assignments Indirect . Indirect .Other Findings for Exposure to Computer Assignments Summary of Findings: 100% of adjunct faculty used at least some component of Blackboard in their courses.taskstream.Other Findings for Facuty Development Computer Technology Summary of Findings: 86% of faculty (6 of 7) attended at least one faculty development program associted with technology.asp?qy..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Mastery of Oral Communication Skills Outcomes 6.Survey Findings for Student Reports of Oral Communication Skills 7 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of adjunct faculty about their course requirements.. Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Enabling Partnerships: Measurable Outcome 4.

. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Continue to strive for 25%. and whether they made a class presentation.11 General Education Evaluation Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered in Blackboard by the faculty member teaching CRMJ 485 (Senior Seminar). but not for class presentations. Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 3.taskstream.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.Survey Findings for Student Reports of Oral Communication Skills Summary of Findings: No findings are available. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Thompson All program faculty Supporting Attachments: 6.. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of faculty about their course requirements.29 on these items.2 Exposure to Oral Communication Assignments Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exposure to Oral Presentations Program level. Target: At least 25% of the courses taught will require one oral presentation. and Institutional Research. Notes : Figure may not be realistic given our high faculty to student ratios and large classes. Indirect . Thus it appears that students have opportunities for class discussions and questions. Target: The Criminal Justice program will achieve a mean score of 2. There was a misunderstanding about how the survey was to be administered. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Try to identify some courses where presentations could be added.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : The first item exceeded the goal but the second failed to meet it.asp?qy. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions.Other Findings for Exposure to Oral Presentations Summary of Findings: 13% of courses required at least one oral presentation. Substantiating Evidence: Student Reports of Oral Communication Skills Program level. Evaluation. Target: 75% of students completing the Senior Survey will agree that they have good oral communication skills. This finding is a reflection of large class sizes. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Ensure survey is administered in Senior Seminar (CRMJ 485) next year. Indirect . Evaluation. Evaluation.43 and 2. and Institutional Research All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All program faculty Supporting Attachments: 8 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM .

and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC led them to report they can speak clearly and effectively. Indirect . Indirect .2 Integration of International Issues in the Curriculum Mapped to: Measures & Findings Exposure to Global Issues Program level.43 on this item..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and Institutional Research. gender and crime. 6. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Given the small sample size. it was determined that this goal was met. Evaluation.Survey Findings for Speak Effectively Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 2.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Evaluation. Indirect . it is unlikely that a difference of . Target: 100% of all students will take at least one course that expressly deals with diversity issues in criminal justice. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Majors are required to take a course on either minorities and crime. and Institutional Research All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 7. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2. or comparative criminal justice.Other Findings for Exposure to Diversity Issues Summary of Findings: 100% of all students took at least one course that expressly deals with diversity issues in criminal justice.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All program faculty Supporting Attachments: 7.1 Integration of Diversity Issues in the Curriculum Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Diversity: Measurable Outcome 1. Exposure to Diversity Issues in the Curriculum Outcomes 7.07 is signficant. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.3 Speak Effectively and Clearly Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Speak Effectively Program level. Evaluation.asp?qy. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is taken from enrollment data and course catalog requirements.Other Findings for Exposure to Global Issues 9 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM ..5 Increased Tolerance Measures & Findings Exposure to Diversity Issues Program level. therefore.

Target: At least 25% of the courses taught will require at least one significant module on global/international issues in criminal justice. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All program faculty Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: No findings are available. Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Diversity: Measurable Outcome 1.. Target: 100% of all students will take at least one course that expressly deals with ethics in criminal justice.Other Findings for Ethics and the Curriculum Summary of Findings: 37% (n=104) of our majors (n=283) took our ethics class (430) last academic year. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Ensure survey is administered in Senior Seminar (CRMJ 485) next year. and Institutional Research. Evaluation. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 7.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.5 Increased Tolerance Measures & Findings Ethics and the Curriculum Program level. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2.71 on these items. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : The catalog was changed effective 2008.Survey Findings for Diversity Experiences in Person or in Class Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 2.. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether they included diverse perspectives in class discussions or writing assignments and had serious conversations with students of a different race/ethnicity. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Indirect .3 Integration of Ethical Issues in the Curriculum Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Diversity: Measurable Outcome 1. All new entering students will have taken at least one class that expressly deals with ethics in criminal justice as a graduation requirement.taskstream.5 Increased Tolerance Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of faculty about their course requirements. Indirect .asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Knox Supporting Attachments: 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg All Program Faculty Supporting Attachments: 10 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM .86 and 2. There was a misunderstanding about how the survey was to be administered.4 Exposure to Diverse People and Perspectives Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Diversity Experiences in Person or in Class Program level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is taken from enrollment data and course catalog requirements. Evaluation.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

75 or higher on the Office of Planning.0 will meet with an advisor to discuss program progress. There was a misunderstanding about how the survey was to be administered. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 8. and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC increased their understanding of other racial and ethnic backgrounds.asp?qy.Survey Findings for Student Satisfaction with Advising Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.7 Retention & Persistence Measures & Findings Intervention with High Risk Students Program level. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2. Student Retention Outcomes 8. Evaluation. Indirect .4 Strong Commitment to Program. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Ensure survey is administered in Senior Seminar (CRMJ 485) next year. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Program level. and Institutional Research.. Indirect .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Other Findings for Intervention with High Risk Students Summary of Findings: No findings are available.5 Student Engagement Measures & Findings Student Satisfaction with Advising Program level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.Survey Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.00 on this item. Evaluation. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is being kept by our Chief Departmental Advisor. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 and Spring 2010 Key/Responsible Personnel: Thompson Supporting Attachments: 8..1 Monitor High Risk Students Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.taskstream.14 on this item. Evaluation. Target: At least 50% of all majors with a GPA of less than 2. Indirect . 7. Measurable Outcome 2.5 Increased Understanding of Diverse Measures & Findings Groups Exposure to Diverse People Mapped to: No Mapping Findings for Exposure to Diverse People Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3. Target: The Criminal Justice program will achieve a mean score of 2. 11 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . and Institutional Research.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.2 Quality Advising Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Evaluation.asp?qy. Indirect . Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is coming from course offering rosters. Evaluation.7 Retention & Persistence. Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 8.4 Use Distance Learning to Facilitate Access Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 4.3 Scheduling Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.. Spring 2009. Target: Offer at least 6 distance learning courses annually. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses the quality of advising they received at UTC. Measurable Outcome 4. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is coming from course offering rosters.Other Findings for Course Delivery Distance Learning Summary of Findings: 7 distance learning courses were offered last year (fall.4 Retention/Graduation Measures & Findings Course Rotation Plan Program level. spring and summer).taskstream..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 and Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 8. and Institutional Research Eigenberg Thompson Garland Knox Hensely Bumphus Supporting Attachments: Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 8.Other Findings for Course Rotation Plan Summary of Findings: 100% of all required courses were offered at least once a year.5 Quality of Relationship between Students and Faculty Mapped to: Measures & Findings 12 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM .1 Distance/Alternative Delivery Measures & Findings Course Delivery Distance Learning Program level. Indirect . Target: 100% of all required courses will be offered at least once a year.

14 and 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Indirect . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.71 on these items.2 Analyzing and Synthesizing Information Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Analyzing and Synthesizing Program level.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean 13 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 9.taskstream.Survey Findings for Integrating Material from Various Sources Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All Program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 9. Critical Thinking Skills Outcomes 9. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Evaluation. and Institutional Research. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student integrated ideas or information from various sources. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses the quality of advising they received at UTC. Evaluation.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. various courses.1 Integration of Ideas Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Integrating Material from Various Sources Program level. or during class discussions.14 and 2.. No Mapping Student Faculty Relationships Program level. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2.Survey Findings for Analyzing and Synthesizing Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3.asp?qy. Evaluation.Survey Findings for Student Faculty Relationships Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 4.29 on this item.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. and Institutional Research. Indirect .. and Institutional Research. Indirect . Evaluation.86 on these items.

score of 2.asp?qy.3 Making Judgements Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Judgement Program level. Evaluation. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 14 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM . Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2. Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 9.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. and Institutional Research. and Institutional Research. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC added to their ability to think clearly and analytically. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student made judgements about information and data.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.Survey Findings for Judgement Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Indirect . Evaluation.14 on this item. Indirect .4 Reported Ability to Think Critically and Analytical Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Ability to Think Critically Program level..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student analyzed the basic elements of an idea..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 9. Evaluation.Survey Findings for Ability to Think Critically Summary of Findings: Criminal Justice majors had a mean of 3.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. experience or theory and whether they synthesized information intom more complex ideas.71 on this item. Evaluation.taskstream. Target: Criminal Justice majors will achieve a mean score of 2.

asp?qy.taskstream. Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Eigenberg Supporting Attachments: 15 of 15 8/6/2010 12:05 PM .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio..

1 Master and Integrate Core Material Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Theses Program level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Direct . Target: At least 75% of the students will pass the Criminal Justice Master’s comprehensive exam on their first attempt and demonstrate mastery of core material. Target: 75% of all students who attempt a thesis will complete it and will demonstrate mastery of core material. Master Core Material Outcomes 1..Student Artifact Findings for Thesis Completion Summary of Findings: 75% of students who attempted a thesis (through the thesis class or by starting a prospectus) completed it.. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Criminal Justice: MSCJ Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. use of critical thinking skills and application of research skills. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Iles All program faculty Supporting Attachments: Thesis Completion Program level. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Iles Eigenberg All program faculty Supporting Attachments: 1 of 5 8/6/2010 12:06 PM . 2010 Measures and Findings 1.taskstream. Direct . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Data is calculated by the Graduate Program Coordinator using completed theses. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Data is calculated by the Graduate Program Coordinator using comprehensive exam results.asp?qy.Exam Findings for Theses Summary of Findings: 86% of the graduates passed the Criminal Justice Master’s comprehensive exam on their first attempt.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. August 06. use of critical thinking skills and application of research skills.

2. Critical Thinking Skills Outcomes 3.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Graduate Coordinator.2 Admission To Doctoral Programs Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Admission to PhD programs Program level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy. High Quality Educational Experience Outcomes 2.Survey Findings for Student Satisfaction Summary of Findings: 100% of the graduates reported they were satisfied or very satisfied with the overall quality of their experience.1 Quality Experience for Students Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Student Satisfaction Program level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Data is calculated by the Graduate Program Coordinator using a ratio of number of students known to apply for a PhD to those accepted. Target: 75% of gradutes who choose to pursue a PhD will be accepted into a program.. Target: 75% of students completing the graduate exit survey will report they are satisfied with the overall quality of their experience.. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Iles Supporting Attachments: 2.1 Student Assessment of Critical Thinking Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Student Assessment of Critical Thinking Indirect .Survey Findings for Student Assessment of Critical Thinking Details/Description: This survey is administered by the 2 of 5 8/6/2010 12:06 PM . Indirect . Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Iles Supporting Attachments: 3.Student Artifact Findings for Admission to PhD programs Summary of Findings: 100% of gradutes (n=2) who chose to pursue a PhD were accepted into a program.

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of faculty about their course requirements..Other Findings for Writing Assignments Summary of Findings: 100% of all graduate courses had at least one major writing assignment or a multitude of smaller assignments that were the equivalent of one larger assignment.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: 100% of all graduate courses will have at least one significant writing assignment.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Survey Findings for Student Assessment of Writing Skills Summary of Findings: 100% of the graduates completing the exit exam were satisified or very satisfied on this item. Mastery of Writing Skills Outcomes 4.. Target: 75% of the graduates completing the exit exam will indicate they are satisfied with the extent to which the program increased their ability to write.asp?qy.2 Exposure to Writing Assignments Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Writing Assignments Program level. Graduate Coordinator.1 Student Satisfaction with Writing Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Student Assessment of Writing Skills Indirect . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Graduate Coordinator. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program staff Iles Supporting Attachments: 5. Mastery of Communication Skills 3 of 5 8/6/2010 12:06 PM . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 4.taskstream. Target: 75% of the graduates completing the exit exam will indicate they are satisfied with the extent to which the program increased their ability to think critically. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Iles All program faculty Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: 100% of the graduates completing the exit exam were satisified or very satisfied on this item. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program staff Iles Supporting Attachments: 4. Direct .

com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Iles Supporting Attachments: 6. 513. Target: 100% of students will have at least one significant oral presentation in their program. Mastery of Research Skills Outcomes 6.2 Exposure to Oral Presentations Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Oral Presentations Program level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Survey Findings for Student Assessment of Oral Communication Summary of Findings: 100% of the graduates completing the exit exam were satisified or very satisfied on this item. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from course syllabi and survey of faculty about their course requirements.1 Student Assessment of Communication Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Student Assessment of Oral Communication Program level. Outcomes 5. Target: 75% of the graduates completing the exit exam will indicate they are satisfied with the extent to which the program increased their oral communications skills. Indirect . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Students had oral presentations in CRMJ 502. Target: 75% of the graduates completing the exit exam will indicate they are satisfied with their mastery of research skills.Student Artifact Findings for Oral Presentations Summary of Findings: 100% of all graduates had at least one signfiicant oral presentation. 516 596 and for all theses in 2008-09. 503. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Graduate Coordinator... Direct . 4 of 5 8/6/2010 12:06 PM .1 Student Assessment of Research Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Student Assessment of Research Skills Program level. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Iles Supporting Attachments: 5.Survey Findings for Student Assessment of Research Skills Summary of Findings: 100% of the graduates completing the exit exam were satisified or very satisfied with their ability to evaluate research and conduct research.asp?qy.taskstream. Indirect . Target Achievement: Exceeded Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Graduate Coordinator.

Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Iles Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 6.taskstream. She also monitors theses completed to ensure this requirement is met as well. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty Iles Supporting Attachments: 5 of 5 8/6/2010 12:06 PM .2 Application of Research Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Demonstration of Research Skills Program level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Graduate Coordinator monitors comprehensive exams to ensure that there is an application of research methods/skills.asp?qy.. Direct .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Student Artifact Findings for Demonstration of Research Skills Summary of Findings: 100% of students demonstrated their mastery of research skills by successfully completing their thesis or by passing the comprehensive exam.. Target: 100% of students will be required to use/apply research method skills and interpret data either in comprehensive exams or theses.

supplemental work did seem to yield better results. at the introductory level there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more. simply did not engage with the instrument.taskstream. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Foreign Languages: BA Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.1 SPEAKING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1. as measured by time in the software. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. It must be noted that those scoring a 1. Spanish Outcomes I.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. students met our expectations. so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. At the intermediate level.0-2.0-2. and reading skills. At the second year level. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1.0-3.6. increases in gain diminished as scores increased. At the end of the first year they should score between 2.0 and 1. Felicia B. As an absolute measure of progress. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.French Course level.1: Conversations Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test . Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. as measured in time. made greater strides than the group that worked less. Direct .6 on the 10-point scale.. At the end of the second year they should score between 3. August 06. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) This chart compares the scores of pre and post tests to Council of Europe Standards 1 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . from those who worked less.6.French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.6. Sturzer Acting Dept. Overall. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult..asp?qy. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement. due to classroom instruction. culture. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. 2010 Measures and Findings Foreign Languages: BA French. still made the greatest gains. This is produced by the company Auralog.

Acting Dept. 211. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. 311/312 exams are recorded on tapes maintained in the department. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Training for new instructors of 211.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. culture.6 on the 10-point scale. However. 311.0 and 1. 311. At the end of the second year they should score between 3.Exam No Findings Added to Auralog pre and post-test Spanish Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. and 312. Direct .asp?qy. Ph. and 211 will receive grades of 70% or better on end of course oral exams. and 312.taskstream. (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview). 102.0-2. and reading skills. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.Exam Findings for End of Course Oral Exams/SOPI Spanish Summary of Findings: There were no SOPI findings for Spanish 212 and 312.6. This is produced by the company Auralog. Target: By the end of elementary Spanish students will be introduced to this task and can perform at the novie level. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: End of course oral exams or the SOPI. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) Auralog pre and post-test . Implementation Plan (timeline): Students are administered oral exams by their instructors at the end of Spanish 101.0-2.6. end of course oral exams indicate that at least 85% of students are scored 70% or better on end of course exams in Spanish 101. 211. Head Supporting Attachments: End of Course Oral Exams/SOPI . 85% of students will perform at the Novice High or Intermediate Low level. 102. 311.6.. 212.. By the end of intermediate Spanish (212). 212. Felicia B.Spanish Course level. are used to assess speaking proficiency and/or mastery of course speaking objectives. 85% of students in Spanish 101. and 312 courses. Direct . Head Supporting Attachments: 2 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . because of new instructors with a lack of training. as well as insistence on end of course oral exams. 102.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Spanish Course level. Sturzer. At the end of 212. students will receive an SOPI. All tests are recorded in instructor Gradebook. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1.. At the end of the first year they should score between 2. 85% of students perform at the intermediate low level or higher.0-3. Sturzer Acting Dept.D. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. After completing both Spanish 311 and 312 (the courses may be taken in any order).

Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We recommend that the Outcome level for second-year French should be raised to performance at the Intermediate Low level. At the end of the French 312 course (Composition and Conversation). It assesses speaking ability from Novice through Superior. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This test is used by government agencies and by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) to assess speaking proficiency in a target language. Target: By the end of the intermediate conversation course (FREN/SPAN 212) students should attain a Novice High-Intermediate Low rating.asp?qy.. of the oral proficiency measures against which we measure results of the Simulated Oral Proficiency Exam. By the end of the composition-conversation course (FREN 312/SPAN 312) students should attain Intermediate Low .taskstream.French Summary of Findings: At the end of the second year in French. Implementation Plan (timeline): The test is administered at the conclusion of FREN or SPAN 212 and 312 respectively. Sturzer. and 14% at the Advanced level.D. 57% at the Intermediate Mid level. Descriptions of the various levels are attached. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. Spanish 101 Oral interview (Microsoft Word) This is the guidelines for the interview along with a rubric. Acting Dept. Ph. Direct . 14% at the Intermediate Low level. 14% at Intermediate High. The test is recorded and assessed by instructors who have been trained in evaluation by this method.High rating. We recommend that the Outcome level for third-year French be raised to the Intermediate Mid level. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. 14% scored at the Intermediate Low level. Head Supporting Attachments: SOPI Proficiency Ratings from ACTFL (Adobe Acrobat Document) Presentation of the various skills levels. 93% met our goal of Novice High-Intermediate Low at the conclusion of the second-year French course (French 212).Exam Findings for SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) . 7% of students scored at the Novice Mid level. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept.D. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to promote this skill. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. 29% Intermediate Mid and 50% at Intermediate High.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. I Can survey Other level.French Course level. Therefore. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.. Therefore 100% met our standard. 3 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Indirect . from novice to superior. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. Ph. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) This is the survey administered to all students in the first and second year language sequences SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) . Acting Dept.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Students met this goal with at least 75% proficiency.

end of course oral exams indicate that at least 85% of students are scored 70% or better on end of course exams in Spanish 101. 212. Direct . At the end of the first year they should score between 2. 211. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task. This is produced by the company Auralog. At the second year level. 85% of students in Spanish 101. At the intermediate level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more.Exam Findings for End of Course Oral Exams and SOPI Spanish Summary of Findings: There were no SOPI findings for Spanish 212 and 312. Direct . Details/Description: End of course oral exams or the SOPI. supplemental work did seem to yield better results.. 102. Overall.Spanish Course level. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1. as measured in time. Felicia B.0-2. 311. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) End of Course Oral Exams and SOPI .0-2. Target: By the end of elementary Spanish students will be introduced to this task and can perform at the novie level. so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult. All tests are recorded in instructor Gradebook.taskstream. At the end of the second year they should score between 3.asp?qy. It must be noted that those scoring a 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences.6.2 SPEAKING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1. (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview).6.French Course level.French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected. because of new instructors with a lack of training..Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test . However. due to classroom instruction. As an absolute measure of progress. 311/312 exams are recorded on tapes maintained in the department. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Training for Spanish 211.3: Presentation Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test . and 211 will receive grades of 70% or better on end of course oral 4 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .6 on the 10-point scale. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. from those who worked less. students met our expectations. made greater strides than the group that worked less. 311. 212. still made the greatest gains. culture.6. are used to assess speaking proficiency and/or mastery of course speaking objectives.0-3. simply did not engage with the instrument. and 312 courses.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. I. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement. 102. Sturzer Acting Dept.0 and 1. increases in gain diminished as scores increased. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. and reading skills. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. as measured by time in the software.

as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. 85% of students will perform at the Novice High or Intermediate Low level.asp?qy. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses.. By the end of intermediate Spanish (212). 312 instructors. 5 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Ph. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer.D. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. Ph. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to build students to 75% proficiency. 85% of students perform at the intermediate low level or higher. exams. Simulated conversations FREN 211 Course level. 4 times per semester. Sturzer. students were consistently 75% proficient. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students participate in simulated conversations with a specific communicative goal.D. Indirect . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to teach this skill as currently done. students will receive an SOPI..Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Students met this goal with 75% proficiency. and 312.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Acting Dept. Target: Students will achieve 75% proficiency at communication according to task assigned.D. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey Other level. Acting Dept.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the academic year. After completing both Spanish 311 and 312 (the courses may be taken in any order). Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal.taskstream. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. Head Supporting Attachments: Sample communicative assignment FREN 211 Intermediate French for Conversation (Microsoft Word) Sample task and grading rubric for communicative task.Student Artifact Findings for Simulated conversations FREN 211 Summary of Findings: By the end of the second semester. Head Supporting Attachments: oral interview 101 (Microsoft Word) Here are the guidelines for the oral interview along with a rubric. This comprises 20% of their final grade in this course. At the end of 212. 211. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students are administered oral exams by their instructors at the end of Spanish 101. 311. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language courses.. Acting Dept. 102. Ph.

The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. At the end of the French 312 course (Composition and Conversation).0-2. made greater strides than the group that worked less.French Course level. simply did not engage with the instrument. Direct . At the end of the second year they should score between 3. 93% met our goal of Novice High-Intermediate Low at the conclusion of the second-year French course (French 212).0-2. We recommend that the Outcome level for third-year French be raised to the Intermediate Mid level. The test is recorded and assessed by instructors who have been trained in evaluation by this method. Acting Dept.French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement.. Sturzer. Head Supporting Attachments: SOPI Proficiency Ratings from ACTFL (Adobe Acrobat Document) 1.High rating.6.. It must be noted that those scoring a 1. so improvements at the lowest level are Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar.3 SPEAKING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1.6. This is produced by the company Auralog. increases in gain diminished as scores increased. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This test is used by government agencies and by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) to assess speaking proficiency in a target language.asp?qy. Descriptions of the various levels are attached. Implementation Plan (timeline): The test is administered at the conclusion of FREN or SPAN 212 and 312 respectively. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) 6 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Therefore. 29% Intermediate Mid and 50% at Intermediate High. Overall. At the second year level. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. It assesses speaking ability from Novice through Superior. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult.taskstream.6 on the 10-point scale. Target: By the end of the intermediate conversation course (FREN/SPAN 212) students should attain a Novice High-Intermediate Low rating. At the end of the first year they should score between 2. due to classroom instruction. 57% at the Intermediate Mid level. Felicia B. and reading skills. Therefore 100% met our standard. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We recommend that the Outcome level for second-year French should be raised to performance at the Intermediate Low level. culture. Sturzer Acting Dept. 14% scored at the Intermediate Low level. Direct .Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. By the end of the composition-conversation course (FREN 312/SPAN 312) students should attain Intermediate Low . Ph. 7% of students scored at the Novice Mid level. still made the greatest gains. SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) . students met our expectations.French Course level. 14% at Intermediate High.2: Written & Spoken Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test .Exam Findings for SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) . as measured by time in the software.French Summary of Findings: At the end of the second year in French. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. and 14% at the Advanced level. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material.0 and 1.D. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1. 14% at the Intermediate Low level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. As an absolute measure of progress.0-3. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.6.

311. and 211 will receive grades of 70% or better on end of course oral exams. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. students will receive an SOPI. because of new instructors with a lack of training. end of course oral exams indicate that at least 85% of students are scored 70% or better on end of course exams in Spanish 101. 212. By the end of intermediate Spanish (212). All tests are recorded in instructor Gradebook. 7 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Sturzer. 102. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task.. and 312 courses. Acting Dept. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) End of Course Oral Exams or SOPI .D. and 312 instructors on the SOPI.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Indirect . 212. Ph. supplemental work did seem to yield better results.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. However. 311. Head Supporting Attachments: Oral Interview Spanish 101 (Microsoft Word) Here are the guidelines for the oral interview along with a rubric.asp?qy. suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. Target: By the end of elementary Spanish students will be introduced to this task and can perform at the novie level.Exam Findings for End of Course Oral Exams or SOPI Spanish Summary of Findings: There were no SOPI findings for Spanish 212 and 312. 85% of students will perform at the Novice High or Intermediate Low level. 102. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Training for 211. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students are administered oral exams by their instructors at the end of Spanish 101. 85% of students perform at the intermediate low level or higher.taskstream. Direct . At the end of 212. 85% of students in Spanish 101. as measured in time. 311. Target Achievement: Not Met Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. 211.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Students were 45% proficient by the end of the second year. 102. 311/312 exams are recorded on tapes maintained in the department. (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview).. I Can survey Other level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more. 211. After completing both Spanish 311 and 312 (the courses may be taken in any order). and 312. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: End of course oral exams or the SOPI.Spanish Course level. At the intermediate level. are used to assess speaking proficiency and/or mastery of course speaking objectives. from those who worked less..

Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. Descriptions of the various levels are attached. Acting Dept.D. By the end of the composition-conversation course (FREN 312/SPAN 312) students should attain Intermediate Low .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. The test is recorded and assessed by instructors who have been trained in evaluation by this method. Implementation Plan (timeline): The test is administered at the conclusion of FREN or SPAN 212 and 312 respectively.1: Conversations Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test .. Direct . 14% at Intermediate High. Direct . culture.. Recommendations : Continue to build this skill. SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) .taskstream. This is produced by the company Auralog.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test . At the end of the French 312 course (Composition and Conversation). 57% at the Intermediate Mid level. Ph. due to classroom instruction. Acting Dept. It assesses speaking ability from Novice through Superior. and 14% at the Advanced level. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to 8 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . 93% met our goal of Novice High-Intermediate Low at the conclusion of the second-year French course (French 212).French Course level.French Course level.High rating. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We recommend that the Outcome level for second-year French should be raised to performance at the Intermediate Low level. and reading skills. Therefore.D. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This test is used by government agencies and by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) to assess speaking proficiency in a target language. Head Supporting Attachments: SOPI Proficiency Ratings from ACTFL (Adobe Acrobat Document) 1. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. still made the greatest gains.French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected.Exam Findings for SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) . Therefore 100% met our standard. We recommend that the Outcome level for third-year French be raised to the Intermediate Mid level. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. 7% of students scored at the Novice Mid level. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Ph. 29% Intermediate Mid and 50% at Intermediate High. Sturzer.asp?qy. Target: By the end of the intermediate conversation course (FREN/SPAN 212) students should attain a Novice High-Intermediate Low rating. 14% scored at the Intermediate Low level.4 SPEAKING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1.French Summary of Findings: At the end of the second year in French. 14% at the Intermediate Low level. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language courses.

so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures.taskstream. 211. As an absolute measure of progress. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more. 85% of students perform at the intermediate low level or higher.6.0-2. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task.6. 311. supplemental work did seem to yield better results. 102. as measured by time in the software. and 211 will receive grades of 70% or better on end of course oral exams. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: End of course oral exams or the SOPI.. score between 1. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult. At the end of the first year they should score between 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Training for 211. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. 312 instructors on SOPI. increases in gain diminished as scores increased. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. 85% of students will perform at the Novice High or Intermediate Low level. Sturzer Acting Dept. Felicia B.6.Exam Findings for End of Course Oral Exams or SOPI Spanish Summary of Findings: There were no SOPI findings for Spanish 212 and 312. At the end of 212. from those who worked less. However. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) End of Course Oral Exams or SOPI . The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. At the end of the second year they should score between 3. as measured in time. (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview). made greater strides than the group that worked less.Spanish Course level. 212. Target: By the end of elementary Spanish students will be introduced to this task and can perform at the novie level. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement. At the second year level. are used to assess speaking proficiency and/or mastery of course speaking objectives. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. All tests are recorded in instructor Gradebook. After completing both Spanish 311 and 312 (the courses may be taken in any order). Implementation Plan (timeline): Students are administered oral exams by their instructors at the end of Spanish 101. 311/312 exams are recorded on tapes maintained in the department. 211. 212. 85% of students in Spanish 101.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. At the intermediate level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. simply did not engage with the instrument. students met our expectations.. It must be noted that those scoring a 1. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. 102. Overall. because of new instructors with a lack of training. and 312 courses.0 and 1.0-2. 102.0-3. end of course oral exams indicate that at least 85% of students are scored 70% or better on end of course exams in Spanish 101. 311. By the end of intermediate Spanish (212). and 9 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Direct .asp?qy. 311.6 on the 10-point scale.

Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Depending upon which detail one examines students were 55-70% confident in this skill. and 14% at the Advanced level. Sturzer.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Ph. Therefore. Indirect .Exam Findings for SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) . SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) . I Can survey Other level. 93% met our goal of Novice High-Intermediate Low at the conclusion of the second-year French course (French 212). 14% at Intermediate High.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 14% scored at the Intermediate Low level. Head Supporting Attachments: 10 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Acting Dept.asp?qy. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. Acting Dept. Head Supporting Attachments: oral interview Spanish 101 (Microsoft Word) Here are the guidelines for the oral interview along with a rubric.. It assesses speaking ability from Novice through Superior. Sturzer. Implementation Plan (timeline): The test is administered at the conclusion of FREN or SPAN 212 and 312 respectively. Target: By the end of the intermediate conversation course (FREN/SPAN 212) students should attain a Novice High-Intermediate Low rating. 29% Intermediate Mid and 50% at Intermediate High. students will receive an SOPI.French Summary of Findings: At the end of the second year in French. Direct .D. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. At the end of the French 312 course (Composition and Conversation). Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Notes : Details/Description: This test is used by government agencies and by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) to assess speaking proficiency in a target language. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language courses.D.High rating.taskstream. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Continue to develop this skill. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level.D. 7% of students scored at the Novice Mid level. 57% at the Intermediate Mid level. Acting Dept.. By the end of the composition-conversation course (FREN 312/SPAN 312) students should attain Intermediate Low . 14% at the Intermediate Low level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We recommend that the Outcome level for second-year French should be raised to performance at the Intermediate Low level. Ph. Therefore 100% met our standard. We recommend that the Outcome level for third-year French be raised to the Intermediate Mid level. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Ph. Descriptions of the various levels are attached.. 312. The test is recorded and assessed by instructors who have been trained in evaluation by this method.French Course level.

0 and 1. so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. Direct .French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the year. Ph.French Course level. and reading skills. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. we Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. as measured in time.Student Artifact Findings for Task oriented dialogue-French Summary of Findings: By the end of the second semester.6. Target: Students will demonstrate 75% proficiency in the communicative task. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) 11 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . SOPI Proficiency Ratings from ACTFL (Adobe Acrobat Document) Substantiating Evidence: Task oriented dialogue-French Course level. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2.6. as measured by time in the software.taskstream. Direct . students met our expectations. At the end of the first year they should score between 2.0-2.D. students were 75% proficient. culture.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. It must be noted that those scoring a 1. Overall. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult.asp?qy. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to build this skill. At the second year level. This is produced by the company Auralog. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.6. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. from those who worked less. At the end of the second year they should score between 3. Acting Dept Head Supporting Attachments: Sample grading rubric for communicative task FREN 211-212 (Microsoft Word) Here students must persuade a fellow student to accompany them to France in the summer. due to classroom instruction. 4 times per semester. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1. Felicia B.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test .6 on the 10-point scale. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer.5 SPEAKING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement... I.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.0-3. Sturzer Acting Dept. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more. simply did not engage with the instrument. made greater strides than the group that worked less. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students are given a specific communicative task for a dialogue with a fellow student and the rubric by which the quality of communication will be judged. As an absolute measure of progress. increases in gain diminished as scores increased.0-2.3: Presentation Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test . still made the greatest gains.

and 211 will receive grades of 70% or better on end of course oral exams. and 312.D. At the end of 212. 311. students will receive an SOPI. After completing both Spanish 311 and 312 (the courses may be taken in any order). Target: By the end of elementary Spanish students will be introduced to this task and can perform at the novie level. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) End of Course Oral Exams or SOPI . and 312 courses.Spanish Course level. 311. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students are administered oral exams by their instructors at the end of Spanish 101. However.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Students felt they were about 55% proficient at this by the end of the second year. Head Supporting Attachments: Oral interview Spanish 101 (Microsoft Word) Here are the guidelines for the oral interview along with a rubric. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. 102. 211.. Acting Dept. 85% of students will perform at the Novice High or Intermediate Low level. Indirect . Sturzer. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. because of new instructors with a lack of training.asp?qy. 85% of students in Spanish 101. I Can survey Other level. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 102. 85% of students perform at the intermediate low level or higher. All tests are recorded in instructor Gradebook. 212. Ph. 312 instructors. 212. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Training for Spanish 211. 12 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . are used to assess speaking proficiency and/or mastery of course speaking objectives.. 211. (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview). Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: End of course oral exams or the SOPI. At the intermediate level. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. Direct .taskstream. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Continue to build this skill. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. end of course oral exams indicate that at least 85% of students are scored 70% or better on end of course exams in Spanish 101. By the end of intermediate Spanish (212).Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.. 311. supplemental work did seem to yield better results. 102. 311/312 exams are recorded on tapes maintained in the department.Exam Findings for End of Course Oral Exams or SOPI Spanish Summary of Findings: There were no SOPI findings for Spanish 212 and 312. conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task.

1: Conversations Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test . Overall. Ph. 14% scored at the Intermediate Low level. We recommend that the Outcome level for third-year French be raised to the Intermediate Mid level. as measured by time in the software. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer.French Course level. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. By the end of the composition-conversation course (FREN 312/SPAN 312) students should attain Intermediate Low .D. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1. Therefore.asp?qy. Therefore 100% met our standard. At the end of the second year they should score between 3. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We recommend that the Outcome level for second-year French should be raised to performance at the Intermediate Low level.French Course level. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult.French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected.6.6. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered 13 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This test is used by government agencies and by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) to assess speaking proficiency in a target language.0-2. SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. and 14% at the Advanced level.0-2. Sturzer. The test is recorded and assessed by instructors who have been trained in evaluation by this method. 14% at Intermediate High.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.D. 7% of students scored at the Novice Mid level. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. Direct . Target: By the end of the intermediate conversation course (FREN/SPAN 212) students should attain a Novice High-Intermediate Low rating. Acting Dept. due to classroom instruction. Implementation Plan (timeline): The test is administered at the conclusion of FREN or SPAN 212 and 312 respectively. culture. still made the greatest gains.French Summary of Findings: At the end of the second year in French. and reading skills.6 on the 10-point scale. Direct .6. I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009.. Head Supporting Attachments: SOPI Proficiency Ratings from ACTFL (Adobe Acrobat Document) II. At the end of the first year they should score between 2. Ph. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence.Exam Findings for SOPI Test (Simulated Oral Proficiency Interview) .0-3. reflecting the increasing difficulty of Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. 57% at the Intermediate Mid level.0 and 1. 14% at the Intermediate Low level. It assesses speaking ability from Novice through Superior..1 LISTENING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1. 29% Intermediate Mid and 50% at Intermediate High. Descriptions of the various levels are attached. 93% met our goal of Novice High-Intermediate Low at the conclusion of the second-year French course (French 212). increases in gain diminished as scores increased. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Acting Dept. This is produced by the company Auralog.taskstream. made greater strides than the group that worked less.High rating. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. At the end of the French 312 course (Composition and Conversation).

. Acting Dept. 211. from those who worked less. 102. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) Exam . Head Supporting Attachments: Final Exam Fall 2008. a random sample of 3 sections of Spanish 101 and 102 exams in 2008-09 indicated that 67% of Spanish 101 and 102 met the standard of 70% correct. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) the material. In Spanish 312 in 2008 and 2009. Implementation Plan (timeline): Each exam.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. very near to department goals of 85%. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement. at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. students felt that they were Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and 14 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.doc (Microsoft Word) I Can survey Other level. Direct . 100% students scored intermediate or better. In Spanish 212 listening comprehension scores as measured by Auralog in 2008 and 2009 indicate that 85% and 83% respectively achieved the level of intermediate or above.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. At the second year level. 80% of students on the 101 exams met the standard of 70% correct. including the final exam has a listening comprehension component. Felicia B. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Each exam of Spanish 101. Poor scores on the 102 exam were probably the result of combining listening comprehension with writing skills. At the intermediate level. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Test listening comprehension on first and second year courses separately without combining with writing. Ph. Sturzer Acting Dept. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task.doc (Microsoft Word) Spanish 102 Final Exam 2009a. As an absolute measure of progress. However. as measured in time. supplemental work did seem to yield better results. Target: 85% of students will complete 70% of the sections correctly. It must be noted that those scoring a 1.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Whether listening to news or conversing with a native. including the final exam. of Spanish 101..D.asp?qy. Sturzer. students met our expectations.Listening Component Spanish Summary of Findings: In listening assessment. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more. with 80% and 67% respectively scoring intermediate high or advanced.Listening Component Spanish Course level. 102.taskstream. simply did not engage with the instrument. and 212. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr..Exam Findings for Exam . Indirect . 211. so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. and 212 has a listening comprehension component.

325. Indirect .. Implementation Plan (timeline): All Spanish 101.Other Findings for Immersion Instruction in Spanish Summary of Findings: There is no exam for this. with the occasional use of English for more complex grammar points. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. Students in 101 and 102 use the Quia program for Puntos en Breve. 15 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students complete on-line workbook which accompanies textbooks. however this practice is in place. Ph. 321. 322. 400-level courses. Ph. Implementation Plan (timeline): In Spanish 211/212 most instruction is in Spanish. Head Supporting Attachments: Spanish Film Series Institution level. 102.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. while those in 211 and 212 used a hardcover workbook/lab manual with Entre Nosotros. 25% proficient at this goal. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level.Student Artifact Findings for Listening Comprehension Exercises Summary of Findings: This area is not tracked separately..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Acting Dept. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Sturzer. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. all instruction is in Spanish.D. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Continue to build this skill.taskstream. Target: Spanish 211/212. 323. Head Supporting Attachments: Listening Comprehension Exercises Course level. and 212 students complete listening comprehension exercises as part of their on-line workbook and lab manual. which students and the community can attend.D. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. Dept. Immersion Instruction in Spanish Course level. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. 312. Ph. 311. 300/400-level Spanish courses are taught entirely in Spanish. second year courses. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence. Direct . Indirect . Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Target: 85% of Students will successfully complete 70% of listening activities. Target Achievement: Met Details/Description: The Department sponsors a Spanish film series. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Spanish 211 and 212 are taught primarily in Spanish.. Acting Dept.asp?qy.D.Other Findings for Spanish Film Series Summary of Findings: This area is not tracked. In 300-400 classes. 211.

. Notes : We are unable to judge at this time whether the target was achieved. Dept..0 and 1. It must be noted that those scoring a 1. still made the greatest gains. made greater strides than the group that worked less.6.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.0-2.asp?qy..6. culture. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) 16 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Direct . Felicia B. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Felicia B.2: Written & Spoken Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test . Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2.French Course level. as measured by time in the software.0-3. Overall. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: II. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Target: A minimum 75% comprehension rate. due to classroom instruction. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement.French Course level. other UTC students. As an absolute measure of progress. Spanish students. so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar.0-2.6.Other Findings for Video Comprehension Measure French Summary of Findings: We have no findings to report at this time because video comprehension was not tracked as a separate assessment tool for purposes of this measure for either the 200 or 300 level courses. students met our expectations.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. Typically 3-4 films are shown each semester. At the end of the second year they should score between 3. and reading skills. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. Implementation Plan (timeline): During the Fall and Spring Semester the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures hosts the Film Series which is open to the public. simply did not engage with the instrument. Target: The community.2 LISTENING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1. Head Supporting Attachments: Spanish Film series Fall 2008 (Microsoft Word) Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Video Comprehension Measure . increases in gain diminished as scores increased.taskstream. At the second year level. Implementation Plan (timeline): This will be implemented across our curriculum in 200.D. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. This is produced by the company Auralog. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1. Ph. Target Achievement: Recommendations : We will attempt to track video comprehension scores separately for purposes of assessment. Sturzer.French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected. At the end of the first year they should score between 2.6 on the 10-point scale. Direct . Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students screen videos in the target language and answer comprehension questions in various formats. Sturzer Acting Dept. 300 and 400-level courses.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test .

Indirect .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. In Spanish 312 in 2008 and 2009. However. including the final exam. of Spanish 101.. 102.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. a random sample of 3 sections of Spanish 101 and 102 exams in 2008-09 indicated that 67% of Spanish 101 and 102 met the standard of 70% correct. very near to department goals of 85%.Listening Component Spanish Course level.taskstream. 211.doc (Microsoft Word) Spanish 102 Final Exam 2009a. Sturzer.. At the intermediate level. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Each exam of Spanish 101. 100% students scored intermediate or better. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level.D. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Continue to build these skills. Target: 80% of students will complete 70% of the sections correctly. 80% of students on the 101 exams met the standard of 70% correct. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Acting Dept. and 212..D. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) Exam . Implementation Plan (timeline): Each exam. Ph. Ph.Listening Component Spanish Summary of Findings: In listening assessment. 102. supplemental work did seem to yield better results. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task. and 212 has a listening comprehension component. from those who worked less.doc (Microsoft Word) I Can survey Other level. Head 17 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . in the measures. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Test listening comprehension separately on first and second year exams. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. 211. Acting Dept.asp?qy.Exam Findings for Exam . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: 70% felt that they could answer a direct question but only 20% felt that they could function in class without English. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. Direct . as measured in time. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. In Spanish 212 listening comprehension scores as measured by Auralog in 2008 and 2009 indicate that 85% and 83% respectively achieved the level of intermediate or above. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. including the final exam has a listening comprehension component. Poor scores on the 102 exam were probably the result of combining listening comprehension with writing skills. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. with 80% and 67% respectively scoring intermediate high or advanced. Head Supporting Attachments: Final Exam Fall 2008.

Direct . reading comprehension. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will be asked to perform a variety of tasks.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. 211.asp?qy. aural comprehension tasks French Course level. listening comprehension exercises. Target Achievement: Recommendations : We will attempt to track these tasks on a more consistent basis. this task was repeatedly practiced and assessed in the form of homework and classroom exercises as well as incorporated into testing. II. and demonstrate ability to follow directions.Other Findings for Oral questions. Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments: Oral questions. cultural comparisons. including questions to which they respond orally or in writing. and 212 students complete listening comprehension exercises as part of their on-line or hard copy workbook and lab manual. Listening Comprehension Exercises Course level. while those in 211 and 212 used a hardcover workbook/lab manual with Entre Nosotros. no separate tracking occurred. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Sample exam-French 311-Composition & Conversation (Microsoft Word) This covers the first two chapters of the book. Notes : We are unable to assess these tasks at this time. 300 and 400 level courses. aural comprehension tasks . 102. either noting facts or following directions on a map. Implementation Plan (timeline): This will be implemented across our curriculum in 200. Felicia B. and writing short essays. Implementation Plan (timeline): All Spanish 101. Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..Student Artifact Findings for Listening Comprehension Exercises Summary of Findings: This area is not tracked separately (it is part of the workbook grade). However.taskstream.. Target: 85% of students will successfully complete 70% of listening activities. sample test FREN 101 (Microsoft Word) First page of test is exercises where students must listen and follow directions. Direct . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students complete on-line workbook which accompanies textbooks. Target: A minimum of 75% of students are able to complete tasks successfully. which assesses oral/aural comprehension.French Summary of Findings: In both the 200 and 300 level courses.3 LISTENING Mapped to: Measures & Findings 18 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Les Francais. Students in 101 and 102 use the Quia program for Puntos en Breve.

so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1. students met our expectations. culture. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: 19 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .French Course level. as measured by time in the software.6. as measured in time. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task. grammar or phrases..0-3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. Implementation Plan (timeline): This will be implemented across our curriculum in our 200. Overall. based on small sample of separate dictations.Other Findings for Dictations and cloze exercises French Summary of Findings: At the 300 level. At the intermediate level. Sturzer Acting Dept. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. At the end of the second year they should score between 3.0-2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Details/Description: Students are given dictations and listening comprehension exercises that require completion of vocabulary. At the end of the first year they should score between 2. and reading skills. 71% percent performed at or above the expected level. still made the greatest gains. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. At the 200 level. However. increases in gain diminished as scores increased. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult. due to classroom instruction. Direct . Target: A minimum of 75% of students will successfully complete. This is produced by the company Auralog. every exam includes an oral comprehension and/or dictation which were not scored separately for purposes of this assessment. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. made greater strides than the group that worked less.French Course level.0 and 1. In addition. Felicia B.2: Written & Spoken Auralog pre and post-test .6. no separate dictations were given. 300 and 400 level courses. from those who worked less.6. Felicia B. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) Dictations and cloze exercises .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. As an absolute measure of progress. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences.asp?qy.taskstream. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr..6 on the 10-point scale. National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1. At the second year level.French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. supplemental work did seem to yield better results. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more.0-2. It must be noted that those scoring a 1.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test . Direct . every exam included an oral comprehension and/or dictation which were not scored separately for purposes of this assessment. simply did not engage with the instrument. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement.

with 80% and 67% respectively scoring intermediate high or advanced. as all first exercises on exams in FREN 211 and 212. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. sample exam FREN 401 Francophone Lit (Microsoft Word) sample exam FREN211 (Microsoft Word) First exercise. a random sample of 3 sections of Spanish 101 and 102 exams in 2008-09 indicated that 67% of Spanish 101 and 102 met the standard of 70% correct. and 212. Listening Comprehension Exercises . Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence.. 100% students scored intermediate or better.. is a dictation exercise.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Only 16% of students felt they could follow a foreign language film without subtitles. Ph. Direct .asp?qy. In Spanish 212 listening comprehension scores as measured by Auralog in 2008 and 2009 indicate that 85% and 83% respectively achieved the level of intermediate or above. Head Supporting Attachments: Exam Final Fall 08 Spanish 101 (Microsoft Word) Final exam Spring 102 Spanish 102 (Microsoft Word) I Can survey Other level.D.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. Direct . Sturzer. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. 102.taskstream. 102. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Continue to build this skill. 211. Acting Dept. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Target: 80% of students will complete 70% of the sections correctly. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Each exam of Spanish 101.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Listening Component Spanish Course level. Poor scores on the 102 exam were probably the result of combining listening comprehension with writing skills. very near to department goals of 85%.Student Artifact Findings for Listening Comprehension Exercises Spanish Details/Description: Students complete on-line 20 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . has a listening comprehension component. Ph. including the final exam. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : We will begin to track oral components separately for the purpose of outcomes assessment in both the 200 and 300 level courses. In Spanish 312 in 2008 and 2009.Exam Findings for Exam .Spanish Course level. Implementation Plan (timeline): Each exam. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Exam . Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level.Listening Component Spanish Summary of Findings: In listening assessment. Indirect . 80% of students on the 101 exams met the standard of 70% correct.D. Acting Dept. and 212 has a listening comprehension component. These tests follow up on practice cloze exercises performed during the 3rd and 4th lesson of every chapter where students complete cloze of recorded dialogues. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Do not combine listening comprehension with writing. However. including the final exam.. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. of Spanish 101. 211. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.

4 LISTENING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 2. and 212 has a listening comprehension component. Poor scores on the 102 exam were probably the result of combining listening comprehension with writing skills. Implementation Plan (timeline): Each exam. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Paris Video Questions-French 311-Composition and Conversation (Microsoft Word) II. In Spanish 312 in 2008 and 2009.Listening Component Spanish Summary of Findings: In listening assessment. 102..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target: A minimum 75% comprehension rate. Target: 80% of students will complete 70% of the sections correctly. Acting Dept.French Course level. including the final exam. while those in 211 and 212 used a hardcover workbook/lab manual with Entre Nosotros. workbook which accompanies textbooks. Head Supporting Attachments: Final Exam Fall 2008 Spanish 101 (Microsoft Word) Final exam Spring 2009 Spanish 102 (Microsoft Word) 21 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .asp?qy. 211.. Implementation Plan (timeline): All Spanish 101.Other No Findings Added to Video Comprehension Measure . Ph. Notes : Details/Description: Each exam of Spanish 101. 102. However. a random sample of 3 sections of Spanish 101 and 102 exams in 2008-09 indicated that 67% of Spanish 101 and 102 met the standard of 70% correct. Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: This area is not tracked separately from the workbook/lab manual grade. 211. 102. Direct .. and 212. Target: 85% of students will successfully complete 70% of listening activities. and 212 students complete listening comprehension exercises as part of their workbook and lab manual. of Spanish 101. including the final exam has a listening comprehension component.D. Implementation Plan (timeline): This will be implemented across our curriculum in 200. 211. very near to department goals of 85%. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.2: Products & Perspectives Measures & Findings Exam . 300 and 400-level courses. Students in 101 and 102 use the Quia program for Puntos en Breve. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Do not combinen listening comprehension and writing components. 80% of students on the 101 exams met the standard of 70% correct. with 80% and 67% respectively scoring intermediate high or advanced.Exam Findings for Exam . 100% students scored intermediate or better.French Details/Description: Students screen videos in the target language and answer comprehension questions in various formats.Listening Component Spanish Course level. Sturzer.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Felicia B. In Spanish 212 listening comprehension scores as measured by Auralog in 2008 and 2009 indicate that 85% and 83% respectively achieved the level of intermediate or above. Direct .. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Video Comprehension Measure .taskstream.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Students who have completed Spanish 311..D. more than 85% of students received 80% or better or midterm and final exams. 211. Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey Other level. Direct .Spanish Course level. Ph. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Strong start for this level as it is not mastered until a higher level. Ph.asp?qy. literature.D. or 4 300-400 level courses for the minor. however. Target: 85% of select Spanish majors and minors will receive 80% or better on Final Exam. Indirect .. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments: Spanish 499 Spanish Film Class Course level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Records maintained in gradebook.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students complete on-line workbook which accompanies textbooks. while those in 211 and 212 used a hard copy workbook/lab manual with Entre Nosotros.taskstream. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. 102.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Sturzer. and culture relating to the Spanish Civil War. Direct .Student Artifact Findings for Listening Comprehension Exercises Spanish Summary of Findings: This area was not tracked separately. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level.. and 212 students complete listening comprehension exercises as part of their workbook and lab manual. and 322 may take this course to meet graduation requirements of two 400-level courses for the major. Implementation Plan (timeline): All Spanish 101. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Spanish 499 Film Class taught Spanish film. Listening Comprehension Exercises . Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence. 321. Acting Dept.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Only 16% felt they could follow a foreign language film without subtitles. Acting Department Head Supporting Attachments: 22 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . 312. Target: 85% of students will successfully complete 70% of listening activities.Exam Findings for Spanish 499 Spanish Film Class Summary of Findings: This measure did not track listening comprehension separately. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. Students in 101 and 102 use the Quia program for Puntos en Breve.

Sturzer Supporting Attachments: III. students met our Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. Target: A minimum 75% comprehension rate. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.French Course level.1 READING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1.asp?qy. At the end of the second year they should score between 3. as measured by time in the software.French Course level. As an absolute measure of progress. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.0 and 1. Felicia B. Target Achievement: Recommendations : For the 300 level courses.0-2. 23 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . culture.French Course level.. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : For the 300 level courses. increases in gain diminished as scores increased.French Summary of Findings: This task is not introduced until the 300 level courses. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1. Notes : We were unable to track this skill. we will attempt to more systematically track track this skill in the future.Other Findings for Televised reports .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Direct . The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. Overall.. Examen Final 499 Summer 2009. However.2: Written & Spoken Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test . Felicia B.6. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. we will attempt to more systematically track track this skill in the future. Notes : We were unable to track this skill.6. Target: A minimum of 75% of students are able to perform at this level.Other Findings for Video Comprehension Measure French Summary of Findings: This task is not introduced until the 300 level courses. Implementation Plan (timeline): This will be implemented across our curriculum in 200.6 on the 10-point scale. Direct . 300 and 400-level courses. This is produced by the company Auralog. It was incorporated into the course work and testing. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students watch televised reports in the target language and perform an assessment task based on the content.0-2. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Video Comprehension Measure . It was incorporated into the course work and testing. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. still made the greatest gains. no separate tracking system was used to assess this skill. However.doc (Microsoft Word) Televised reports . Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students screen videos in the target language and answer comprehension questions in various formats. Direct .French Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected. no separate tracking system was used to assess this skill. Implementation Plan (timeline): This measure will be implemented only in the 300 and 400 level courses. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult.taskstream.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test . due to classroom instruction. made greater strides than the group that worked less.0-3.doc (Microsoft Word) Spanish 499 SU2099 Midterm Exam.6. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. At the end of the first year they should score between 2. and reading skills.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. and 212 are administered a reading comprehension section in each exam. At the second year level. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students in Spanish 101. Indirect . Head Supporting Attachments: Final exam Spanish 101 (Microsoft Word) Final exam Spring 2009 Spanish 102 (Microsoft Word) I Can survey Other level. Felicia B.Reading Comprehension Component . as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: 76% felt they could understand a magazine or newspaper story. in general.taskstream. At the intermediate level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more. from those who worked less. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses.Reading Comprehension Component Spanish Course level. although separate reading scores were not maintained. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task.. and 212. indicative of a need for some improvement. so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) Exam . 102. Felicia B. achieving departmental goals for each level. However. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. including the final exam. simply did not engage with the instrument. supplemental work did seem to yield better results.Exam Findings for Exam .. Sturzer Acting Dept. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Each Exam in Spanish 101. as measured in time. 211.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. It must be noted that those scoring a 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to build this skill. Reading scores from a random sample of 101 and 102 final exams form 2008-2009 resulted in 70% of students scored 70% or better. 24 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. includes a reading comprehension section. elementary instructors felt that students scored well on reading comprehension sections of exams. Sturzer Acting Dept. 102. 211.Spanish Summary of Findings: Outcomes for reading in Spanish 212 and 312 were identical to those for listening levels. Direct . Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) expectations.asp?qy. Target: Students will successfully complete 70% of reading comprehension section of exams.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

newspapers. Therefore. Acting Dept. Reading comprehension . III. Target: A minimum of 75% of students are able to perform this task at their level.. Target: A minimum of 85% of students can perform at this level. consisting of articles.asp?qy. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : We will work to improve student's expression of their comprehension rate since we believe their comprehension exceeded their ability to express their comprehension in the target language.2 READING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 3. Felicia B. In addition. students researched and debated contemporary issues in French and 100% scored at the expected level of 75% comprehension rate..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Sample article for French 312-Conversation and Comprehension (Adobe Acrobat Document) The article is taken from a French newspaper. I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. students researched articles on contemporary issues and 100% demonstrated 85% comprehension rate. Notes : Language learning is inclusive of all skills that are assessed.French Course level. menus. Ph. brochures. etc.Other Findings for Reading comprehension .French Course level. it is difficult to separate the skills in any one assessment. Direct .D. At the 300 level. 72% of students demonstrated an 85% comprehension rate of the nuances in fictional and non-fictional works. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Felicia B. Direct . vocabulary exercise FREN 323 French Culture & Civilzation (Microsoft Word) Students follow links to read websites published by French museums on sites and artifacts from prehistoric to modern times for class discussion. and asked to demonstrate comprehension through a variety of measures. Details/Description: Students demonstrate nuanced comprehension of literary and non-literary texts in a variety of genres. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Sample exam FREN 332 Introduction to Literature 25 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . students presented summaries of readings on French culture and 100% demonstrated 85% comprehension rate. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We will track targeted skills more systematically.taskstream.2: Distinctive Viewpoints Measures & Findings Textual Analysis .Student Artifact Findings for Textual Analysis .French Summary of Findings: At the 200 level. Implementation Plan (timeline): These skills are introduced at the 200 level and systematically assessed at the 300 and 400 levels. Short vocabulary quizzes test comprehension prior to discussion in class. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students are exposed to a variety of written realia in the target language. Students read articles for comprehension and report to the class in both oral and written form. web sites. Implementation Plan (timeline): This measure is implemented from the elementary to the advanced level in the target language.French Summary of Findings: In the 300 level in two separate literature courses.

Exam Findings for Textual Analysis . Acting Department Head Supporting Attachments: Chapter of Culture and Civilization Course and Questions (Adobe Acrobat Document) Latin American Culture and Civilization Mid Term (Microsoft Word) Spanish 499 Final Exam (Microsoft Word) Technical/Professional Textual Analysis French Course level. and Literature Classes Summary of Findings: More than 85% of students achieved grades of 80% or better on midterm and final exams. Direct . Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.D.taskstream. Target: 85% of students in upperdivision literature and cultural classes will acheive 70% or better on exams relating to textual analysis. 332. Implementation Plan (timeline): 300 and 400 level literature and civiliazation and culture classes.French Summary of Findings: This skill was assessed in two separate 300 level classes. Civilization.asp?qy. 1800-present (Microsoft Word) Students must demonstrate their analytical skills in responding to synthetic. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Direct . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Spanish students will be texted on materials they have read by midterm and final exams. 72% Details/Description: Students must demonstrate comprehension of technical and complex texts in a 26 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Ph.Spanish Summary of Findings: More than 85% of students received grades of 80% or better on midterm and final exams. 400-level) will read and analyze literature. Civilization.3 READING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 3. Direct .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..1: Knowledge of other disciplines Measures & Findings 300 and 400 level Culture. genre based and thematic questions on literary texts under study.Student Artifact Findings for Technical/Professional Textual Analysis .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. In the literature class.Spanish Course level. and Literature Classes Course level.D. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in literature classes (Spanish 331. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Grades are maintained in gradebook.Exam Findings for 300 and 400 level Culture. Sturzer. Implementation Plan (timeline): Upper division classes (with the exception of 322 and 323) will deal with textual analysis in some regard.... Ph. Acting Department Head Supporting Attachments: Spanish 499 Final (Microsoft Word) Spanish 499 Mid Term (Microsoft Word) III. Target: 85% of Spanish majors and minors will score 70% or better on midterm and final exams. Substantiating Evidence: Textual Analysis . Sturzer.

311. 212. 312 Summary of Findings: This item is not tracked separately in most cases.. 100% of students met the goal of 85% success in conveying personal information.1 WRITING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 5. 311. 312 Course level. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spanish 101.. 102. 212. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Paris. Target: 85% of students at all levels of 101. Acting Department Head Supporting Attachments: Exam 1 Spanish 101 (Microsoft Word) Exam 1 Spanish 211 (Microsoft Word) Spanish 312 In-Class Essay (Microsoft Word) Writing Samples for advanced courses French Course level. At the 400 level. However. 102. 102. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Writing Outcome 312. and 312 will receive 70% or better on writing portion of their exams. While writing skills are introduced in the second semester of the elementary sequence.D.taskstream. 102.asp?qy.Exam Findings for Exams Spanish 101. students should be able to meet the writing outcomes as indicated in this document a level understood by a sympathetic native speaker. 212. we met our goal of 85% comprehension goal. 211.1: Within & Beyond Classroom Measures & Findings Exams Spanish 101. Sturzer.. 211. Target: At the 300 level. Ph. In the composition and conversation class. 312 Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. In aggregate. ville antique (Web Link) Sample link which forms the "textbook" for FREN 323 Introduction to French Culture and Civilizaation http://www. Target: A minimum of 85% of students are able to perform this task. However.fr/ understood complex literary analysis at an 85% comprehension rate. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.culture.Student Artifact Findings for Writing Samples for advanced courses .French Summary of Findings: In the 300 level composition and conversation class.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. variety of genres from a variety of sources. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: IV. which indicate that more than 85% of students achieve scores of 80% or better on written compositions. 311. 211. Spanish 311 and 312 are composition and conversation courses. 499 (Microsoft Word) Details/Description: Every exam of Spanish 101-212 contains an open-ended writing assessment. From a pedagogical standpoint. 212. the latter stress Details/Description: These samples demonstrate writing outcomes required for advanced level language courses (300-400 level). it is not practiced in the 200 level courses. 100% of students understood complex articles at an 85% level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Sufficient data exists to assess this skill. Students are allowed to correct and revise writing samples after input from peers and instructors.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.paris. compositions of Spanish 311 and 312 students are maintained in the department office. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : The above statistics represent essays that students have had an opportunity to correct. 311. 211. this reflects standard editing practices of any writing situation. Felicia B. Implementation Plan (timeline): Samples are gathered 27 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Direct . they should be able to meet the writing outcomes at an advanced level as understood by any native speaker. Implementation Plan (timeline): This task is introduced and reinforced in 300 level courses and mastered in 400 level courses. Direct .

Students are allowed to correct and revise writing samples after input from peers and instructors.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. At the 400 level. Notes : Student samples are on file in the Foreign Language office in Brock Hall 208. Head Supporting Attachments: Sample Syllabus (Microsoft Word) Writing Samples for advanced courses-French Course level. Head Supporting Attachments: Syllabus FREN 332 (Microsoft Word) The portion on "les comptes" signals students to research. Professor of French Acting Dept. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. 71% of students achieved a 75% ability to compose a research paper integrating primary and secondary sources.taskstream.Essay writing (Microsoft Word) conversation rather than writing skills. summarize and integrate materials from articles from 28 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: These samples demonstrate writing outcomes required for advanced level language courses (300-400 level). 100% demonstrated this ability. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : It is evident that while students have difficulty with this skill initially. read. Ph. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 499 Syllabus Summer 2008.D. Head Supporting Attachments: French 312-Syllabus for Composition and Conversation. they should be able to meet the writing outcomes at an advanced level as understood by any native speaker.D. Ph.2: Distinctive Viewpoints Measures & Findings Research Papers in Literature Classes beyond 332 Course level. Target: 85% of students will receive 70% or better... Sturzer. Ph. Notes : Samples are on file in the Foreign Language office in Brock 208. Acting Dept.doc (Microsoft Word) Writing Outcomes for 499 and 312. Implementation Plan (timeline): Samples are gathered throughout the year for all courses that are taught during that academic year. throughout the year for all courses that are taught during that academic year. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students in courses above Spanish 332.. In a 400 level literature class. Target: At the 300 level.doc (Microsoft Word) Details/Description: Students in 300 and 400-level classes beyond 332 are routinely asked to complete research papers in Spanish according to the MLA style. students should be able to meet the writing outcomes as indicated in this document a level understood by a sympathetic native speaker. ultimately they master it. Sturzer. Sturzer.2 WRITING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 3.D. Professor of French Acting Dept.Student Artifact Findings for Writing Samples for advanced courses-French Summary of Findings: In a 300 level literature class.asp?qy. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Direct .Student Artifact Findings for Research Papers in Literature Classes beyond 332 Summary of Findings: More than 85% of students achieve grade of 80% or better on final research papers. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Direct . Substantiating Evidence: IV.

322) Course level. The literature classes focus on assessing literary/cultural expression.and 400-level Spanish Classes (except 321. Ph..D. 322) Summary of Findings: Over 85% of students received grades of 80% or better on written papers and exams. Direct .Student Artifact Findings for 300.doc (Microsoft Word) Details/Description: Students write papers or answer questions on exams that relate directly to literary. reputable journals in French on the topic of their choice for their paper.1: Practices & Perspectives Measures & Findings 300.3 WRITING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 2. syllabus FREN 413 (Microsoft Word) Syllabus outlines that must write 3 shorter (1000 word) research papers in French on the books read and discussed in class. Sturzer.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Ph. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students in most upper division classes (except for 321. 322) Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. personal. Students are allowed to correct and revise writing samples after input from peers and instructors.D.asp?qy.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. students should be able to meet the writing outcomes as indicated in this document a level understood by a sympathetic native speaker.taskstream. Each paper must make use of at least 2 reputable journal articles. IV. Head 29 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . 85% of students in two different classes demonstrated a 75% success rate at responding to complex questions. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Student samples are on file in the Foreign Language office in Brock Hall 208.Student Artifact Findings for Writing Samples for advanced courses-French Summary of Findings: At the 300 level. Students attend a short seminar with a research librarian to learn how to use the MLA database and retrieve articles from those citations before beginning their research.and 400-level Spanish Classes (except 321. At the 400 level. Professor of French Acting Dept. Acting Department Head Supporting Attachments: Latin American Culture Exam (Microsoft Word) Spanish 312 Final Exam (Microsoft Word) Spanish 499 Exam (Microsoft Word) Writing Samples for advanced courses-French Course level. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.. cultural. they should be able to meet the writing outcomes at an advanced level as understood by any native speaker. Implementation Plan (timeline): Samples are gathered throughout the year for all courses that are taught during that academic year. all of our exams incorporate this assessment skill. Target: 85% of students will score 70% or better on papers and exams. Direct . Substantiating Evidence: French 311 Examen (Microsoft Word) Details/Description: These samples demonstrate writing outcomes required for advanced level language courses (300-400 level). Substantiating Evidence: Writing Outcomes for 499 and 312. Sturzer. Target: At the 300 level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Exam grades are maintained in instrucors' gradebooks. while composition/conversation classes focus on assessing personal and socio-political topics. and socio-political topics..

Students are allowed to correct and revise writing samples after input from peers and instructors. Ph.. the Intro. Target: At the 300 level. Supporting Attachments: French 312-Final Exam (Composition) (Microsoft Word) Sample exam FREN 332 Introduction to Literature 1800-present (Microsoft Word) As in all exams in this course. Professor of French Acting Dept. 100% of the students performed at an 85% success rate. which includes oral and written sections.D. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Ph.taskstream. students should be able to meet the writing outcomes as indicated in this document a level understood by a sympathetic native speaker. It includes essays and identification questions.. Sturzer.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): Samples are gathered throughout the year for all courses that are taught during that academic year.. contextualizing them within the movement and period that they represent This test is for the French 311 Composition and Conversation Test. Target: 85% of students can relate or summarize a real or fictional story.2: Written & Spoken Measures & Findings Spanish Upper Division Classes Course level. In the 300 level composition/conversation course. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Student samples are available in the Foreign Language Office in Brock 208.Student Artifact Findings for Writing Samples for advanced courses-French Summary of Findings: This assessment measure is introduced in the second semester of our 200 level course and reinforced in the 300 level composition/conversation course. Implementation Plan (timeline): Most upper division classes. Acting Head Supporting Attachments: Spanish 312 Final (Microsoft Word) Writing Samples for advanced courses-French Course level. course-Medieval period -18th century. students must link textual examples to themes and genre practices. students must follow the course of French culture and civilization from pre-historic France to the Carolingian age.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. they should be able to meet the writing outcomes at an advanced level as understood by any native speaker. Direct . Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. 30 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Head Supporting Attachments: La premiere France (Microsoft Word) On this exam.D. By the 400 level course. following a particular theme of their choosing. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: These samples demonstrate writing outcomes required for advanced level language courses (300-400 level). IV. we take this skill for granted.4 WRITING Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 1. French 331 Examen (Microsoft Word) This is a test for French 331. Direct . The topics are on comparative analysis between French and American culture.Student Artifact No Findings Added to Spanish Upper Division Classes Details/Description: Students narrate a story. Sturzer. At the 400 level. to French lit.

explaining the meaning of "les plaisirs de la table. At the 300 level. and mastered at the 400 level. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Strong start for this level as it is not mastered until a higher level. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students provide written and oral analysis in a variety of forms of the interplay between the target language and culture. and Conversation (Adobe Acrobat Document) This sample tests assesses student's understanding of the 31 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . the Composition and Conversation course (311-312) focuses on the relationship between language and culture. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. Sample exam FREN 211 Intermediate French for Conversation (Microsoft Word) In this exam students must recount a story in dialogue form (asking questions to draw out the story and then responding with pieces of the events and their circumstances).taskstream.1 CULTURE Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 4.1: Nature of Language Measures & Findings I Can survey Other level. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept.Student Artifact Findings for Interplay between Language and Culture-French Summary of Findings: At the 200 level..Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Overall results for this type of knowledge student self-assessed at around 20-30%. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009. Implementation Plan (timeline): This task is introduced at the elementary level. this outcome was not disaggregated from class work and exam scores. depending upon phrasing.asp?qy. V.D. Felicia B. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Sample chapter quiz FREN 102 (Microsoft Word) Like most quizzes and exams at the introductory level. Target: A minimum of 85% of students should be able to perform this task.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : In the future. Direct . reinforced at the 200 and 300 levels.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. students must demonstrate their knowledge of grammar and vocabulary and tie it (here food and eating) to its French cultural context. Acting Dept.. Interplay between Language and CultureFrench Course level. We met our goal since at least 85% of students passed the course with a B or better." Sample test French 312 Comp. we will disaggregate this element from the other skills in the second year. Indirect . Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence. Ph.

interplay between language and culture. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer.D. Implementation Plan (timeline): This measure is implemented at the elementary level and continues in the 200.Exam Findings for Spanish 211. 32 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .. Ph. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Target: 85% of students will score 70% or better. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Grades are maintained in instructors' gradebooks. 212. 323.Student Artifact Findings for Comprehension of Cultural Determinants-French Summary of Findings: We did not assess this skill in 2008-09 because the culture course was not taught.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. Target: A minimum of 85% of students are able to perform at this level. Sturzer. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Indirect . 212.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Spanish 211. Direct . recognizing historical and sociopolitical contingencies. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Exam 2 from Introduction to France (Microsoft Word) This is the second exam of the Introduction to France course. FREN 323. with 100% and 92% of students passing final exams for the culture courses of Spanish 323 or 325 with a grade of 70% or better. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses.. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Strong start for this level as it is not mastered until a higher level.D. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students analyze cultural markers in a variety of forms. 323. students exceeded expectations. Acting Department Head Supporting Attachments: Spanish 211 Sample Exam (Microsoft Word) Spanish 325 Exam (Microsoft Word) V.2 CULTURE Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 4.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: AT the first and second year. Felicia B.asp?qy. I Can survey Other level. Direct . 300 and 400 level courses.2: Concept of Culture Measures & Findings Comprehension of Cultural DeterminantsFrench Course level. 325 Culture Component Summary of Findings: In the category of cultural competency.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Intermediate Spanish and Spanish 323 and 325. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Spanish and Latin American Culture and Geography are tested on exams. Ph. 325 Culture Component Course level. covering from the Normand invasions to the Renaissance. students felt about 35% proficient at this skill.

Exam Findings for Intermediate Spanish and Culture and Civilization Courses Summary of Findings: Culture grades for 211 and 212 are not tracked separately. still made the greatest gains. Acting Dept.. As an absolute measure of progress. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Sturzer.0-3.asp?qy. Incoming second-year students are expected to perform between 2. This is produced by the company Auralog.Exam Findings for Auralog pre and post-test Summary of Findings: The findings at this introductory level are as expected. Acting Department Head Supporting Attachments: Sample 211 Exam (Microsoft Word) Sample Latin American Culture and Civilization Exam (Microsoft Word) V. so improvements at the lowest level are suspect and those with 1s should have been discounted in the measures. lower performing students spent substantially more time in the software and made more substantial improvement.0 and 1. and reading skills. The two groups in the middle also performed as expected in that the group that consistently worked harder. Implementation Plan (timeline): Intermediate and advanced Spanish courses. with 100% and 92% of students passing final exams with 70% or better. Those with the highest incoming scores yielded the lowest gains because language acquisition slows as the material gets more difficult. Target: Incoming first-year students are expected to score between 1.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Overall.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. In Spanish 323 and 325. students met our expectations. made greater strides than the group that worked less. Implementation Plan (timeline): This was administered at the beginning of the first and second-year courses and at the end of the first and second-year sequences.. Intermediate Spanish and Culture and Civilization Courses Course level. Target Achievement: Met Details/Description: TellMeMore is a software program with built-in voice recognition that measures oral and aural comprehension as well as grammar. culture. Head Supporting Attachments: Auralog scores correlated to EU standards (Microsoft Word) 33 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . At the end of the first year they should score between 2. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B.D. increases in gain diminished as scores increased. Felicia B. At the end of the second year they should score between 3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will understand and express the markers that distinguish a foreign Culture Target: 85% of students will achieve scores of 70% or better on exams. due to classroom instruction. I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009.6.6. reflecting the increasing difficulty of the material. At the second year level. students exceeded expectations. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Raise expectations from 85% with 70% to 85% of students scoring 80% or better.0-2. Direct . Ph.3 CULTURE Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 2. Direct ..0-2. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence.2: Products & Perspectives Measures & Findings Auralog pre and post-test Course level.6 on the 10-point scale. as measured by time in the software. The lowest scores coming in spent less time working in the software but. Sturzer Acting Dept. simply did not engage with the instrument. It must be noted that those scoring a 1.6.taskstream.

Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Results ranged from proficient to not proficient depending on whether students needed to identify key figures or identify key moments of life cycle in target culture (34%). as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. Identifying and Contextualizing Manifestations of Culture .French Summary of Findings: We could not assess this skill because we did not teach the culture course in this cycle. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Pre and Post test in Auralog for FREN 211-212 (Word Document (Open XML)) Pre and Post test results in Auralog FREN 101-102 (Word Document (Open XML)) I Can survey Other level. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal.taskstream. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Exam from Introduction to Culture (Microsoft Word) For the early period of French culture. Recommendations : Since there is no remarkable difference in gain between groups that worked more. from those who worked less. Felicia B. Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. Indirect .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.asp?qy.French Course level. Target: A minimum of 85% of students are able to perform this task. study their content and evaluate the value and the values promoted in the way the French understand and retell the story of their culture. Implementation Plan (timeline): This is implemented beginning at the elementary level and continues in the 200. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Strong start for this level as it is not mastered until a higher level. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Results of student survey 2008-2009.. we conclude that the software provides little added value when measured against time on task. At the intermediate level.D. we examine a variety of French website. 34 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . and compare various manifestations of culture in different formats and contexts. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students must identify. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. 300. Ph. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence. Direct . supplemental work did seem to yield better results. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. analyze.Student Artifact Findings for Identifying and Contextualizing Manifestations of Culture ..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. as measured in time. and 400 level courses. Acting Dept. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.

with 100% and 92% of students passing final exams for the culture courses of Spanish 323 or 325 with a grade of 70% or better. with 100% and 92% of students passing final exams for the culture courses of Spanish 323 or 325 with a grade of 70% or better. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: All Spanish majors are required to take either a Spanish or Spanish American Culture Class. Acting Head Supporting Attachments: Latin American Civilization and Culture (Microsoft Word) Spanish 499 Alberti.asp?qy. Target: 85% of students will score 70% on exams.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Head Supporting Attachments: Art on Final Exam Spanish 325 (Microsoft PowerPoint) Final Exam Spanish 325 Spring 2009 (Microsoft Word) Midterm Exam Spanish 323 (Microsoft Word) Cultural Relativity -French Course level. Sturzer. Direct .Spanish and Spanish American Culture Courses Summary of Findings: In the category of cultural competency. Spanish and Spanish American Culture.4 CULTURE Mapped to: National Standards in Foreign Language Education: Standard 4.. In addition many minors may take this course as part of their 18 hour requirement. Spanish minors may also take the courses towards graduation requirements. Felicia Sturzer. students exceeded expectations.2: Concept of Culture Measures & Findings Cultural Relativity .D. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students analyze and compare cultural manifestations in the target culture and relate them to a broader cultural context.taskstream. Spanish and Latin American Culture and Civilization Courses Course level.. Target: A minimum of 85% of students are able to perform this task.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Ph. Implementation Plan (timeline): Junior or Senior year. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Direct . Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Details/Description: Students analyze and compare cultural manifestations in the target culture and relate them to a broader cultural context. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): The 300 and 400 level curriculum.Spanish and Spanish American Culture Courses Course level. Target: All Spanish Majors are required to take either Spanish 323 or 325.Other Findings for Cultural Relativity -French Summary of Findings: This skill was not assessed because the culture course was not taught during this cycle. Leon Class (Microsoft Word) V. Dept.Exam Findings for Cultural Relativity .Exam Findings for Spanish and Latin American Culture and Civilization Courses Summary of Findings: In the category of cultural competency.. students exceeded expectations. Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia B. Implementation Plan (timeline): This is implemented beginning in the elementary level and is reinforced in 35 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .

Key/Responsible Personnel: Felicia Sturzer. Translation. politics. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 101 are introduced to the three declensions of nouns and adjectives through oral instruction. Translation Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level. Grammar. history.taskstream.D.Survey Findings for I Can survey Summary of Findings: Depending on how this skill is phrased. Direct . Translation. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Strong start for this level as it is not mastered until a higher level. and translations involving Greek-English and EnglishGreek. Felicia B.Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 58% percent of students in Greek 101 successfully completed this outcome Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of grammar.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey results for 2008-2009. Details/Description: Students were asked what they can do in the target language across the first and second year courses. written exercises.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Ph. the 200. Grammar Mapped to: Foreign Languages: BA Greek: Culture. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. decline. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes over the course of the semester Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips 36 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Implementation Plan (timeline): Throughout the 2008-2009 year at the first and second year level. Indirect . Translation. Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize.. thereby articulating aspects that do and do not change across time.. as administered by students of the Psychology dept and supervised by a professor in the Psychology Dept. Sturzer Supporting Attachments: Final Exam for Introduction to French Culture (Microsoft Word) The final exam asks students to move back and forth from cultural artifacts to the culture that produced them and to follow the development of a single manifestation of culture across history. Substantiating Evidence: I Can survey Other level. Head Supporting Attachments: I Can survey (Microsoft Word) Survey administered across the first and second year language sequence. Foreign Languages: BA Greek Outcomes 1. Grammar. student confidence in their proficiency varied.asp?qy. as well as using cultural knowledge to comprehend a story which ended towards 80%.But identifying and explaining a cultural site earned on 40% and choosing a culturally appropriate gift earned 36%. Grammar. 300 and mastered 400 level courses. and parse nouns and adjectives of the three declensions. Grammar. Acting Dept. Grammar. Personal comparison ranked consistently between 70 and 80%. Grammar. Target: Students will be 75% proficient at stated goal. Grammar.

Direct .. written exercises. decline. Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes over the course of the semester. imperfect. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes throughout the semester. written exercises. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level. conjugate. and translations involving GreekEnglish and English-Greek.Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 80% of students in Greek 102 successfully completed this outcome. Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize and 37 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Supporting Attachments: Grammar Mapped to: Foreign Languages: BA Greek: 1.Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 80% of students in Greek 102 successfully completed this outcome..asp?qy. written exercises. and aorist tenses of 0-type verbs and participles through oral instruction. and translations involving GreekEnglish and English-Greek. Direct . Details/Description: Students in Greek 101 and 102 are introduced to the conjugation of imperatives of the present and aorist tenses through oral instruction. decline and parse correctly the present tense forms of 0-type verbs and of participles. and recognize the syntax of relative clauses. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 102 are introduced to the declension of the relative pronouns and the syntax of relative clauses through oral instruction. Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize.taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of grammar. and translations involving Greek-English and English-Greek.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of grammar.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 80% of students in Greek 102 successfully completed this outcome. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level.and parse relative pronouns. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasis this area of grammar Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 101 and 102 are introduced to the present. Grammar Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level.

conjugate.Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 350 (intermediate level) successfully completed this outcome. Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize. and parse verbs of both moods. and translations involving Greek-English and English-Greek. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of grammar Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 350 are introduced to the subjunctive and optative moods through oral instruction. written exercises.taskstream. Direct .Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 80% of students in Greek 102 successfully completed this outcome. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes over the course of the semester Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level. and translations involving Greek-English and English-Greek. Direct . Direct .. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of grammar.asp?qy. written exercises. Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize and properly translate the various uses of these moods.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Details/Description: Students in Greek 102 are introduced to the comparative forms of adjectives and adverbs through oral instruction. written exercises. parse imperatives of both tenses. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes over the course of the semester Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level. 38 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 350 (intermediate level) successfully completed this outcome.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 350 are introduced to the uses of the subjunctive and optative moods in both independent and dependent clauses through oral instruction. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes over the course of the semester Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. and translations involving Greek-English and English-Greek.

Exam Findings for Exams Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 350 (intermediate level) successfully completed this outcome.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Translation Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and translations Course level. Direct . conjugate. Direct . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of translation skills. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes over the course of the semester Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of grammar. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Translation Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams Course level. and parse correctly the these three tenses of verbs.taskstream. and translations involving GreekEnglish and English-Greek. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of exams and quizzes throughout the semester. Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize. Target: 75% of students will be able to translate these passages with 90% accuracy in their daily assignments and translation exams. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and quizzes Course level.Exam Findings for Exams and quizzes Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 350 (intermediate level) successfully completed this outcome.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of daily translation assignments and translation exams over the course of the semester. and pluperfect tenses of verbs of both types through oral instruction.Exam Findings for Exams and translations 39 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Target: 75% of students will be able to recognize. Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 350 and 351 are assigned daily translation exercises from the texts of primary authors of prose and poetry.. written exercises. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of grammar.. decline. and parse the comparative and superlative forms of adjectives and adverbs. future perfect.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 350 are introduced to the perfect.

Target: 75% of students will be able to appreciate different prose styles in discussions of their daily assignments and translation exams. Direct . Discussion of these assignments and exams.asp?qy. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 350 (advanced level) and 351 are assigned daily translation exercises from the texts of primary authors of prose and poetry.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of daily translation assignments and translation exams over the course of the semester.Exam Findings for Exams and translations Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 351 successfully completed this outcome. Target: 75% of students will be able to translate accurately and identify important syntactical structures 90% of the time in their daily assignments and translation exams. Direct .. Translation exercises and discussion of these exercises focus on the prose styles of the different authors. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of daily translation assignments and translation exams over the course of the semester. Target: 75% of students will be able to appreciate different poetic genres in discussions of their daily assignments and translation exams.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of translation skills. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of translation skills.Exam Findings for Exams and translations Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 351 successfully completed this outcome. Translation exercises and discussion of these exercises focus on accuracy of translation and identification of syntactical structures. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 351 are assigned daily translation exercises from the texts of primary authors of poetry. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 350 (advanced level) successfully completed this outcome.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Translation Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and translations Course level. Translation exercises and discussion of these exercises focus on the genres of poetry. Details/Description: Students in Greek 350 (advanced level) are assigned daily translation exercises from the texts of primary authors of prose and poetry. 40 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Translation Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and translations Course level. Discussion of these assignments and exams.taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of translation skills.

Target: As stated in Details section.Exam Findings for Exams and translations Summary of Findings: 100% of students in Greek 351 successfully completed this outcome.asp?qy. The same proportion of students should be able to produce these forms from memory with an accuracy rate of at least 65%. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Culture Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exams and translations Course level. Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of daily translation assignments and translation exams over the course of the semester.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. an accuracy rate of 65% will be expected for active recall of these same forms. Again. Target: 75% of students will be able to appreciate and discuss intelligently the culture and history of ancient Greece as reflected in their daily assignments and translation exams. %75 of students are expected to meet the standard appropriate to their semester level. Translation exercises and discussion of these exercises focus on the culture and history embodied in the texts. to identify all forms of the entire indicative verb system (including passives and participles). with an accuracy of %75. At the end of LAT 102 75% of students should be able.1 Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Measure: In-house exams Details/Description: It is expected that 75% of students be able by the end of LAT 101 to identify all parts of the active indicative verbal system with an accuracy of at least %75.. Discussion of these assignments and exams.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): Implementation of daily translation assignments and translation exams over the course of the semester.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize this area of cultural appreciation. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in Greek 350 (advanced level) and 351 are assigned daily translation exercises from the texts of primary authors of prose and poetry. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Phillips Supporting Attachments: Foreign Languages: BA Latin Outcomes I. No Findings Added to Measure: In-house exams 41 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .

taskstream. An assessment will be made in each of these two courses near the end of the semester. and they should be able to produce these same forms from memory with an accuracy rate of at least 65%. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. conditionals. the syntactic constructions that are tied to the subjunctive (e.asp?qy.3 Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house exams Details/Description: It is expected that 75% of students be able by the end of LAT 101 to identify all forms of the nouns in declensions 1-3 with an accuracy of at least %75.. %80 for LAT 202. Supporting Attachments: No Findings Added to In-house exams 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are to be introduced in LAT 201 and to be fully in place by the end of LAT 202. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are to be introduced in LAT 101 and to be fully in place by the end of LAT 102. etc.). and the ablative absolute.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. An assessment will be made in each of these two courses near the end of the semester. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. Target: %75 of students are expected to meet the standard for LAT 201. purpose clauses. The same proportion of students should be able to generate these forms and simple examples of these structures with at least 65% accuracy. 80% of students should be able to perform all the tasks above at the same levels of accuracy. wishes.g. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009.. After completing LAT 202. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. At the end of LAT 102 75% of students No Findings Added to In-house exams 42 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .2 Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house exams Details/Description: At the close of LAT 201 75% of students should be able to identify and translate with 75% accuracy all forms of the subjunctive verbal system. Supporting Attachments: 1.

. This same outcome will be achieved by %80 of students in LAT 202. An accuracy rate of 65% will be expected for active recall of these same forms. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. to identify all forms of all noun/adjective declensions and also the major pronouns. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. reinforced and developed in LAT 201. An assessment will be made in each of these two courses near the end of the semester.4 Grammar Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house exams Details/Description: 75% of LAT 102 students will be expected to comprehend indirect discourse and to produce actively simple examples of this construction in writing. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 102. Target: %75 of LAT 102 and LAT 201 students will meet the standard for their semester level. 75% of LAT 201 students will be expected to comprehend complex indirect discourse and produce moderately complex examples of it.asp?qy. Supporting Attachments: 1. %80 percent of LAT 202 students will meet the standard for their level.. Target: %75 of students will meet the standard for their semester level. Supporting Attachments: No Findings Added to In-house exams II. 75% students should be No Findings Added to In-house exams 43 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . An assessment will be made in each of these two courses near the end of the semester. with an accuracy of %75. fully mastered in LAT 202. should be able. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 101 and mastered in LAT 102.taskstream. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009.1 Vocabulary Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house exams Details/Description: When confronted with a page of Latin at their semester level. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 75% of students should be able to identify a certain percentage of the Latin derivates: 20% after LAT 101. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. This instructor will assess them in each semester of basic Latin (LAT 101&102) and intermediate Latin (LAT 201&202) by distributing in class eight English sentences to be rendered into Latin in fifteen minutes. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009. 60% after LAT 202. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Targeted assessment happens through LAT 202 near the end of each semester. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. Supporting Attachments: II. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 101 and reinforced thereafter. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr... Target: %75 of students will meet the standard of their No Findings Added to In-house exam 44 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Targeted assessment happens through LAT 202 near the end of each semester. 40% after LAT 102.1 Writing Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house exam Details/Description: Students should be able to compose fairly quickly simple and properly formed sentences that integrate the full grammatical knowledge and vocabulary of their semester-level. 50% after LAT 201. Supporting Attachments: No Findings Added to In-house activity III. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 101 and reinforced thereafter. 75% of students will be expected to perform at a “C” level or higher.2 Vocabulary Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house activity Details/Description: given a page of English prose.asp?qy.taskstream. Target: %75 of students will meet the standard. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009. able to translate 70% of the words without assistance from a dictionary. Target: %75 of students will meet the standard.

in a Latin appropriate to their semester level. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years.taskstream. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 101. Assessment will take place near the end of each semester. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 101 and reinforced through LAT 202. It is expected that %75 percent of them will perform this task in a manner that the instructor considers worthy of the letter grade B or higher.1 Speaking and Aural Comprehension Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house activity Details/Description: In each semester. semester-level. students will produce individual compositions in an ancient genre such as poetic epigram or tombstone dedication. either in the form of a dramatic dialogue or else in one of the ancient literary genres. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009.. In addition. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009. mastered in LAT 202. Target: %75 of students will meet the standard of their semester-level. reinforced in LAT 102 and 201.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. In LAT 202. students should be able to formulate simple No Findings Added to In-house activity 45 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Assessment will take place near the end of each of these courses.2 Writing Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house activity Details/Description: Students will be expected to compose creative compositions. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. They will do this as a group project once each semester from LAT 101 through LAT 201. 75% will be expected to earn at least a letter grade of C on this work. Supporting Attachments: No Findings Added to In-house activity IV. Latin students should be able to understand as the instructor speaks in level-appropriate Latin and asks questions about the narratives being studied or about various other topics. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.asp?qy. Supporting Attachments: III.

Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 101 and reinforced thereafter. LAT 202. Supporting Attachments: V. Target: %75 of students will meet the standard of their semester-level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. answers in Latin to the questions asked. It is expected that at least 70% will perform this task acceptably. Each semester the instructor will make an assessment of reading by asking the students to translate. LAT 102. Target: %70 of students will meet the standard of their semester-level. the one to which all the others lead and contribute. Joshua Davies No Findings Added to In-house activity 46 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . While this kind of activity will be frequent during the semester. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009. Implementation Plan (timeline): The skills are introduced in LAT 101 and reinforced through LAT 202. For LAT 101.taskstream. In LAT 350&351 they will receive an unmodified but more difficult and complex passage from one of the Roman authors. It is expected that 75% of them will perform this task at a level that the instructor deems deserving of a letter grade of C or better. and LAT 201.. noting how many are able to answer in simple but well formulated Latin. Assessment will take place near the end of each semester. LAT 201.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and their ability to do so should show some growth through the sequence of LAT 101. The instructor will discuss a subject in Latin and pose a question to each student. LAT 102. Targeted assessment happens in every course near the end of each semester. they will receive an unmodified. assessment will take place just once near the end of the term.1 Reading Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings In-house activity Details/Description: The ability to read and understand Latin texts is the central linguistic competency of the major. a passage that they have never seen before. but clear and straightforward passage from one of Roman authors.. with the aid of a dictionary. the passage will be simplified Latin taken from a textbook aimed at their level. For LAT 202. reaching a relative mastery at the 300-level.

It is expected that 75% will do so. The essay exams and term papers of the No Findings Added to Essays 47 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . the students will each write a term paper on one of these areas (i.g. in which the instructor notes the number of students who bring forth informed and meaningful contributions. Implementation Plan (timeline): Although the instructor will regularly introduce cultural elements into the beginning and intermediate language classes in order to pave the way.).com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. Two means of assessment will be utilized. and it will be expected that at least 75% reveal an understanding of their chosen subject that the instructor considers to be substantial. Supporting Attachments: No Findings Added to Essay and class discussion VI. in terms of their literary style and modes of expressions. Target: %75 of students will meet the standard. Secondly. their literary or intellectual contributions. Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009. etc. measures. there will be a cumulative group discussion of the author near the end of the semester.1 Culture Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Essay and class discussion Details/Description: In 300-level Latin courses.taskstream. influence. CLAS 310: The Greco-Roman World.. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years. actual assignments. and their influence on later civilization. ideas.2 Culture Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Essays Details/Description: The 300-level Classics courses (e..) emphasize the broad lines and features of Classical civilization as a whole. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009. Supporting Attachments: VI. CLAS 396: Classical Mythology.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.asp?qy. the genres in which they write. First. the author’s literary qualities. and assessments in this area will wait until the 300-level CLAS courses due to the great amount of language work that needs to be accomplished in the 100-200 level Latin courses. the emphasis will be on detailed knowledge of important authors. etc. from the divinities of ancient religion to social realities and literary history.e.

actual assignments. Implementation Plan (timeline): Although the instructor will regularly introduce cultural elements into the beginning and intermediate language classes in order to pave the way..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and assessments in this area will wait until the 300-level CLAS courses due to the great amount of language work that needs to be accomplished in the 100-200 level Latin courses. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. students will be used to assess their competency in this area.. measures.taskstream. It will be expected that 75% of them will demonstrate a substantial grasp of these broader currents. Supporting Attachments: 48 of 48 8/6/2010 12:09 PM . Target: %75 of students will meet the standard of their semester-level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Care has been taken for more secure preservation of data in future years.asp?qy. Joshua Davies Notes: Due to doubly unfortunate circumstances (crashed hard drive and boxes lost in move) findings are not available for 2008-2009.

mean overall score = 574.taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): The ACAT will be administered by OPEIR staff during April of 2009. Direct . 59th. stratigraphy. While we are pleased that we met our objective. petrology. n=6).Exam Findings for ACAT: overall scores Summary of Findings: Five prospective graduates took the ACAT in early April 2009. and will be included in the 2008-2009 outcomes assessment report. Key/Responsible Personnel: Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: Graduates will have knowledge of mineralogy Measures & Findings 1 of 7 8/6/2010 12:16 PM .. 29th. 2009. Overall scores are generally good. 542. and 80th %tiles and the 4th.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. = 100. dev. Results are expected during mid to late summer.. Three of the five scores are above the mean for the national comparison group. and structural geology. [Standard scores are based on mean = 500. Target: The mean of overall scores on the ACAT for graduating seniors will be at or above the 50th percentile compared to national norms. the mean of which is 513. as is the mean of all five scores. 446. we wish these scores were better. 66th.] The individual scores correspond to the 40th.asp?qy. August 06. These results are somewhat worse than those of last year (2007-2008 cycle. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Geology Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. and 7th stanines. 474. The ACAT will include 4 content areas reflective of geology core courses—mineralogy. std. 4th. 6th. 5th. and 583. These results indicate that this objective was met. 2010 Measures and Findings Geology Outcomes Graduates will have a general knowledge of geology Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings ACAT: overall scores Program level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Prospective graduates will take the Area Concentration Achievement Test (ACAT) for geology after completing the geology curriculum. despite there having been no change made to the geology curriculum. We recognize that overall scores for such few numbers of students are not statistically significant. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We continue our efforts to improve upon ACAT test scores by requiring students to take cumulative and comprehensive exams in each course. 522.

Details/Description: Prospective graduates will take the Area Concentration Achievement Test (ACAT) for geology after completing the geology curriculum. Mineralogy content-area scores are generally good. std. [Standard scores are based on mean = 500. 436. stratigraphy. n=6). 488. We recognize that overall scores for such few numbers of students are not statistically significant. mean petrology content-area score = 497. 361.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 583. we wish these scores were better. These results are somewhat worse than those of last year (2007-2008 cycle. and will be included in the 2008-2009 outcomes assessment report. 523. mean mineralogy content-area score = 588. dev. These results are somewhat worse than those of last year (2007-2008 cycle. despite there having been no change made to the petrology curriculum. We recognize that overall scores for such few numbers of students are not statistically significant. The ACAT will include 4 content areas reflective of geology core courses—mineralogy. Mapped to: No Mapping ACAT: mineralogy scores Program level. and structural geology. = 100. Results are expected during mid to late summer. These results indicate that this objective was not met. dev. Key/Responsible Personnel: Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: Graduates will have knowledge of petrology Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings ACAT: petrology scores Program level. and 523. [Standard scores are based on mean = 500. Target: The mean of petrology content-area scores on the ACAT for graduating seniors will be at or above the 50th percentile compared to national norms. petrology. n=6). Implementation Plan (timeline): The ACAT will be administered by OPEIR staff during April of 2009.Exam Findings for ACAT: mineralogy scores Summary of Findings: Five prospective graduates took the ACAT in early April 2009. stratigraphy. Direct . Results are expected during mid to late summer. and structural geology. which corresponds to the 31st %tile. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : We continue our efforts to improve upon ACAT petrology content-area scores by requiring students to take cumulative and comprehensive exams in Petrology..Exam Findings for ACAT: petrology scores Summary of Findings: Five prospective graduates took the ACAT in early April 2009. std. Implementation Plan (timeline): The ACAT will be administered by OPEIR staff during April of 2009. and 458. petrology.] The mean of mineralogy content-area scores is 515. 2009. The ACAT will include 4 content areas reflective of geology core courses—mineralogy. The mean petrology content-are score is 450. while 3 are low.] Two of these are quite good and exceed the mean for the national comparison group. = 100.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Prospective graduates will take the Area Concentration Achievement Test (ACAT) for geology after completing the geology curriculum. While we are pleased that we met our objective. These results indicate that this objective was met. which corresponds to the 56th %tile. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We continue our efforts to improve upon ACAT mineralogy content-area scores by requiring students to take cumulative and comprehensive exams in Mineralogy.. Key/Responsible Personnel: Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: 2 of 7 8/6/2010 12:16 PM . 523. Petrology content-area scores are 534.asp?qy. 398. despite there having been no change made to the mineralogy curriculum. 2009. and will be included in the 2008-2009 outcomes assessment report. Target: The mean of mineralogy content-area scores on the ACAT for graduating seniors will be at or above the 50th percentile compared to national norms.taskstream.

petrology. While we are pleased that we met our objective. 493. Structural geology content-area scores are generally good. These results indicate that this objective was met. Implementation Plan (timeline): The ACAT will be administered by OPEIR staff during April of 2009. std. Notes : Details/Description: Prospective graduates will take the Area Concentration Achievement Test (ACAT) for geology after completing the geology curriculum. and 622. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We continue our efforts to improve upon ACAT stratigraphy content-area scores by requiring students to take cumulative and comprehensive exams in Historical Geology and Sedimentary Rocks and Stratigraphy.Exam Findings for ACAT: stratigraphy scores Summary of Findings: Five prospective graduates took the ACAT in early April 2009. dev. = 100. Target: The mean of structural geology content-area scores on the ACAT for graduating seniors will be at or above the 50th percentile compared to national norms. n=6). we wish these scores were better. Key/Responsible Personnel: Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: Graduates will have knowledge of structural geology Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings ACAT: structural geology scores Program level.Exam Findings for ACAT: structural geology scores Summary of Findings: Five prospective graduates took the ACAT in early April 2009. stratigraphy.asp?qy.] The mean of structural geology content-area scores is 551. mean stratigraphy content-area score = 534.. which corresponds to the 69th %tile. Results are expected during mid to late summer. 578. Direct . Direct . The ACAT will include 4 content areas reflective of geology core courses—mineralogy. dev.] The mean of stratigraphy content-area scores is 513. = 100. stratigraphy. 520. and structural geology.taskstream. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Graduates will have knowledge of stratigraphy Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings ACAT: stratigraphy scores Program level. 2009. We recognize that overall scores for such few numbers of students are not statistically significant. and will be included in the 2008-2009 outcomes assessment report. 2009. 3 of 7 8/6/2010 12:16 PM . 367. Results are expected during mid to late summer.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We continue our efforts to improve upon ACAT structural geology content-area scores by requiring students to take cumulative and comprehensive exams in Structural Geology. Stratigraphy content-area scores are generally good. petrology. Implementation Plan (timeline): The ACAT will be administered by OPEIR staff during April of 2009. 460. and structural geology. and 627. These results are somewhat worse than those of last year (2007-2008 cycle. 640. The ACAT will include 4 content areas reflective of geology core courses—mineralogy. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Prospective graduates will take the Area Concentration Achievement Test (ACAT) for geology after completing the geology curriculum. Target: The mean of stratigraphy content-area scores on the ACAT for graduating seniors will be at or above the 50th percentile compared to national norms. std.. and will be included in the 2008-2009 outcomes assessment report. 507.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. despite there having been no change made to the stratigraphy curriculum. which corresponds to the 55th %tile. [Standard scores are based on mean = 500. [Standard scores are based on mean = 500. 404.

Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: Exit questionnaire Program level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Interview Findings for Exit interview Summary of Findings: Although no formal interviews were conducted. and academic advisement that they received and strongly agreed that faculty are knowledgeable in their respective subject areas.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Prospective graduates will complete the exit questionnaire at or near the time of their graduation and will do so anonymously.asp?qy. geology faculty at UTC are willing to help students.taskstream. One respondent was critical of the program's facilities. Indirect . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: In lieu of or in addition to completing an exit questionnaire (see Measure: Exit questionnaire). prospective graduates will be invited to offer their opinions and constructive criticisms of the geology program during an exit interview by the department head.Survey Findings for Exit questionnaire Summary of Findings: Four (of 6) prospective graduates completed the exit questionnaire. and are willing to help students. Key/Responsible Personnel: Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: 4 of 7 8/6/2010 12:16 PM . Two respondents were complimentary of how well faculty relate to students and the extent to which they make themselves available to students. Target: All interviewed graduates will indicate that they are satisfied with the education and training that they received as a student in the geology program. (2) I am satisfied with the academic advisement that Ireceived as a student in the geology program at UTC. All respondents indicated satisfaction with the education.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Prospective graduates will complete an exit questionnaire designed jointly by geology faculty and OPEIR. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We will continue to work to ensure that students are satisfied with the education and training that they receive. Target: Prospective graduates will agree or strongly agree with each of the following statements: (1) I am satisfied with the education and training that I received as a student in the geology program at UTC. (4) geology faculty at UTC relate to students in an academically productive way. Implementation Plan (timeline): Prospective graduates will be invited to discuss the geology program with the department head at or near the time of their graduation. Target Achievement: Recommendations : We will make greater effort in the future to encourage students to discuss the program with the department head. and (5) when called upon. relate well to students. Key/Responsible Personnel: Habte Churnet (Department Head). Comments were generally positive. training. (3) geology faculty at UTC convey an in-depth knowledge of the subjects that they teach. Indirect . Key/Responsible Personnel: Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: Substantiating Evidence: Graduates will be satisfied with education and training Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Exit interview Program level. who will provide them to responsible personnel during mid to late summer for inclusion in the 2007-2008 outcomes assessment report. the department head did receive comments from upper-level students including the prospective graduates.. Students will deliver completed questionnaires directly to the department secretary.

as calculated by [((T2-T1)/T1) ≥ 0. these questions will be graded as a post-test for each student. Average scores are as follows: section 001.Exam No Findings Added to GEOL 112: pretest/post-test Details/Description: A subset of questions from the final exam for Geology 112 will also constitute a pretest to be administered at the beginning of the semester. to be administered at the end of each semester.. Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: Enhanced competencies due to GEOL 112 (General Education) Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings GEOL 112: pretest/post-test Course level. Mies. section 002. in which the average score on the pretest was 40%. Pretest and post-test questions. Direct . if not identical.50]. UPDATE: The pretest was administered to all sections of Geology 111 during the present semester (fall 2009). 40%. 46%. Results will be included in the 2009-2010 outcomes assessment report.. 48%. Direct .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. will be very similar. 42%.taskstream. section 004. The pretest will be administered at the beginning of each semester. As part of the final exam.Exam No Findings Added to GEOL 111: pretest/post-test Details/Description: A subset of questions from the final exam for Geology 111 will also constitute a pretest to be administered at the beginning of the semester. and will 5 of 7 8/6/2010 12:16 PM . NOTE: THIS OUTCOME AND ASSESSMENT IS PROPOSED FOR INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION DURING THE FALL OF 2009 OR SPRING OF 2010 (2009-2010 OUTCOMES CYCLE). These results are very similar to those of a pilot study conducted during the spring semester of 2008. if not identical. and will be the same for all sections of Geology 111.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: The average of students’ scores for the post-test (T2) will be at least 50 relative percent better than the average of students’ scores for the pretest (T1). Holmes. The post-test will be part of the final exam. will be very similar. section 003. which is 80 relative percent better than the that of the pretest. Enhanced competencies due to GEOL 111 (General Education) Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings GEOL 111: pretest/post-test Course level. these questions will be graded as a post-test for each student.asp?qy. Churnet. Pretest and post-test questions. Williams). As part of the final exam. Key/Responsible Personnel: class instructor (Brodie. the average score on the post-test was 72%. within the first 3 hours of class. Implementation Plan (timeline): The pretest and post-test will be administered to all sections of Geology 111 during fall semester of 2009 and the spring semester of 2010.

Williams).Exam No Findings Added to GEOL 116: pretest/post-test Details/Description: A subset of questions from the final exam for Geology 116 will also constitute a pretest to be administered at the beginning of the semester. Mies.. Implementation Plan (timeline): The pretest and post-test will be administered to all sections of Geology 112 during the spring semester of 2010.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. will be very similar. Results will be included in the 2009-2010 outcomes assessment report. Churnet.50]. Jonathan Mies 6 of 7 8/6/2010 12:16 PM . within the first 3 hours of class.asp?qy..50]. The post-test will be part of the final exam. Mies. if not identical. to be administered at the end of each semester. As part of the final exam. Pretest and post-test questions. Key/Responsible Personnel: class instructor (Brodie. as calculated by [((T2-T1)/T1) ≥ 0. Target: The average of students’ scores for the post-test (T2) will be at least 50 relative percent better than the average of students’ scores for the pretest (T1). NOTE: THIS OUTCOME AND ASSESSMENT IS PROPOSED FOR INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION DURING THE FALL OF 2009 OR SPRING OF 2010 (2009-2010 OUTCOMES CYCLE).com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. within the first 3 hours of class. and will be the same for all sections of Geology 116. Key/Responsible Personnel: class instructor (Brodie. be the same for all sections of Geology 112. Results will be included in the 2009-2010 outcomes assessment report. these questions will be graded as a post-test for each student. Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: Enhanced competencies due to GEOL 116 (General Education) Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings GEOL 116: pretest/post-test Course level. NOTE: THIS OUTCOME AND ASSESSMENT IS PROPOSED FOR INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION DURING THE FALL OF 2009 OR SPRING OF 2010 (2009-2010 OUTCOMES CYCLE). The pretest will be administered at the beginning of each semester. The post-test will be part of the final exam. The pretest will be administered at the beginning of each semester. Holmes. as calculated by [((T2-T1)/T1) ≥ 0. Implementation Plan (timeline): The pretest and post-test will be administered to all sections of Geology 116 during the spring semester of 2010. Holmes. Williams). Direct .taskstream. to be administered at the end of each semester. Target: The average of students’ scores for the post-test (T2) will be at least 50 relative percent better than the average of students’ scores for the pretest (T1). Churnet.

NOTE: THIS OUTCOME AND ASSESSMENT IS PROPOSED FOR INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION DURING THE FALL OF 2009 OR SPRING OF 2010 (2009-2010 OUTCOMES CYCLE)..asp?qy. Williams). As part of the final exam.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. these questions will be graded as a post-test for each student. to be administered at the end of each semester. will be very similar. Jonathan Mies Supporting Attachments: 7 of 7 8/6/2010 12:16 PM .Exam No Findings Added to GEOL 225: pretest/post-test Details/Description: A subset of questions from the final exam for Geology 225 will also constitute a pretest to be administered at the beginning of the semester. Holmes. within the first 3 hours of class. Supporting Attachments: Enhanced competencies due to GEOL 225 (General Education) Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings GEOL 225: pretest/post-test Course level. Target: The average of students’ scores for the post-test will be at least 20 relative percent better [(T2-T1)/((T1+T2)/2) ≥ 0. Key/Responsible Personnel: class instructor (Brodie.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..20] than the average of students’ scores for the pretest. Pretest and post-test questions.taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): The pretest and post-test will be administered to all sections of Geology 225 during the spring semester of 2010. and will be the same for all sections of Geology 225. Results will be included in the 2009-2010 outcomes assessment report. The pretest will be administered at the beginning of each semester. Churnet. Direct . The post-test will be part of the final exam. Mies. if not identical.

Direct .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Student Artifact Findings for Practical Skills Gained in Internship Program Summary of Findings: 82% of the students completing internships received a C or better.1 Distinctive Experience Outside Class. Evaluation.1 Distinctive Experience Outside Class.1 Practical Skills required for Career Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 1. Indirect .. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.2 Student Satisfaction.75 on this item. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Details/Description: This item is measured by student records kept by the Internship Coordinator. Measurable Outcome 2. Measurable Outcome 2. Mastery of Practical Skills Outcomes 1.3 Experiential Learning Opportunities. and Institutional Research All faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 1. Measurable Outcome 2. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Legal Assistant Studies: BS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.Survey Findings for Practical Skills Gained in University and Major Courses Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 2. Measurable Outcome 3.9 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Practical Skills Gained in University and Major Courses Program level. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies majors will achieve a mean score of 2.asp?qy. Target: At least 75% of the internships will result is a grade of C or better (as determined by the internship coordinator with input from the field supervisor).3 Experiential Learning Opportunities.2 Student Internships Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 1.taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. August 06.1 Service Learning.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Evaluation and Institutional Research.2 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Practical Skills Gained in Internship Program Program level. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 1 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM .5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Evaluation. Measurable Outcome 2. and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC led them to acquire job or work related knowledge and skills.. 2010 Measures and Findings 1. Measurable Outcome 1.1 Service Learning. Measurable Outcome 1.

Measurable Outcome 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): 08-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 1.3 Experiential Details/Description: This item is measured by student records kept by the Internship Coordinator..Survey Findings for Applying Practical Problems Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 3. Indirect . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.4 Applying Theory to Practical Problems Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Applying Practical Problems Program level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.1 Service Learning.Student Artifact [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 1. Key/Responsible Personnel: McGuffee Supporting Attachments: Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 1.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Evaluation and Institutional Research. Direct .Survey Findings for Writing Skills Details/Description: This survey is administered by the 2 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. Mastery of Writing Skills Outcomes 2.1 Student Assessment of Writing Skills Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students Measures & Findings Writing Skills Program level.1 Distinctive Experience Outside Class Target: 100% of Legal Assistant Studies majors will complete an internship. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies majors will achieve a mean score of 2.3 Service Learning Mapped to: Measures & Findings Service and/or Experiential Learning Findings for Service and/or Experiential Learning Summary of Findings: 100% of Legal Assistant Studies majors completed an internship. Evaluation.2 on this item.. Indirect .asp?qy. Measurable Outcome 2. Evaluation. and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC emphasized applying theories or concepts to practical problems. Learning Opportunities. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students Program level.

.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.2. Evaluation. Target: At least 75% of the LAS students will receive a grade of C or better in the Advanced Legal Research and Writing Course (LAS 390). Evaluation.1 Student Assessment of Computer Skills Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.Survey Findings for Student Assessment of Computer Skills Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a means of 3. Mastery of Computer Skills Outcomes 3. Indirect .Student Artifact Findings for Mastery of Legal Research and Writing Skills Summary of Findings: 96% of the LAS students received a grade of C or better in the Advanced Legal Research and Writing course. [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.75 on these items.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. and 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: LAS 390 Instructor McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 3. Evaluation. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Direct . and Institutional Research. Evaluation and Institutional Research. 3. Evaluation.2 Student Satisfaction Office of Planning.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.2 Legal Research and Writing Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Mastery of Legal Research and Writing Skills Course level..asp?qy.taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained by student records kept by the faculty member teaching LAS 390.2 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Student Assessment of Computer Skills Program level. and Institutional Research All program staff McGuffee Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 2.75 on this item.0. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2. and Institutional Research Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student used an electronic medium to discuss or complete an assignment. worked on an assignment where they used 3 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM . Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2. and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC added to their ability to write clearly and effectively.

Evaluation.2 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Computer Use Program level. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: LAS 360 Instructor McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 3.Survey Findings for Computer Use Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 2.Student Artifact Findings for Demonstrate Computer Skills needed in a Legal Office Summary of Findings: 93..taskstream.75 on this item.5% of the LAS students received a grade of B or higher in the LAS 360.2 Demonstrate Computer Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Demonstrate Computer Skills needed in a Legal Office Course level. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies majors will achieve a mean score of 2. a computer. Direct .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.3 Using Computers and Technology Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.Law Office Management and Computer Applications class. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Evaluation. Evaluation. Target: At least 75% of the Legal Assistant Studies majors will receive a grade of B or better in the Law Office Management and Computer Applications Course (LAS 360). Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Indirect . and contributed to their ability to use computing and informational technology.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy. and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC led them to report that they have the ability to use computer and information technology. and Institutional Research. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: Substantiating Evidence: 3. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 4 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM .5 or higher on the Office of Planning.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from student records kept by the faculty member teaching LAS 360.

3 Speak Effectively and Clearly Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Speak Effectively Program level.1 Reported use of Oral Communication Measures & Findings Skills Reported Oral Communication Skills Mapped to: Program level.. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 4. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 4. Indirect .. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Evaluation. Evaluation. Indirect .asp?qy.2 Student Satisfaction Findings for Reported Oral Communication Skills Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is obtained from student records kept by the faculty member teaching LAS 471.taskstream. Direct .6 on both of these items. 4. and Institutional Research.Student Artifact Findings for Oral Presentation Summary of Findings: 89.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.Survey Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.Survey Findings for Speak Effectively Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies Details/Description: This survey is administered by the 5 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM . and whether they made a class presentation. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.7% of the LAS students received a grade of C or better on the paper/presentation required in the Legal Ethics and Professionalism class.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Evaluation. Mastery of Oral Communication Skills Outcomes 4. Target: At least 75% of the Legal Assistant Studies students will receive a grade of C or better on the paper/presentation required in the Legal Ethics Course (471). Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.2 Demonstrate Oral Communication Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Oral Presentation Program level. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2.

and Institutional Research All Program Faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: majors had a mean of 2. Office of Planning. Evaluation. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.asp?qy. Evaluation. Evaluation.Survey Findings for Integrating Material from Various Sources Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 3. Indirect .1 Integration of Ideas Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.80 on these items. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 5. Evaluation.20 and 2. and Institutional Research.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.2 Analyzing and Synthesizing Information Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Analyzing and Synthesizing Program level.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.. and Institutional 6 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM .Survey Findings for Analyzing and Synthesizing Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 3. and Institutional Research Program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 5. Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.20 and 2. Evaluation. Mastery of Critical Thinking Skills Outcomes 5.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.taskstream. and Institutional Research. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student integrated ideas or information from various sources and courses.80 on these items. Indirect .5 on this item. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. and during class discussions.. Evaluation. and Institutional Research’s National Survey of Student Engagement which assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC led them to report they can speak clearly and effectively.2 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Integrating Material from Various Sources Program level. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies majors will achieve a mean score of 2. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.

Indirect . Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 7 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM . and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 5. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.4 Reported Ability to Think Critically and Analytical Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Ability to Think Critically Program level. experience or theory and whether they synthesized information into more complex ideas. Evaluation. Evaluation.3 Making Judgements Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Judgement Program level.asp?qy. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student’s experience at UTC added to their ability to think clearly and analytically.. and Institutional Research.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 5. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Evaluation.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.Survey Findings for Ability to Think Critically Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 2. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student analyzed the basic elements of an idea. Indirect . and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether a student made judgements about information and data. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Research..20 on this item.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Survey Findings for Judgement Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 3. Evaluation. and Institutional Research.taskstream. Evaluation. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2. Evaluation.50 on this item.

and Institutional Research McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 6. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses the quality of advising they received at UTC. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This data is taken from the class schedules for the year.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.33 on this item.. Target: 100% of all required courses will be offered at least once a year. Student Retention Outcomes 6. Evaluation. Measurable Outcome 2.Survey Findings for Student Faculty Relationships 8 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM .Survey Findings for Student Assessment of Advising Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 3. Evaluation.4 Retention/Graduation Measures & Findings Course Rotation Plan Program level.3 Quality of Relationship between Students and Faculty Mapped to: Measures & Findings Student Faculty Relationships Program level.Other Findings for Course Rotation Plan Summary of Findings: 100% of all required courses were offered at least once a year. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.5 or higher on the Office of Planning.taskstream.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.5 Student Engagement Measures & Findings Student Assessment of Advising Program level.. and Institutional Research. Evaluation. Indirect .1 Quality Advising Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies students will achieve a mean score of 2.4 Strong Commitment to Program. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 6. Measurable Outcome 4. Evaluation. Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning.2 Scheduling Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.7 Retention & Persistence. Indirect . Direct .

1 Exposure to Diverse People and Perspectives Measures & Findings 9 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM .5 or higher on the Office of Planning.9 Student Satisfaction Measures & Findings Overall Student Satisfaction Program level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 7.4 Strong Commitment to Program. and Institutional Research.0 on this item. Measurable Outcome 2. Indirect .taskstream. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 4. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses students perceptions about the quality of relationships between faculty and students. Student Satisfaction Outcomes 7. Evaluation. Exposure to Diversity Outcomes 8.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.0 on this item. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2. Evaluation. Evaluation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses the entire educational experience.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 2.5 Student Engagement Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.. and Institutional Research.1 Student Satisfaction with Overall Quality Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Students [Teaching & Learning]: Measurable Outcome 3. Evaluation.0 or higher on the Office of Planning.Survey Findings for Overall Student Satisfaction Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 3. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 5..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Evaluation. and Institutional Research All program faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 8. Evaluation.

taskstream. and Institutional Research All Program Faculty McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 8..asp?qy. and Institutional Research. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether they included diverse perspectives in class discussions or writing assignments and had serious conversations with students of a different race/ethnicity. and Institutional Research.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Evaluation. and Institutional Research’s Enrolled Student Survey that assesses whether they had an increased understanding of people from other racial/ethnic backgrounds.3 Integration of Ethical Issues in the Curriculum Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Diversity: Measurable Outcome 1.00 on this item.. McGuffee Supporting Attachments: 8. Evaluation.5 Increased Tolerance Findings for Understanding Other Races/Ethnicity Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 3. Indirect . Evaluation. Target: 100% of graduating majors will take an ethics class in legal assistant studies (LAS471). Mapped to: Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Diversity: Measurable Outcome 1. Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.2 Increased Understanding of Diverse Measures & Findings Groups Understanding Other Races/Ethnicity Mapped to: Institution level. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: Office of Planning. Direct .Survey Strategic Initiative: Partnerships for Diversity: Measurable Outcome 1.5 or higher on the Office of Planning. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Details/Description: The data will be taken from the student records kept by the Coordinator. Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: McGuffee 10 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM . Implementation Plan (timeline): 2008-09 Key/Responsible Personnel: All program faculty. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: This survey is administered by the Office of Planning.Survey Findings for Diversity Experiences in Person or in Class Summary of Findings: The Legal Assistant Studies majors had a mean of 2.Other Findings for Participate in Ethics Class Summary of Findings: 100% of all graduating majors took the ethics (470) course. Evaluation.5 Increased Tolerance Measures & Findings Participate in Ethics Class Course level.60 on both of these items.5 Increased Tolerance Diversity Experiences in Person or in Class Program level. Evaluation.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Indirect . Target: The Legal Assistant Studies program will achieve a mean score of 2.

com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.. Supporting Attachments: Substantiating Evidence: 11 of 11 8/6/2010 12:07 PM ..taskstream.asp?qy.

. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Music Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. passed the final examination. Direct . 310 and 328. 2010 Measures and Findings BM Music Outcomes Recital Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Recital Program level. Target: 80% Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall Key/Responsible Personnel: Conducting faculty Supporting Attachments: 1 of 3 8/6/2010 12:21 PM . Basic Conducting.asp?qy. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue providing conducting lab component in Music Seminar course to provide conducting opportunities for students enrolled in MUS 303. will pass a music reading examination. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students enrolled in MUS 303. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to communicate expectations via studio instructors and Music Student Handbook. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will pass the Division Jury pre-recital hearing. Direct .. August 06.Other Findings for Recital Summary of Findings: 100% of students passed the Division Jury pre-recital hearing. a portion of the final examination for the course. Target: 80% Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall and Spring Key/Responsible Personnel: Division Jury committee Supporting Attachments: Score Reading Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Score Reading Program level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Basic Conducting.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Exam Findings for Score Reading Summary of Findings: All students enrolled in MUS 303.taskstream.

Target: 90% Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall and Spring Key/Responsible Personnel: Applied Music Faculty Supporting Attachments: Master of Music Outcome Set Outcomes 2 of 3 8/6/2010 12:21 PM .Theory Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Theory Proficiency Program level. Direct ..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to monitor jury results.Other Findings for Continuation Standard . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to monitor exam results. Direct . Listening Analysis Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Listening Analysis Program level.Performance Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Continuation Standard . Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will pass a Semester End jury audition to be admitted to 300-level applied study.Performance Program level.Exam Findings for Theory Proficiency Summary of Findings: 90% of students enrolled in MUS 208 passed the Sophomore Theory Proficiency Exam (Comprehensive) on the first attempt.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will pass a Sophomore Theory Proficiency Exam as a pre-requisite to upper level theory and conducting courses. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue with current procedures Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students enrolled in MUS 208. Target: 90% Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring Key/Responsible Personnel: Theory II faculty Supporting Attachments: Continuation Standard .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Theory II.Performance Summary of Findings: 90% of students auditioning for 300-level applied music study passed on their first attempt. which includes a listening portion.asp?qy.taskstream.Exam Findings for Listening Analysis Summary of Findings: 100% of students enrolled in Theory II passed the final exam. Target: 80% Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring Key/Responsible Personnel: Theory II faculty Supporting Attachments: Continuation Standard . will pass the final exam.

will evaluate the candidate's performance on the comprehensive examination and vote "pass" or "fail. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Communicate with graduate students and advisors on specific procedures and expectations for the Comprehensive Examination via consultation and Graduate Music Student Handbook..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. appointed by the Department Head.asp?qy. Preparation for professional life Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Professional Knowledge Program level.taskstream." Target: 80% of graduate students will pass the comprehensive oral and written examination on the first attempt. projects and recitals.. Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: All theses.Other Findings for Publication and Performance Summary of Findings: 100% of graduate students were passed on their theses. Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Graduate Advisory Committee.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : No changes at this time.Exam Findings for Professional Knowledge Summary of Findings: 100% of graduate students passed the comprehensive examination on the first attempt. projects and recitals will be evaluated as "passed" or "not passed." Graduate Advisory Committee and Division Jury will evaluate as appropriate. Target: 100% of graduate students will pass Implementation Plan (timeline): fall and spring Key/Responsible Personnel: Graduate Music faculty Supporting Attachments: 3 of 3 8/6/2010 12:21 PM . Implementation Plan (timeline): fall and spring Key/Responsible Personnel: Graduate music faculty Supporting Attachments: Thesis/project/recital Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Publication and Performance Program level.

. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 1a. Target Achievement: Details/Description: 75% or more of Philosophy and Religion graduates will score above the UTC mean on the Writing Skills index of the College Base Achievement Test. Target: 75% or more success rate. At least 80% of students in PHIL 351 (required of all majors) will prepare an appropriate bibliography for a research paper using book. 1b. Target: 80% success rate for students in PHIL 351 and 90% success rate for students completing their senior theses.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. August 06.Exam Findings for Writing Skills Summary of Findings: No data was available (no majors took this part of the Writing Skills index of the College Base Achievement Test.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Key/Responsible Personnel: Faculty in Department. Direct .2% of students (13 of 16) in PHIL 351 prepared an appropriate bibliography 83. 1 of 2 8/6/2010 12:23 PM . Bibliographies will be judged by members of the student's oral examination committee. and internet sources. Implementation Plan (timeline): Yearly. Learning environment Outcomes Construction of bibliography Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Thesis Bibliography Program level. Direct .asp?qy..taskstream. 2010 Measures and Findings Assets of technology. and internet resources. journal. Supporting Attachments: Development of writing skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Writing Skills Program level. At least 90% of student completing the senior thesis will prepare an appropriate bibliography using book. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Philosophy & Religion Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. journal.3% of students (5 of 6) completing their senior theses prepared an appropriate bibliography Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Continue to emphasize the importance of constructing appropriate bibliographies.Student Artifact Findings for Thesis Bibliography Summary of Findings: 81.

taskstream.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): Yearly Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Head Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : Continue to consult the results of this portion of the test..Exam Findings for Reading and Textual Analysis Skills Summary of Findings: 66.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Work to improve the analytical reading ability of our majors. Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Head Supporting Attachments: 2 of 2 8/6/2010 12:23 PM . Implementation Plan (timeline): Yearly. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: 75% or more of Philosophy and Religion graduates will score above the UTC mean on the Reading Analytically index of the College Base Achievement Test.asp?qy.6% of students (3 of 3 taking the test) scored above the UTC mean on the Reading Analytically index of the College Base Achievement Test.. Target: 75% success rate. Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Development of reading and textual analysis skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Reading and Textual Analysis Skills Program level.

total 10 students tested. 67% overall score Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Senior exit exam mandatory for POLS graduation Target: 100% of the students test in this area. total 21 students tested..asp?qy. 2010 Measures and Findings Political Science & Public Administration Outcome Set Outcomes Outcome 1: American Studies Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings ACAT senior exit exam American Studies Program level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Direct . Score a minimum 50% average overall in proficiency in American Studies section Implementation Plan (timeline): At end of each semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Departmental Secretary Supporting Attachments: Outcome 2: International and Comparative Government Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings International and Comparative Government Direct . Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Details/Description: PACAT Test Administered by Austin Peay State University.Exam Findings for ACAT senior exit exam American Studies Summary of Findings: Exit exam delivered to December 2008 graduates: 100% of students. Target: Will be administered to graduating Political Science majors whose concentration is International and Comparative Studies.Exam Findings for International and Comparative Government Summary of Findings: Students scored in the 58th percentile.taskstream. 73% overall score Exit exam delivered to May 2009 graduates: 100% of students.. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Political Science & Public Administration Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. August 06.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): Will be Administered in the Spring 1 of 2 8/6/2010 12:24 PM .

Identify the reserach hypothesis 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students in POLS 200 read an atricle in a professional journal and show that they are able to 1. Analyze and assess the apporpriateness of the author's conclusions.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Based on evaluation of a random sample of 50% of the papers. Analyze and assess the sampling. Direct . analytical.Portfolio Findings for Communication Skills Summary of Findings: 72% of the random sample deemed "satisfactory" 28% deemed "unsatisfactory" Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Graduates in Political Science shall demonstrate the ability to write a research paper in which they analyze a political topic. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. an appropriate methodology 3. proper use of citations and references Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Target: Students in all 400-level political science courses who are required to write a research paper. Target: Political Science majors are required to take POLS 200: Research Methods. and style 5. Horne's class scored 80% or above Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Graduates in Political Science will be able to critically analyze an article in a professional journal. Fouad Moughrabi Supporting Attachments: 2 of 2 8/6/2010 12:24 PM . and statistical techniques used 3.Exam Findings for Critical Thinking Summary of Findings: 62% of the students in Dr.taskstream.asp?qy.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. using appropriate references and citations.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. at least 50% will demonstrate an ability to satisfy at least four of the following criteria: 1. Key/Responsible Personnel: Departmental Secretary Supporting Attachments: Substantiating Evidence: Outcome 3: Critical Thinking Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Critical Thinking Program level.. Direct . syntax. Christopher Horne Supporting Attachments: Outcome 4: Communication Skills Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Communication Skills Program level. level of organization 4. the author thesis 2. proper grammar.

and indicate at least a moderate agreement that the course is supportive. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success Course level. but also that the professors and lab instructors were supportive.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. yet challenging. Intended Educational Outcome/Objective Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 2. Intended Educational Outcome/Objective Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1. 92% also indicated the course was challenging. At the end of the semester. Success will be achieved if at least 70% of students report being at least somewhat satisfied with the quality of the 202 course and lab. 100% of responding students were at least somewhat satisfied with the quality of the lecture. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success Summary of Findings: At mid-semester. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A supplemental survey of students at the middle and end of the semester will provide data addressing this outcome. 97. In addition. Indirect .1% agreed at least somewhat that the course was challenging overall. Indirect .Survey Findings for 1.. August 06.Survey Findings for 2. while 100% indicated that the professors and lab instructors were supportive.3% of respondents at least somewhat agreed Details/Description: Supplemental survey results will indicate the degree to which students feel PSY 202 has 1 of 2 8/6/2010 12:25 PM . 83. Target: Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments: 2.taskstream. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Psychology: BS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success Course level. and 92% were at least somewhat satisfied with the quality of the lab.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio..4% of students were at least somewhat satisfied with the quality of the lecture and lab. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success Summary of Findings: With respect to critical thinking ability.asp?qy. 2010 Measures and Findings Psychology: BS Outcome Set Outcomes 1. 92. Of respondents.

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

provided them with useful skills and knowledge to be more effective critical thinkers and problem solvers in the real world. Success will be achieved if at least 70% of reports indicate at least moderate agreement with these statements. Target: Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments:

that this course had improved their critical thinking ability. As for problem solving, 80.6% at least somewhat agreed that this course improved their ability to be a real-world problem solver. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

3. Intended Educational Outcome/Objective
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
3. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Course level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for 3. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Summary of Findings: Of respondents, 83.3% at least somewhat agreed that the PSY 202 lab was “especially helpful to the development of [your] psychology research skills.” Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Supplemental survey results will indicate that at least 70% of students find the overall lab experience in PSY 202 to be especially helpful to their development of research skills in psychology. Target: Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments:

2 of 2

8/6/2010 12:25 PM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Psychology: MS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday, August 06, 2010

Measures and Findings

Psychology: MS Outcome Set
Outcomes

1. Intended Educational Outcome/Objective
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
1. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Program level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for 1. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Summary of Findings: Responses to the exit survey from recently graduating students (N = 26) supports this objective as 91.8% of students Agreed or Strongly Agreed that the UTC program curriculum has prepared them to take their next steps in the I-O field. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Results from an exit survey will indicate that a majority of graduating students at least Agree with statements that indicate the curriculum has prepared them for their next steps in the field of I-O. Target: Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments:

2. Intended Educational Outcome/Objective
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
2. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Program level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for 2. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Summary of Findings: Only 5/26 respondents chose to respond to this particular question, but all indicated that the comprehensive exam process was worthwhile and helped them to consolidate their I-O knowledge gained in the UTC program. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Results from an exit survey will show that a majority of graduating students at least Agree with statements suggesting that the comprehensive exam process was worthwhile and helped them to consolidate their knowledge of I-O. Target: Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments:

1 of 2

8/6/2010 12:27 PM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

3. Intended Educational Outcome/Objective
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
3. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Program level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for 3. Means of Assessment and Criteria for Success
Summary of Findings: 96.2% of all respondents Agreed or Strongly Agreed that professors were “very knowledgeable about the topics they teach,” and 88.5% Agreed or Strongly Agreed that professors were “engaging in their presentation of material in class”. Target Achievement: Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Results from a supplemental end of semester teaching evaluation will indicate that at least 70% of students feel their professors are at least Very knowledgeable about the topics they teach and engaging in their presentation of materials within the classroom. Target: Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Supporting Attachments:

2 of 2

8/6/2010 12:27 PM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Theatre & Speech Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday, August 06, 2010

Measures and Findings

Theatre & Speech Outcome Set 07-08
Outcomes

Identify and Use Dramatic Action
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Directed scene
Course level; Direct - Other

Findings for Directed scene
Summary of Findings: 1 Student scored 10/10 2 Students scored 9/10 2 Students scored 8/10 Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. We are currently revising all assessment tools, objectives, and outcomes. Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Through directed scenes presented in demonstration labs. Target: 80% of students will score a 8 out of 10 on "interpretation" and "development of dramatic action" portions of the Dem-Lab. Implementation Plan (timeline): End of year. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Burgess, Gaye Jeffers, Steve Ray, Mac Smotherman Supporting Attachments:

Play Analysis
Course level; Direct - Student Artifact

Findings for Play Analysis
Summary of Findings: 1 Student scored 10/10 1 Student scored 9/10 2 Students scored 8/10 1 Student scored 7/10 Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. We are

Details/Description: Through Play Analysis (Hodge) in preparation for scenes directed for demonstration labs. Target: 80% of students will score a 8 out of 10 on the analysis. Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Gaye Jeffers Supporting Attachments:

1 of 5

8/6/2010 12:28 PM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

currently revising all assessment tools, objectives, and outcomes. Substantiating Evidence:

Understand Characterization
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Directing scenes
Course level; Direct - Other

Findings for Directing scenes
Summary of Findings: 2 Students scored 10/10 1 Student scored 9/10 2 Students scored 8/10 Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. We are currently revising all assessment tools, objectives, and outcomes. Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Through scenes directed for demonstration labs. Target: 80% of students will score 8/10 on the characterization portion of the demonstration lab evaluation. Implementation Plan (timeline): At least once each semester. Key/Responsible Personnel: Gaye Jeffers Supporting Attachments:

Roles Performed in Labs and Productions
Program level; Direct - Other

Findings for Roles Performed in Labs and Productions
Summary of Findings: 1 Student scored 10/10 1 Student scored 9/10 3 Students scored 8/10 Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. We are currently revising all assessment tools, objectives, and outcomes. Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Through Roles performed in demonstration labs and UTC Theatre productions Target: 80% of students with an acting focus will score 8 out of 10 on Jury Critique. Implementation Plan (timeline): Twice each semester. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Burgess, Gaye Jeffers, Steve Ray, Mac Smotherman Supporting Attachments:

Scenic Environment
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Floor Plan
Course level; Direct - Student Artifact

Findings for Floor Plan
Summary of Findings: 4 Students scored 9/10 1 Student scored 7/10 Target Achievement: Met

Details/Description: Compose a floor plan and use scenic environment in directed scenes for demonstration lab. Target: 80% of students will score a 8 out of 10 on the

2 of 5

8/6/2010 12:28 PM

and outcomes.1. Steve Ray.asp?qy. "Scenic Environment" portion of Dem-Lab evaluation. Target: All students will successfully complete student teaching experience. Mac Smotherman Supporting Attachments: Advanced Work Mapped to: USA.Other Findings for Skills and disciplines Summary of Findings: 1 Student scored 10/10 1 Student scored 9/10 1 Student scored 8/10 2 Students scored 7/10 Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Scheduling rehearsals is complicated by the lack of suitable space for students to work. Direct . Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Organization and management of a demonstration lab rehearsal process and/or through service as a crew head and/or stage manager on a UTC Theatre production. Substantiating Evidence: Stage Management Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Skills and disciplines Program level. 1 Student is progressing toward advanced work. Gaye Jeffers. 3 Students show potential. Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: John Burgess.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. We are Details/Description: Through supervised and evaluated student teaching. We are currently revising all assessment tools. Gaye Jeffers. Mac Smotherman Supporting Attachments: 3 of 5 8/6/2010 12:28 PM .Other Findings for Specialized Area Summary of Findings: 1 Student is currently doing advanced work. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals.3. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: John Burgess.. Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. More suitable rehearsal spaces are needed. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.1 Measures & Findings Specialized Area Program level. Steve Ray. and outcomes.taskstream. We are currently revising all assessment tools. Direct . objectives.SACS. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. Target: 80% of students will score a 8 out of 10 on Jury Critique.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. objectives.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: Gaye Jeffers Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. Poor use of time or organization causes students to fall behind and affect others needing the space.

Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Through direction of design of UTC Theatre or public workshop production. Direct . and outcomes. objectives. Direct .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: All students will score an average of 4. We are Details/Description: Through advanced production or performance work juried by THSP faculty Target: 100% of students will score a minimum of 9 out of 10 on 300r and 400r Jury Critiques Implementation Plan (timeline): Twice each semester. Gaye Jeffers. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Through supervised professional internship or international exchange. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Burgess. and outcomes. currently revising all assessment tools.5 out of 5 on questionnaire sent to host program.8 from 4. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. Target: 100% of students will score a minimum of 9 out of 10 on 300r and 400r Jury Critiques Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: John Burgess. objectives.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Steve Ray. Mac Smotherman Supporting Attachments: 4 of 5 8/6/2010 12:28 PM .. We are currently revising all assessment tools.5.Other Findings for Specialized Area Summary of Findings: 1 Student is performing an advanced work in directing during 2009-2010 year. Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : The assessment and findings are based solely upon our Directing class which has in the past been used as a "capstone" class. Implementation Plan (timeline): Upon the completion of an internship or exchange program. Key/Responsible Personnel: John Burgess. a questionnaire along with a stamped envelope will be sent to the host agency for the evaluation of the student. Gaye Jeffers. objectives. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. Gaye Jeffers.asp?qy. 1 Student is progressing toward advanced work in technical theatre. 3 Students show potential for advanced work. Steve Ray. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. The current faculty does not believe this assessment plan is an effective means of assessment for our current objectives and goals. We are currently revising all assessment tools. Both students scored 5/5 Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We should raise our expectations for this outcome. Substantiating Evidence: Specialized Area Program level. Mac Smotherman Supporting Attachments: Specialized Area Program level..taskstream.Other Findings for Specialized Area Summary of Findings: 2 Students completed an internship with two different host institutions. Perhaps raise to 4. and outcomes. Direct . Mac Smotherman Supporting Attachments: Specialized Area Program level.Other Findings for Specialized Area Summary of Findings: All students are have scored 9 or higher. Steve Ray.

.. and outcomes. objectives.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.asp?qy. Substantiating Evidence: 5 of 5 8/6/2010 12:28 PM .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. currently revising all assessment tools.taskstream.

3.9% Meets Expectations: 41.9% 3) Elocution Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Details/Description: Following an in class assignment regarding asset impairment. 2010 Measures and Findings Accountancy: MAcc Outcome Set Outcomes MACC Goal A1: Structured Business Presentation Mapped to: USA.10% Meets Expectations 52.asp?qy. and drawing upon the asset impairment information gathered from their company’s 10K or 10Q.1.3..95% Below Expectations 2.1 Measures & Findings MACC A1: Structured Business Presentation Course level. In a subsequent class.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Assurance of learning standards 5.05% Above Expectations 44. USA.Exam Findings for MACC A1: Structured Business Presentation Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Above Expectations 97. Direct .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 3.2.SACS. Target: Above + Meets Expectation is greater than 85% Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Thomas Gavin Supporting Attachments: 1 of 4 8/6/2010 12:30 PM .1% Above Expectations: 52.1% Below Expectations: 0% 2) Eye Contact Meets + Above Expectations: 94. Financial Accounting Theory and Issues. the students enrolled in 547.AACSB. August 06. will go to Edgar Online or another financial statement database service and identify a company that has had an impairment of long lived assets.1.95% Traits: 1) Visual aids Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 5.2% Below Expectations: 5.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 5.taskstream.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3..1. each student will make an eight to ten minute presentation on the disclosures made in the body of the financial statements as well as in the footnotes. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Accountancy: MAcc Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.9% Meets Expectations: 94.

SACS. the students enrolled in 547. 3. and drawing upon the asset impairment information gathered from their company’s 10K or 10Q. Assurance of learning standards 5. Direct .1.1 Measures & Findings MACC A2:Effective Information Gathering Techniques Course level. Students were asked to develop expected cash flow outcome given cash flows associated with the following operational elements: net 2 of 4 8/6/2010 12:30 PM .6% Meets Expectations 29.65% Above Expectations 89.Exam Findings for MACC C2: Implementing Advanced Laws.taskstream. Regulations.1.1. USA. Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.8% Meets Expectations: 35. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Following an in class assignment regarding asset impairment. Above Expectations: 58.1. and Standards Course level.1% Above Expectations: 58.1 Measures & Findings MACC C2: Implementing Advanced Laws.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 5.3.2% Below Expectations: 0% 4) Mannerisms Meets + Above Expectations: 94.Exam Findings for MACC A2:Effective Information Gathering Techniques Summary of Findings: Meets + Above Expectations 100% Above Expectations 70.. and Standards Summary of Findings: Meets + Above Expectations 92.8% Meets Expectations: 41.7% Meets Expectations 2.AACSB.SACS.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.3% Below Expectations: 5. Financial Accounting Theory and Issues.9% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None needed.2. each student will make an eight to the minute presentation on the disclosures made in the body of the financial statements as well as in the footnotes.1.35% Details/Description: All students enrolled in 547. 3.1.95% Below Expectations 7.3. Regulations.3. Target: Above + Meets Expectation is greater than 85% Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Thomas Gavin Supporting Attachments: MACC Goal C2: Implementing Advanced Laws. Direct . In a subsequent class. will go to Edgar Online or another financial statement database service and identify a company that has had an impairment of long lived assets..AACSB.2. Regulations.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 5. Financial Accounting Theory and Issues. Assurance of learning standards 5. were given a case regarding SFAS 144.3.4% Below Expectations 0% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None needed. USA. and S Mapped to: USA.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.asp?qy.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MACC Goal A2: Effective Information Gathering Techniques Mapped to: USA.

3. they were not experienced with its advanced features. Assurance of learning standards 5.asp?qy. Direct . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: In BACC 589.SACS. the performance standard was high. It is her objective that this Details/Description: Students in BACC 536 Accounting Information Systems. and related discounts rates (to be used as appropriate).3.1.3.AACSB.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.29% Below Expectations 23.1. McCoskey will tell them to analyze this issue more fully in future semesters. over 40% of the students scored below expectations. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Whereas students were able to handle cases using basic Excel skills. she will incorporate Excel 2007 cases into my undergraduate BACC 408 course to target these 4 areas.1. cash flows for the asset in-use and for sale.47% Above Expectations 41. Direct . Summer term 2009. over 60% of the students exceeded expectation.. The fall class analyzed Accounting Fraud at WorldCom and the spring class analyzed Ethics and Competence at New Century Financial Corporation.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.18% Meets Expectations 35. Target: Above + Meets Expectation is greater than 85% Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Thomas Gavin Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None needed. students prepared a case write-up. Marsha Scheidt will endeavor to improve their skills using two approaches.2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. completed 12 cases using Excel 2007. 3.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 5.1.1.1.1 Measures & Findings MACC E2: Knowledge of Advanced Technical Topics Course level.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 5.2.Exam Findings for MACC D1: Consequences of Deviating from Ethically Sound Decision-Making Summary of Findings: Meets + Above Expectations 76. Twenty five students were evaluated. In two of the 4 cases that required advanced skills. Target: Above + Meets Expectation is greater than 85% Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Melanie McCoskey Supporting Attachments: MACC Goal E2: Mapped to: USA. and 96%-100% exceeded expectations. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MACC Goal D1: Consequences of Deviating from Ethically Sound Mapped to: USA. USA.Exam Findings for MACC E2: Knowledge of Advanced Technical Topics Summary of Findings: In the 8 cases that required basic skills. 90%-95% met expectations. Target: Above + Meets Expectation is greater than 85% Implementation Plan (timeline): Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Marsha Scheidt Supporting Attachments: 3 of 4 8/6/2010 12:30 PM . Since these were graduate students who were skilled in Excel.. Assurance of learning standards 5.taskstream.AACSB. related time horizons.SACS. USA. The metric used was the following: less than 90% correct was below expectations.1 Measures & Findings MACC D1: Consequences of Deviating from Ethically Sound Decision-Making Course level.3. She will develop these cases to improve these 4 identified advanced skills. First. which had a general overview and then answer posted questions regarding ethics.53% Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Students didn't really understand how the stakeholders fit into the decision-making process. 3.

Target: Above + Meets Expectation is greater than 85% Implementation Plan (timeline): Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Marsha Scheidt Supporting Attachments: 4 of 4 8/6/2010 12:30 PM . This questionnaire was based on a reading concerning the strategic goals of an organization.asp?qy. she will prepare four short demonstrations using these advanced features.SACS.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.3. Summer term 2009.1. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MACC Goal E3: Accounting in Business Organizations Mapped to: USA.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Twenty five students were evaluated. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students in BACC 536 Accounting Information Systems.taskstream. in BACC 536. and value chain components. completed 10 exam questions about the strategic role of accounting and information in business organizations. 50-75% met expectations.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. On these questions.2. She will prepare a lecture on these topics and present a more in-depth discussion of these topics. needs-based and access based strategic positions.Exam Findings for MACC E3: Understanding Accounting in Business Organizations Summary of Findings: Students were successful in differentiating between structured and unstructured decisions.1. Assurance of learning standards 5.. and over 75% exceeded expectations. USA. On questions involving strategic differentiation they scored below 70%.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 5. The metric used was the following: less than 50% correct was below expectations. Direct .AACSB. She will also endeavor to link these concepts to more concrete examples. knowledge should carry forward to their graduate BACC 536 course.1 Measures & Findings MACC E3: Understanding Accounting in Business Organizations Course level.3. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Students performed poorly on questions involving variety-based. decision scope. students consistently scored over 80%. 3. Second. Hopefully.1.. these short lectures will be a refresher in how to apply these advanced skills.

3.64% 3) Spelling and grammar Meets + Above Expectations: 87.Other Findings for BS A1: Written Communication Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Above Expectations 90.36% Above Expectations: 41. 1.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. The assignment directed the student to compose a message to employees of a company announcing the return to a formal dress code.55% Meets Expectations: 51.1 Measures & Findings BS A1: Written Communication Course level. August 06.39% 2) Language Meets + Above Expectations: 89.1. The students completed the program assessment assignment outside of class. 4. USA.42% Below Expectations 45.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Using a rubric. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Cindy White Supporting Attachments: 1 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM ..asp?qy. logic and organization language spelling and grammar purpose.3.74% Meets Expectations 44.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.68% Above Expectations 9.SACS. the professors evaluated the following four traits of writing. 3. The College of Business used one of the written assignments for the undergraduate degree program assessment.61% Above Expectations: 42.58% Traits: 1) Logic and organization Meets + Above Expectations: 93. 2010 Measures and Findings Business Administration: Undergraduate Outcome Set Outcomes BS Goal A1: Written Communication Mapped to: USA. 2.taskstream.AACSB.. Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%.1. Business Communication.06% Below Expectations: 6. Direct . 3.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1.49% Meets Expectations: 47.87% Below Expectations: 10.1. course requires students to compose several written documents. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Business Administration: Management & Marketing Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.23% Details/Description: The BMGT 310.

Direct . 1.1.1 Measures & Findings BS A2: Business Presentation Skills Course level. As a result. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Cindy White Supporting Attachments: 2 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM . 4.42% is a great improvement.4% met or exceeded expectations. organization visual aids eye contact elocution mannerisms.43% Above Expectations: 42. 3.62% Meets Expectations: 43.87% Below Expectations: 9.56% Meets Expectations: 47.3. Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%. A problem scenario presented a situation where the students made a decision and presented their decision to a board of directors (the BMGT 310 class).SACS. the overall Spring 2009 results of 90. Each student spoke for two to three minutes.Other Findings for BS A2: Business Presentation Skills Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Above Expectations 95% Below Expectations 46% Meets Expectations 49% Above Expectations 5% Traits: 1) Organization Meets + Above Expectations: 94% Above Expectations: 58% Meets Expectations: 36% Below Expectations: 6% 2) Visual aids Meets + Above Expectations: 94% Above Expectations: 53% Meets Expectations: 41% Below Expectations: 6% 3) Eye Contact Meets + Above Expectations: 75% Details/Description: BMGT 310 students. 3.1.AACSB.taskstream. working in teams. Notes : The overall results from Spring 2008 were 77.57% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.3..77% 4) Purpose Meets + Above Expectations: 90.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. participated in a role-playing exercise. Above Expectations: 43. The professors used a rubric to evaluate the following five presentation traits.61% Below Expectations: 12. 5. This role-playing presentation constituted the business presentation assessment.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.asp?qy. USA.1. 2.. Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal A2: Business Presentation Skills Mapped to: USA.

Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. “Thoroughly discuss the legal and ethical issues that arise in this scenario. They are told to complete the following task.37% Meets Expectations 43. Mapped to: USA.26% 2) Identifies the issue of whether it was ethical for Jean Claude to offer business opportunities to the shipper Details/Description: Students in the BACC 335 class are required to read and analyze a case with ethical issues. Trait 4: Identifies the issues regarding whether a donation by a company in exchange for a contract to 3 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM . offer potential solutions where appropriate.Other Findings for BS B Ethics Summary of Findings: Overall Ethics Assessment: Meets + Above Expectations 91. Trait 3: Identifies issues regarding whether it was ethical for the museum to alter its exhibition format to meet the demands of the owner of the pieces or to meet the demands of a donor.07% Below Expectations: 5.23% Above Expectations 47.taskstream.1.” The students are evaluated on each of the following areas and an overall ethics evaluation. In your discussion. Direct .77% Traits: 1) Follows Assignment Instructions Meets + Above Expectations: 94. In the traits. Above Expectations: 33% Meets Expectations: 42% Below Expectations: 25% 4) Elocution Meets + Above Expectations: 91% Above Expectations: 35% Meets Expectations: 56% Below Expectations: 9% 5) Mannerisms Meets + Above Expectations: 74% Above Expectations: 28% Meets Expectations: 46% Below Expectations: 26% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Overall.AACSB. the eye contact and mannerism traits need improvement. USA.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.67% Meets Expectations: 28. no changes are recommended. 3..1.asp?qy.86% Below Expectations 8. Explain your answer completely.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..3.3.1. Trait 1: Follows Assignment Instructions Trait 2: Identifies the issue of whether it was ethical for Jean Claude to offer business opportunities to the shipper and insurer in exchange for donations. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal B: Ability to reason ethically.SACS.74% Above Expectations: 66.1 Measures & Findings BS B Ethics Course level.

09% Meets Expectations: 28.taskstream.02% 7) : Identifies ethical issues related to Jean Claude's suggestions or demands that the museum exhibit his pieces in a certain way for is own personal interest. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Joanie Sompayrac Supporting Attachments: and insurer in exchange for donations.47% Above Expectations: 64. and if so. Meets + Above Expectations: 55.98% Above Expectations: 39.05% Meets Expectations: 28.84% 5) Identifies whether Jane violated her code of ethics and compromised the position of the museum.95% Below Expectations: 50% 4) Identifies the issues regarding whether a donation by a company in exchange for a contract to ship or insure property is really a charitable contribution and whether a "donor" making such a gift can the company claim a tax deduction. ship or insure property is really a charitable contribution and whether a "donor" making such a gift can the company claim a tax deduction.. Trait 7: Identifies ethical issues related to Jean Claude's suggestions or demands that the museum exhibit his pieces in a certain way for is own personal interest.79% Below Expectations: 4. and if so.47% Meets Expectations: 53.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.51% Below Expectations: 7. Meets + Above Expectations: 95..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.08% 4 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM .91% Meets Expectations: 24.26% Above Expectations: 20. Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%. Meets + Above Expectations: 63. Meets + Above Expectations: 50% Above Expectations: 21.asp?qy. Trait 8: Offers viable solutions to ethical problems.18% Meets Expectations: 35.53% 6) Identifies legal and ethical issues that could limit enforceability of the pledges to the Museum against donors in this case.16% Above Expectations: 35. how? Trait 6: Identifies legal and ethical issues that could limit enforceability of the pledges to the Museum against donors in this case.39% 3) Identifies issues regarding whether it was ethical for the museum to alter its exhibition format to meet the demands of the owner of the pieces or to meet the demands of a donor.07% Below Expectations: 36. how? Meets + Above Expectations: 89.61% Above Expectations: 79. Trait 5: Identifies whether Jane violated her code of ethics and compromised the position of the museum.82% Meets Expectations: 15.56% Below Expectations: 10. Meets + Above Expectations: 92.

1% Above Expectations: 49.3% Meets Expectations: 31. The entire simulation revolves around critical thinking. critical-thinking ability. Direct .Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1.3. USA.1.75% Below Expectations: 20.Exam Findings for BS D: Use of Information Technology Summary of Findings: The BMGT 100 Computers in Business Course was being redesigned to an online course during the spring of 2009. Students are asked to take on the role of CEO of a sneaker manufacturing company. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal C: Analytical.1.18% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Overall. Details/Description: Students gain an information technology proficiency in BMGT 100. Direct . 3.1.taskstream. Students are scored on how well they meet their investor’s expectations and on how they fare based on “best-in-industry.1.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.74% 8) Offers viable solutions to ethical problems Meets + Above Expectations: 79. no changes are recommended.SACS.3.SACS.AACSB.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.. Computers in Business.Other Findings for BS C: Critical Thinking Summary of Findings: Overall: Above + Meets Expectations: 81. Target Achievement: Recommendations : We are developing a new assessment for the new course. students in BMGT 100 take a test consisting of a number of tasks. understand their competition. BMGT 100 focuses on four areas of Microsoft Office: Word.asp?qy. Traits 3 and 4 need improvement.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. and make decisions that will move them forward in an international marketplace. In each of these areas. Excel. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : No changes are recommended. Below Expectations: 44.82% Above Expectations: 28. USA.. Mapped to: USA.1 Measures & Findings BS D: Use of Information Technology Course level. Students must be able to analyze their own company.8% Below Expectations: 18.AACSB.” The scoring is a 50%-50% weighting. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal D: Use of Information Technology Mapped to: USA.3. They compete against their colleagues. 3.3.07% Meets Expectations: 51. PowerPoint.1. Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%.9% Details/Description: A major component of BMGT 440 is the Business Strategy Game simulation.1. Consequently. no assessment was conducted. and Access.1 Measures & Findings BS C: Critical Thinking Course level. For the College of Business assessment of UG Objective 5 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM .Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.

8% Above Expectations: 42.1.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Jennifer Stanley Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : More emphasis on diversity needs to be included in the curriculum.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.1. Excel.3. USA. Please define diversity and explain these advantages.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. D. 3. managers have become more dedicated to seeking a diverse set of employees because they realize there are distinct advantages to doing so. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal E2: Stages of Group Development Mapped to: USA.AACSB. or any other group of employees.4% Meets Expectations: 29.1 Measures & Findings BS E1: Diversity Course level. USA.asp?qy. the coordinator will embed a series of tasks into each test in all sections. and Access. The tasks are computerized and the coordinator will have the data from all sections.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.SACS.3. Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%. PowerPoint.2% Details/Description: A free-form essay was be included at the end of the exam. Word 6 tasks Excel 8 tasks PowerPoint 6 tasks Access 6 tasks The rubric gives the student assessment scores for each test.. The question for the exam was “When building a department.Comprehensive Standards (Section Measures & Findings BS E2: Stages of Group Development Course level. 6 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM .1. Direct .4% Below Expectations: 28.SACS.” Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%. team.1.Exam Findings for BS E1: Diversity Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Above Expectations: 71.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.taskstream.. Direct .Exam Findings for BS E2: Stages of Group Development Summary of Findings: Details/Description: Six questions on group/team development were embedded into the final exam. and the following pages describe the assessments for Word. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Luis Leon and Tony Parsley Supporting Attachments: Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal E1: Diversity Mapped to: USA.AACSB. The number of embedded tasks for each test is below.

4% Meets Expectations: 44. the students were required to gain an understanding of the game’s industry by conducting an Industry Analysis.23.1 Measures & Findings BS E3: Group Collaboration Course level.9% correct Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. Working in the teams.3.asp?qy.73. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Jennifer Stanley Supporting Attachments: Overall: Meets + Above Expectations: 90.04% Meets Expectations 8.0% correct Q4 .Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.21% Above Expectations 0.16% Below Expectations: 0.47% Below Expectations: 0. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal E3: Group Collaboration Mapped to: USA.78% Meets Expectations: 4.75% Traits: 1) Attendance Meets + Above Expectations: 99.79. 3.Other Findings for BS E3: Group Collaboration Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Above Expectations 99.75% 3) Enthusiasm and commitment Details/Description: Students in BMGT 440 participated in teams and competed in a business simulation game.3% Above Expectations: 45. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: 7 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM . and strategic groups. Every member of the team rated each student on five group collaboration traits.3. The five traits are below.7% correct Q3 .9% Below Expectations: 9.. industry shocks. USA.SACS.7% Question Results: Q1 .AACSB.25% Below Expectations 91.1 Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. 3): 3.1.3.3. The teams presented the Industry Analysis to the class.25% Above Expectations: 94.80. industry trends.taskstream. 3. Direct .09% Meets Expectations: 17.. group collaboration.8% correct Q5 .1.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.1.1% correct Q6 . They analyzed economic factors.3% correct Q2 . The teammates evaluated each of the other team members on the student’s contribution to the Industry Presentation and Industry Analysis.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.77.80. The College used the teammate evaluation of each team member for the assessment of objective E3.1. Attendance Preparation for meetings Enthusiasm and commitment Teamwork and cooperativeness Carried fair share of work load Target: Meets + expectations are equal to or greater than 80%.25% Above Expectations: 82.1.75% 2) Preparation for Meetings Meets + Above Expectations: 99.

and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley.asp?qy. 65th percentile for Summer 2009.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. Direct .1.Exam Findings for BS F1: Accounting Summary of Findings: 65th percentile for Summer 2009.54% Below Expectations: 0.1 Measures & Findings BS F1: Accounting Course level. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade.75% 4) Teamwork and cooperativeness Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 91.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Spring 2009. Meets + Above Expectations: 99.82% Meets Expectations: 13.AACSB.25% Above Expectations: 56.75% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to improve the consistency of student results. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F. The scores.79% Meets Expectations: 8.43% Below Expectations: 0..SACS.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal F1: Accounting Mapped to: USA.3. compared to national test scores.3. Notes : Overall students improved over their Spring 2008 scores. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions. ranked COB students. 8 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM .21% Below Expectations: 0% 5) Carried fair share of work load Meets + Above Expectations: 99. 3.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.25% Above Expectations: 85. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.71% Meets Expectations: 42.1.1. USA. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F. 40th percentile for Spring 2009. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam..

75th percentile for Summer 2009. 55th percentile for Spring 2009. ranked COB students. The scores. 3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to improve the consistency of student results.3.3. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F. Charles Ragland. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F.3. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: BS Goal F3: Management Mapped to: USA.1.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: BS Goal F2: Economics Mapped to: USA. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions.1.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. compared to national test scores. Direct . USA.1 Measures & Findings BS F2: Economics Course level.. USA.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: 9 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM .3. 3. The scores.1 Measures & Findings BS F3: Management Course level. 60th percentile for Spring 2009. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade.1. ranked COB students. compared to national test scores. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F.1.asp?qy. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley.Exam Findings for BS F3: Management Summary of Findings: 60th percentile for Fall 2008. 20th percentile for Summer 2009.AACSB.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. Spring 2009.1. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley. Direct .1. Spring 2009. Charles Ragland.AACSB.taskstream. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam.SACS. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.SACS. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade.Exam Findings for BS F2: Economics Summary of Findings: 50th percentile for Fall 2008. Charles Ragland.

Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions. 3. ranked COB students.1.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.1 Measures & Findings BS F5: Information Systems Course level. 15th percentile for Summer 2009. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley.1 Measures & Findings BS F4: Quantitative Business Analysis Course level. 50th percentile for Spring 2009.3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to improve the consistency of student results. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: BS Goal F5: Information systems Mapped to: USA. Direct . Measures & Findings BS F6: Finance Course level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: BS Goal F6: Finance Mapped to: USA.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. compared to national test scores. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions. compared to national test scores. 60th percentile for Summer 2009.SACS.1.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.AACSB. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.3. Direct . The scores. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade..asp?qy.1. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F. USA.AACSB.Exam Findings for BS F5: Information Systems Summary of Findings: 50th percentile for Fall 2008. Charles Ragland. 3.Exam Findings for BS F4: Quantitative Business Analysis Summary of Findings: 45th percentile for Fall 2008.taskstream.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Charles Ragland.SACS. BS Goal F4: Quantitative business analysis Mapped to: USA. ranked COB students. USA. Spring 2009. Direct . Spring 2009. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam. 45th percentile for Spring 2009. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley. The scores.1.1. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade.AACSB.3.1.Exam Findings for BS F6: Finance 10 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM .3.1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to improve the consistency of student results. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F.

USA.3.1 Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F.SACS.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. Charles Ragland. ranked COB students.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. 70th percentile for Spring 2009.AACSB. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade. ranked COB students.1. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F. 3. 70th percentile for Summer 2009. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: 60th percentile for Fall 2008.1.3. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F. 11 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM . Direct . Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam. 80th percentile for Summer 2009. The scores. Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions. Spring 2009.1..taskstream.3.1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.1 Measures & Findings BS F8: Legal Issues Course level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to improve the consistency of student results. The scores. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions.SACS. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley. USA.Exam Findings for BS F7: Marketing Summary of Findings: 40th percentile for Fall 2008.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. USA.3.1 Measures & Findings BS F7: Marketing Course level. compared to national test scores.1. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam. compared to national test scores. 3.1. 40th percentile for Spring 2009.3. Direct .3. Charles Ragland. 40th percentile for Spring 2009. 60th percentile for Summer 2009.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.SACS. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal F7: Marketing Mapped to: USA. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Spring 2009. 3. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley.1.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.AACSB.Exam Findings for BS F8: Legal Issues Summary of Findings: 70th percentile for Fall 2008. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: BS Goal F8: Legal issues Mapped to: USA.asp?qy.1.

Spring 2009. The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F.. 55th percentile for Summer 2009.1 Measures & Findings BS F9: International Issues Course level. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley. compared to national test scores.Standards: Assurance of Learning Standards 1. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to improve the consistency of student results.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008. Charles Ragland.Exam Findings for BS F9: International Issues Summary of Findings: 50th percentile for Fall 2008. compared to national test scores.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. ranked COB students. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to improve the consistency of student results. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade. Spring 2009. The test consisted of 120 multiple-choice questions.3.taskstream. and Bob Koplowski Supporting Attachments: 12 of 12 8/6/2010 12:58 PM . The scores. The scores. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: BS Goal F9: International issues Mapped to: USA.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley.1. USA. The test was a permanent part of all BMGT 440 classes with a weight of ten percent of the student’s grade. ranked COB students. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008. 45th percentile for Spring 2009.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Charles Ragland. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam.1. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Major Field Test (MFT) in Business assessed all nine objectives of UG Goal F. 3.3. Direct . The College utilized the MFT in Business to assess the objectives of UG Goal F.1.AACSB..SACS.

Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. The College of Business will use this evaluation for program assessment of MBA Objective A1.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Management Skills. Direct .33% Below Expectations: 0% Traits: 1) Attendance Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 100% Meets Expectations: 0% Below Expectations: 0% 2) Participation Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 97.SACS..taskstream. 2010 Measures and Findings Business Administration: MBA Outcome Set Outcomes MBA Goal A1: Group Collaboration Mapped to: USA. August 06. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Business Administration: MBA Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.1. work in teams to develop their management skills. participation. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Rich Allen Supporting Attachments: 1 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .67% Meets Expectations: 2. The evaluation form and rubric for the COB assessment follow.3.AACSB. The team members also rate each other’s contribution to the team effort in terms of attendance.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.3. and interpersonal behavior.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. group collaboration. For the final exam. effort.. USA.asp?qy.Other Findings for MBA A1: Group Collaboration Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 97. management scenario and then video tape themselves applying the management skills learned in BMGT 584.1 Measures & Findings MBA A1: Group Collaboration Course level. 3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. work quality.67% Meets Expectations: 2.2.1. each team completes a semester project in which they develop their own realistic.33% Below Expectations: 0% 3) Effort Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Details/Description: Students in BMGT 584.

67% Meets Expectations: 2. The students plan their resistance strategy and are assessed on nine areas.3. USA.Other Findings for MBA A2: Leadership Summary of Findings: ACTING ASSERTIVELY OVERALL: Meets + Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 68% Meets Expectations: 32% Below Expectations: 0% Traits: 1) Explain the adverse effects of compliance on performance. 3. The effectiveness of the resistance is evaluated by the third member of the group. Meets + Above Expectations: 92% Above Expectations: 72% Details/Description: Students work in small groups (usually three) on role-playing in order to develop experience in critical management skills.taskstream. Acting assertively .1.AACSB. Two of the students in the group play the roles. while the third student evaluates the appropriate behavior. This exercise places the student in a situation where they must give advice to a subordinate in order to improve the subordinate’s performance.Sometimes individuals attempt to increase their power over other individuals by exercising inappropriate influence. Each student receives feedback on how she or he applied at least one of the four skills listed below during a role-play skill practice to a realistic management scenario.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. The student 2 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .35% Meets Expectations: 4. This role playing exercise places the student in the role of the person needing to resist the influence. Communicating supportively .Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.1 Measures & Findings MBA A2: Leadership Course level.asp?qy. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal A2: Leadership Mapped to: USA.33% Below Expectations: 0% 5) Interpersonal behavior Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 95. Meets + Above Expectations: 88% Above Expectations: 40% Meets Expectations: 48% Below Expectations: 12% 2) Defend your personal rights.SACS..Effective one-on-one coaching and counseling are important skills for leaders.2.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.3.33% Below Expectations: 0% 4) Work Quality Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 97. The description and rating guidelines for each of the four skills follow.65% Below Expectations: 0% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. Above Expectations: 97..1.67% Meets Expectations: 2. Direct .

asp?qy. Meets + Above Expectations: 96% Above Expectations: 68% Meets Expectations: 28% Below Expectations: 4% 6) Refuse to bargain. This role-playing exercise requires a manager to motivate an employee to change an inappropriate behavior into an appropriate behavior.taskstream. Meets + Above Expectations: 76% Above Expectations: 52% Meets Expectations: 24% Below Expectations: 24% 5) Confront the manipulator. In this managing conflict role-playing exercise.. the responder and the initiator are assessed by the observer resulting in two separate assessments. The observer assesses the responder on six guidelines and assesses the initiator on seven guidelines Motivating others – The ability to motivate people is a vital leadership skill for managers.. Meets + Above Expectations: 96% Above Expectations: 76% Meets Expectations: 20% Below Expectations: 4% 3 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM . Meets Above Meets Below + Above Expectations: 88% Expectations: 72% Expectations: 16% Expectations: 12% 9) Explain the adverse effects of compliance on performance. Managing conflict – An essential leadership behavior is the ability to manage conflict.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Meets + Above Expectations: 96% Above Expectations: 56% Meets Expectations: 40% Below Expectations: 4% 7) Use countervailing power to shift dependence to interdependence. The observer assesses the manager on the eight guidelines.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. counseling another role-player is assessed by the third member of the group on ten behaviors for effective supportive communication. Meets + Above Expectations: 84% Above Expectations: 44% Meets Expectations: 40% Below Expectations: 16% 8) Confront the exploiting individual directly. Meets + Above Expectations: 96% Above Expectations: 76% Meets Expectations: 20% Below Expectations: 4% 4) Examine the intent of any gift or favor. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Rich Allen Supporting Attachments: Meets Expectations: 20% Below Expectations: 8% 3) Firmly refuse to comply.

8% 5) Use validating statements. Meets + Above Expectations: 88.2% Above Expectations: 47..8% 4) Use problem-oriented. Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 76.3% Above Expectations: 52.2% Above Expectations: 64.5% Below Expectations: 0% 3) Use descriptive.5% Below Expectations: 11.1% Meets Expectations: 47.5% Meets Expectations: 23. not global statements.1% Below Expectations: 0% Traits: 1) Differentiate between coaching and counseling.7% 4 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .8% 6) Use specific.4% Below Expectations: 17.9% 2) Communicate congruently.9% Meets Expectations: 29.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.3% Expectations: 5. Meets + Above Expectations: 88.1% Expectations: 58. COMMUNICATING SUPPORTIVELY OVERALL: Meets + Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 52. Meets + Above Expectations: 94. not person-oriented statements.1% Below Expectations: 5. Meets Above Meets Below + Above Expectations: 94.7% Meets Expectations: 23. Meets + Above Expectations: 82.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.5% Below Expectations: 11.taskstream.8% Expectations: 35. not evaluative statements.7% Meets Expectations: 23.9% Meets Expectations: 47.asp?qy.2% Above Expectations: 64..

Meets + Above Expectations: 94.7% Meets Expectations: 17.4% Below Expectations: 14. Meets + Above Expectations: 78.8% Meets Expectations: 41.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.3% Traits: 1) Establish a climate for joint problem solving.5% Below Expectations: 17.4% Below Expectations: 0% 2) Seek additional information.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.6% Below Expectations: 17.3% Above Expectations: 58.3% Above Expectations: 64.6% Meets Expectations: 21.4% 5 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM . 7) Use conjunctive.7% MANAGING CONFLICT (RESPONDER) OVERALL: Meets + Expectations: 85.7% Above Expectations: 64.asp?qy. Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 58. Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 78..9% 10) Implement Personal Management Interviews Meets + Above Expectations: 82. Meets + Above Expectations: 82.1% Above Expectations: 64.2% Meets Expectations: 21. not disjunctive statements.6% Above Expectations: 57.4% Below Expectations: 5.2% Below Expectations: 0% 8) Own your statements.8% Meets Expectations: 23.3% Meets Expectations: 21.7% 9) Use supportive listening and appropriate responses to insure 2 way conversation..7% Meets Expectations: 29.

1% 4) Ask for suggestions of acceptable alternatives.4% Expectations: 14.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.4% 3) Agree with some aspect of the complaint..1% Meets Expectations: 42.25% Below Expectations: 0% Traits: Details/Description: The assessment for the writing objective was an in-class assessment. the professor assessed the students and gave an overall writing score and scores on the following four writing traits.SACS.3% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. Meets + Above Expectations: 85. “What was the toughest ethical decision you have faced? How did you handle it and why? What did you learn?” Using the three-point scale.3% Meets Expectations: 21.Other Findings for MBA B1: Written Communication Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 93.taskstream.1. The students responded in writing to the following questions. USA.3% Meets Expectations: 28.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Writing Traits Ideas and content Organization 6 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .75% Meets Expectations: 6.1.3.9% Above Expectations: 64.6% Below Expectations: 7.AACSB.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4..7% Above Expectations: 64. 3.2. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal B1: Written Communication Mapped to: USA. Direct . Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 57.1 Measures & Findings MBA B1: Written Communication Course level.3% 5) Create an action plan.9% Below Expectations: 0% 6) Schedule follow-up Meets Above Meets Below + Above Expectations: 85.3.4% Below Expectations: 14. Meets + Above Expectations: 92.asp?qy. Below Expectations: 21.3% Expectations: 14.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.7% Expectations: 71.

3.1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Bev Brockman Supporting Attachments: 1) Ideas and content Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 81. the course professor recommended separating two areas into different traits.75% Below Expectations: 0% 3) Language and voice Meets + Above Expectations: 93.59% Below Expectations: 5.66% Traits: 1) Organization Meets + Above Expectations: 92.. Notes : The language (grammar) and voice (tense) trait had 28 percent of the students scoring below expectations.25% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended.Other Findings for MBA B2: Business Presentation Skills Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 94. Each student was required to participate in the presentation and spoke for a minimum of four minutes. Direct .1 Measures & Findings MBA B2: Business Presentation Skills Course level. Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal B2: Business Presentation Skills Mapped to: USA. student teams completed a marketing audit of a company. The audit was a written document.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.75% Details/Description: As part of the BMKT 586 courses.45% Above Expectations: 20.34% Above Expectations: 20. To evaluate these traits better.3.25% Meets Expectations: 18. The marketing audit reviewed the current marketing practices of a company.75% Above Expectations: 25% Meets Expectations: 68. 3. but the team also presented the results of the audit to the class.75% Meets Expectations: 73. Language and voice Presentation Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%.SACS.75% Below Expectations: 0% 2) Organization Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 81.1.AACSB.75% Below Expectations: 6.asp?qy. MBA program assessment of each student’s business presentation skills used the marketing audit presentation. The students received an overall assessment of their skills and an assessment on each of the following five traits. USA.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. The AOL Committee agreed and approved the action.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.taskstream.25% Meets Expectations: 18. Organization Visual aids 7 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM ..

95% Below Expectations: 28. and F7. 3.1. 85th percentile in Spring 2009.11% Above Expectations: 30.89% 5) Mannerisms Meets + Above Expectations: 75. no changes are recommended.98% Meets Expectations: 58.55% 2) Visual aids Meets + Above Expectations: 77.75% Meets Expectations: 50.AACSB.36% Above Expectations: 9. The test consisted of 124 multiple-choice questions with half of the questions based on short cases.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4. eye contact and mannerism traits need improvement. F3.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.92% Below Expectations: 1. F1.49% Below Expectations: 24.taskstream. 80th percentile in Summer 2009.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.1 Measures & Findings MBA C: Integration Course level.64% 3) Eye contact Meets + Above Expectations: 71. USA. Eye contact Elocution Mannerisms Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. The scores. The ETS MBA Test gave a score for each area.47% Above Expectations: 16.44% Meets Expectations: 67.53% Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Overall.7% Below Expectations: 7. Direct ..2.SACS.92% Below Expectations: 22. In the traits..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Jim Henley Supporting Attachments: Meets Expectations: 71.3.1. 8 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .19% Meets Expectations: 67.3% 4) Elocution Meets + Above Expectations: 98. ranked COB students. F6.asp?qy. Details/Description: The College assessed MBA Objectives C.7% Above Expectations: 20. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. with the Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) MBA Test.Exam Findings for MBA C: Integration Summary of Findings: 90th percentile in Fall 2008.3. compared to national MBA Test scores. the visual aids. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal C: Integration Mapped to: USA.

Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A large part of BUSA 587 is dedicated to the Marketplace Simulation.2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.AACSB. Spring 2009.asp?qy.Other Findings for MBA E: Ethics Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 95% Above Expectations: 15% Meets Expectations: 80% Below Expectations: 5% Traits: 1) Identification of ethical issues.taskstream.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.1. USA. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4. For Objective C students will be assessed on their total score of AOLA Sections II through VI. Causey et al.2.3. Dist.1. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal D: Critical Thinking Mapped to: USA. 2005 U. 2d 368 (SDNY 2004). teams need to purchase market research.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. 3.SACS. The AOLA looks at individual functional areas as well as analysis skills and critical thinking. Meets + Above Expectations: 90% Above Expectations: 35% Details/Description: Students will read and compare the two court decisions in United States v.AACSB. analyze the information. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: MBA Goal E: Ethics Mapped to: USA. USA. 305 F. Each quarter.3.1.1. Martha Stewart. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam.3.3. Supp.S.SACS. The students will make quarterly decisions to bring their company from startup to full stage production.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Brian Finley Supporting Attachments: 9 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM ..Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.Other Findings for MBA D: Critical Thinking Summary of Findings: Meets + Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 7% Meets Expectations: 93% Below Expectations: 0% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended.1 Measures & Findings MBA D: Critical Thinking Course level. The students were rated on five traits and the overall objective.1 Measures & Findings MBA E: Ethics Course level. The Marketplace Simulation has a built in Assurance of Learning Assessment (AOLA) that students take individually. and make a set of decisions to move the company forward. Direct . 3. Lexis 39619 and United States v.. Direct .

ranked COB students.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4. Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 20% Meets Expectations: 80% Below Expectations: 0% 3) Identification of alternative courses of action. F6.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Meets + Above Expectations: 75% Above Expectations: 5% Meets Expectations: 70% Below Expectations: 25% 5) Consideration of the impact of unethical behavior on an organization.1. Meets Expectations: 55% Below Expectations: 10% 2) Identification of leagl issues.SACS. 10 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM . 3. 85th percentile in Spring 2009. F3.taskstream.asp?qy. Direct .. The test consisted of 124 multiple-choice questions with half of the questions based on short cases. no changes are recommended.AACSB.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Target Achievement: Exceeded Details/Description: The College assessed MBA Objectives C. F1. Meets + Above Expectations: 85% Above Expectations: 10% Meets Expectations: 75% Below Expectations: 15% 4) Consideration of stakeholders and analysis of alternative actions. 85th percentile in Summer 2009. The ETS MBA Test gave a score for each area. Meets + Above Expectations: 85% Above Expectations: 0% Meets Expectations: 85% Below Expectations: 15% Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Overall.3. and F7.2.Exam Findings for MBA F1: Accounting Summary of Findings: 80th percentile in Fall 2008. USA.3. with the Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) MBA Test. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal F1: Accounting Mapped to: USA..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Trait 4 needs improvement. compared to national MBA Test scores. The scores.1.1 Measures & Findings MBA F1: Accounting Course level.

95..4% correct Q5 .5% correct Q7 .88.6% correct Q14. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal F2: Economics Mapped to: USA.5% correct Q19. The assessment consists of 22 questions covering economics.5% correct Q11.SACS..96.0% correct Q17.67.3.asp?qy.75.1.88.3% Meets Expectations: 19.2. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Spring 2009.2% correct Q4 .8% correct Q10. the assessment of economics knowledge for MBA students takes place in these classes.93.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.65.88.85.9% correct Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Economics scores need to be monitored and improved. USA.1% correct Q9 .Exam Findings for MBA F2: Economics Summary of Findings: Meets + Above Expectations: 64% Above Expectations: 44.59. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : No changes are recommended.2% correct Q16.1% correct Q22.AACSB.7% correct Q6 . Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Mike Long Supporting Attachments: MBA Goal F3: Management Mapped to: Measures & Findings 11 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Economics is a prerequisite for the above finance and marketing courses.6% correct Q18.75.83. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam.88. Consequently.85.4% correct Q3 .3.1.95.88. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.7% Below Expectations: 36% Questions: Q1 .77.0% correct Q12.2% correct Q20.1 Measures & Findings MBA F2: Economics Course level.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Direct .80.78.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.taskstream.63. 3.7% correct Q8 .5% correct Q15.73.3% correct Q21.4% correct Q13.5% correct Q2 .

taskstream. USA.3. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%.1. and F7.2% 3) Statistical inference.7% Above Expectations: 45.Exam Findings for MBA F4: Business Statistics Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 72. The test consisted of 124 multiple-choice questions with half of the questions based on short cases. 3. Meets + Above Expectations: 81.. Meets + Above Expectations: 63. USA.7% Above Expectations: 45.1. specially-designed weekly assignments that thoroughly covered the above topics and measured the mastery of the topics. F6. 2. 3.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.3. with the Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) MBA Test. ranked COB students.AACSB.Exam Findings for MBA F3: Management Summary of Findings: 85th percentile for Fall 2008. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008.1. F1.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. USA.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4. 3.4% Meets Expectations: 27.2. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The College assessed MBA Objectives C. Direct . Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended.3.SACS.1 Measures & Findings MBA F4: Business Statistics Course level. Descriptive statistics Probability Statistical inference Regression and correlation Students took course-embedded. Spring 2009.2% Below Expectations: 36.3% Traits: 1) Descriptive statistics. F3. 4.3% Details/Description: Four major areas of statistics are covered in the course.6% Above Expectations: 45.8% Above Expectations: 54. Direct .4% Meets Expectations: 18. The scores. Meets + Above Expectations: 72..3. They are: 1.1. 80th percentile for Spring 2009.SACS.5% Meets Expectations: 27.3% Below Expectations: 27.1 MBA F3: Management Course level.4% 2) Probability.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. compared to national MBA Test scores. The ETS MBA Test gave a score for each area.3% Below Expectations: 18. and Summer 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: MBA Goal F4: Business Statistics Mapped to: USA.2.AACSB.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 90th percentile for Summer 2009.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Mo Ahmadi Supporting Attachments: 12 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .4% Meets Expectations: 27.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.

7% Meets Expectations: 18.8% Expectations: 45. during the fall 2008 semester. Meets Above Meets Below + Above Expectations: 81. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Meets + Above Expectations: 65.15: Meets Expectations 2 16 – 18: Above Expectations 3 Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. Direct .SACS.2.1. The following scales will be used to grade the students’ assessments.3% Above Expectations: 34.4% Above Expectations: 25% Meets Expectations: 36. 3.2% Below Expectations: 47. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal F4: Management Science Mapped to: USA.4% Below Expectations: 38.1% Details/Description: Dr.1.taskstream. Meets + Above Expectations: 84.1% Above Expectations: 77. USA. The questions will be embedded into the courses’ regular tests.1 Measures & Findings MBA F4: Management Science Course level.4% Expectations: 18. Test Performance on the Exam Questions Less than 80% Below Expectations 1 pt.9% 3) Statistical process control.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.3% Meets Expectations: 6.2% Below Expectations: 34..4% Expectations: 36.2% Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Statistics scores need to be monitored and improved. Project management Monte Carlo simulation Statistical process control Acceptance sampling Forecasting Inventory control Each student in BMGT 583 will answer at least one assessment question on each of the six areas of management science.3.1% Meets Expectations: 18. Parthasarati Dileepan Supporting Attachments: 13 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .3% 4) Regression and correlation. Program and Operations Management. Above 90% Above Expectations 3 pts..6% Traits: 1) Project management.7% 2) Monte Carlo simulation. 80% to 90% Meets Expectations 2 pts. Meets + Above Expectations: 52. Trait Assessment Score 11 or less: Below Expectations 1 12 .3.asp?qy.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4. The assessment covers six areas of management science.9% Above Expectations: 47. Below Expectations: 27.AACSB. Parthasarati Dileepan will administer the management science assessment in BMGT 583.Exam Findings for MBA F4: Management Science Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 61.8% Below Expectations: 15.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.

one problem. Meets + Above Expectations: 50% Above Expectations: 45.5% Meets Expectations: 4.2.8% Below Expectations: 40. Meets + Above Expectations: 59. 4) Acceptance sampling.7% Above Expectations: 40. The measures covered three learning outcomes and involved three questions. 3.1% Above Expectations: 52.1.4% Below Expectations: 0% Details/Description: For the MBA program assessment of MIS.3% 5) Forecasting.6% Meets Expectations: 24..AACSB.1% Above Expectations: 80..9% Meets Expectations: 6.5% Meets Expectations: 14.9% 6) Inventory control. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Beni Asllani Supporting Attachments: 14 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .taskstream.SACS. embedded measures.3.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. An overview of the learning outcomes.8% Below Expectations: 52. and scoring scale is included in the following tab.asp?qy. Meets + Above Expectations: 100% Above Expectations: 75.9% Traits: 1) Describe five major components of information systems.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Beni Asllani embedded information systems measures into the midterm and final exams of BMGT 581.Exam Findings for MBA F5: Information Systems Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 95.1. Meets + Above Expectations: 47.6% Below Expectations: 4. Management of Information Systems.1 Measures & Findings MBA F5: Information Systems Course level. USA.3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal F5: Information Systems Mapped to: USA.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.3% Meets Expectations: 6. Direct . and one essay.5% Below Expectations: 50% Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Management science scores need to be monitored and improved.

2) Develop a simple information system application which accurately represents business requirements..1.1 Measures & Findings MBA F6: Finance Course level. Direct .3. Meets + Above Expectations: 90. 85th percentile for Summer 2009.3.1. Meets + Above Expectations: 92. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. The test consisted of 124 multiple-choice questions with half of the questions 15 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .1% Meets Expectations: 36.1.AACSB. F3. ranked COB students. 3. 3. 80th percentile for Spring 2009.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or abobe on the ETS exam. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal F6: Finance Mapped to: USA.2. with the Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) MBA Test.8% 3) Understand how information technology is used for business process redesign and for competitive advantage. 80th percentile for Spring 2009.. F6. and F7.3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Exam Findings for MBA F6: Finance Summary of Findings: 90th percentile for Fall 2008. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: MBA Goal F7: Marketing Mapped to: USA. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The College assessed MBA Objectives C. F3. The scores. F1. The ETS MBA Test gave a score for each area.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. USA. USA.6% Below Expectations: 7. compared to national MBA Test scores.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. and F7.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3.2% Meets Expectations: 0% Below Expectations: 9. The ETS MBA Test gave a score for each area.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.2.SACS.SACS. 85th percentile for Summer 2009.taskstream.asp?qy. F6.AACSB.Exam Findings for MBA F7: Marketing Summary of Findings: 85th percentile for Fall 2008. with the Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) MBA Test.3. F1. Details/Description: The College assessed MBA Objectives C.2% Above Expectations: 90.3% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended. The test consisted of 124 multiple-choice questions with half of the questions based on short cases.1.1 Measures & Findings MBA F7: Marketing Course level.7% Above Expectations: 56.

Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal F8: Legal Issues Mapped to: USA. Strategic 16 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM . ranked COB students.1 Measures & Findings MBA F8: Legal Issues Course level. USA.asp?qy.Comprehensive Standards (Section Measures & Findings MBA F9: International Assessment Course level.Exam Findings for MBA F8: Legal Issues Summary of Findings: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 90% Above Expectations: 10% Meets Expectations: 80% Below Expectations: 10% Traits: 1) Identify legal issues Meets + Above Expectations: 95% Above Expectations: 10% Meets Expectations: 85% Below Expectations: 5% 2) Identify alternatives Meets + Above Expectations: 95% Above Expectations: 25% Meets Expectations: 70% Below Expectations: 5% 3) Consider impact on stakeholder Meets + Above Expectations: 95% Above Expectations: 15% Meets Expectations: 80% Below Expectations: 5% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended.AACSB. USA. The students are evaluated on the following traits. compared to national MBA Test scores. based on short cases.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Other Findings for MBA F9: International Assessment Summary of Findings: Details/Description: As part of BUSA 587. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2008 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No changes are recommended.SACS.3. Direct .1. The scores.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Brian Finlay Supporting Attachments: MBA Goal F9: International Issues Mapped to: USA.1.2.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. 3.2.taskstream. Students are expected to demonstrate the ability to identify and understand the basic legal issues that are involved in a hypothetical situation. Target: Students rank at the 50th percentile or above on the ETS exam.3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.AACSB. Identify Legal Issues Identify Alternatives Consider Impact on Stakeholder Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will read the factual scenario below and write 2-3 pages answering the questions that follow.SACS.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.

3. 3): 3.57% 3) Application of analysis to management situation Meets + Above Expectations: 85.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. The midterm will cover the first seven categories with fourteen questions while the final will cover the last seven categories with fourteen questions.71% Meets Expectations: 50% Below Expectations: 14.1. 3.57% Above Expectations: 21. At the end of the course the students have a take home exam. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Kathleen Wheatley Supporting Attachments: Overall: Meets + Expectations: 78. The measures are intended to assess the students’ understanding of general concepts in entrepreneurship that are considered to be key components of the discipline. International Question: 1) Identify and discuss the various global factors you faced in the simulation.43% Traits: 1) Identification of global factors Meets + Above Expectations: 71.86% Below Expectations: 28.3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 17 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .86% Below Expectations: 28. covering fourteen outcome categories. differences in market size.Comprehensive Standards (Section 3): 3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MBA Goal F10: Entrepreneurship Mapped to: USA. They are forced to analyze the similarities and differences between different geographic regions and consider this information when making business decisions (such as plant location.57% Above Expectations: 35.71% Above Expectations: 35.3. geographic expansion plan).1. The following questions are incorporated this exam. 2) Discuss your analysis of the impact of these global factors. will be embedded into the midterm and final exams.1 Measures & Findings MBA F10: Entrepreneurship Assessment Course level.taskstream.1.1. students compete in an international micro industry simulation.14% Below Expectations: 21. pricing differences.43% Meets Expectations: 57. 3) Discuss how these factors directly influenced your business decisions.Standards: Assurance of learning standards 4.. Twenty eight measures.3.Exam Findings for MBA F10: Entrepreneurship Assessment Summary of Findings: Meets + Expectations: 6. Direct .2.43% Above Expectations: 28. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%.29% Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : International scores need to monitored and improved. 3.57% 2) Analysis of global factors Meets + Above Expectations: 78.7% Target Achievement: Not Met Details/Description: The MBA assessment of entrepreneurship will occur in BETR588. USA.2% Above Expectations: 0% Meets Expectations: 6.2% Below Expectations: 93. local responsiveness.asp?qy.1 Management.57% Meets Expectations: 42.AACSB..71% Meets Expectations: 42.SACS.

Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Spring 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Bev Brockman Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : Entrepreneurship scores need to monitored and improved.. Target: Meets + above expectations are equal to or greater than 85%. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 18 of 18 8/6/2010 1:00 PM .asp?qy.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.taskstream.

3.asp?qy.Content Mapped to: USA.1. Key Indicator 7. Sub-Standard 4d. Direct . Certification Officer Sandra Jones.3. Key Indicator 6. TPA Admnistrative Assistant Valerie Rutledge.2.. Key Indicator 1. Key Indicator 6. Key Indicator 3.PLT Program level. Key Indicator 4.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Measures & Findings Praxis II Program level. USA. Key Indicator 6.Exam Findings for Praxis II 1 of 4 8/6/2010 1:15 PM .. August 06.6. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Early Childhood Education: BS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.4.Exam Findings for PRAXIS II .2. TPA Department Head Supporting Attachments: Praxis II . Key Indicator 3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Key Indicator 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Although 100% of candidates achieve a passing score on the required PLT for their program. Implementation Plan (timeline): Performance of students will be monitored each testing year for each required PLT test.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 1c. Key Indicator 1. Key Indicator 6. Key Indicator 1.. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: All students completing a program of study which leads to initial licensure will achieve a passing score on the required Principles of Learning and Teaching test(s)..5. Key Indicator 4. Faculty teaching in this program will take the test to insure accurate and up to date information about the content and format of the test is provided to students. Key Indicator 7. additional attention and analysis should reveal how many students must take the required test more than one time.PLT Summary of Findings: 100% of students who complete a licensure track program in education achieved a passing score on the required Praxis II Principals of Teaching and Learning test for Early Childhood.1.3. Target: An additional two percent of students in initial licensure programs will achieve the required score on mandated PLT Praxis II tests the first time they take the test.4. Sub-Standard 1d. Notes : Development is the most important part of this test.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 1.1. Key Indicator 3. Sub-Standard 4a.4.2. 2010 Measures and Findings Early Childhood Education: BS Outcome Set Outcomes PRAXIS II Principles of Learning and Teaching Mapped to: USA.1. Key Indicator 3. Key Indicator 1. This analysis will be used by faculty to revise course content to assure that it is most closely aligned with the content of the PLT for this level. It would be most helpful to analyze students' performance to see if there are specific areas on which student scores could be improved.. Direct . Sub-Standard 3c.2.. Key Indicator 3. Key Indicator 7.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Key Indicator 1.4.1. Key/Responsible Personnel: Connie Cloud. Measures & Findings PRAXIS II .5.2.6.NCATE.taskstream.3. Key Indicator 3.

Key Indicator 4. Key/Responsible Personnel: Connie Cloud. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will demonstrate commitment to the profession by successfully completing required clinical placements and related components..Education Course level.asp?qy.2. Details/Description: All students completing a program of study which leads to initial licensure for which a Praxis II test is required will achieve a passing score on the required content area test(s). Key Indicator 1. Social Sciences. TPA Department Head Arts and Sciences Department Heads . professors in residence will be required to present seminars on specific topics including reflection about what students have learned and how they might apply this knowledge to their own classrooms. Review and consider refining the rubric used to evaluate field placements to insure that it addresses all aspects of this objective.. Notes : In order to make field experiences more relevant and valuable.5.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 1a. Sub-Standard 1b. Key Indicator 1.NCATE.1.2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Reflections submitted by students related to clinical placements will be collected and evaluated each semester for those courses which require placement hours.Child and Family Studies Measures & Findings 2 of 4 8/6/2010 1:15 PM . Field Placement Coordinator Jan Gould.3. but more than 30 percent of students must take the test more than once. Sub-Standard 4d.. Key Indicator 1.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 4. College Advisor Supporting Attachments: Clinical Experiences . This test has a pass rate of 100% for completers. Key/Responsible Personnel: TPA Tenure Track Faculty TPA Adjunct Faculty Carl Raus..NCATE. Sub-Standard 4b. Notes : Faculty members who teach in this program will take the Praxis II tests for this level of licensure to insure that the courses they teach are appropriately aligned with the content over which students are tested..Education Mapped to: USA.3. USA.4. Sub-Standard 4a.Education Summary of Findings: Students' field placements and related components are evaluated using the dispositions evaluation instrument which has been adopted by the department. particular attention will be paid to the Special Education Praxis 0690. Key Indicator 1.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Sub-Standard 3b. Direct . USA. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to evaluate students performance of required field placements and components with the goal of insuring that these include a significant range of diverse experiences in a variety of settings. Target: Eighty percent of students completing clinical placements will achieve a score of acceptable or target on the rubric used to evaluate reflections related to required clinical placements. Key Indicator 4. Sub-Standard 3c. As a result. Substantiating Evidence: Clinical Experiences . The results vary for each of these.6. Target: Two percent of students in education programs will achieve the required score on mandated Praxis II content tests the first time they take the test(s). Sub-Standard 1c... Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Provide additional test preparation sessions which focus on the content covered in the Special Education Praxis 0690.Student Artifact Findings for Clinical Experiences . Key Indicator 1. Have faculty members take this test to insure that the content of courses addresses the specific areas included on the test.1.Sciences. Sub-Standard 4c.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 3a. Measures & Findings Clinical Experiences . Reflections addressing specific questions will be submitted for those classes in which clinical experiences are required and will be evaluated via a common departmental rubric. TPA Administrative Assistant Valerie Rutledge..taskstream. Obtain additional test prep materials which can be made available to students to help them prepare. Implementation Plan (timeline): Performance of students will be monitored each testing year for each subset of required content tests. Math.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Key Indicator 1. Certification Officer Sandra Jones. English Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: Students taking the Praxis II tests for Early Childhood have five tests besides the PLT.. This information is collected for each student and becomes a part of that students' field placement file.

Sub-Standard 3c. Pam Carter Dr. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will demonstrate commitment to the profession by successfully completing required clinical placements and related components. This module is part of the next more intensive focus on use of assessment information to make decisions about effective teaching methods. Sub-Standard 4d. Following completion.1.. Key Indicator 8.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 3a. Mapped to: USA.. this module will continue to be refined and developed to insure that students will have experience and expertise in analyzing student performance with the goal of matching student needs with instructional Details/Description: Students will complete the required assessment module (part 1) and related evaluation to demonstration their recognition of the improtance of this informaiton. Implementation Plan (timeline): All students in EDUC 201 will complete Assessment Module 1 of the Degree + 3 program..INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 8. Clinical Experiences . Notes : Child and Family Studies majors will be required to reflect on their field placement experiences to see if what they are taking away from these placements is providing them with the background and knowledge which will prove most relevant for their programs of study.. Key Indicator 8.. Kim Wingate Supporting Attachments: 3 of 4 8/6/2010 1:15 PM . continue to work to develop and begin to present assessment module 2 to all education students pursuing licensure. Reflections addressing specific questions will be submitted for those classes in which clinical experiences are required and will be evaluated via a common departmental rubric.NCATE. Direct . Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Key Indicator 8.Student Artifact Findings for Clinical Experiences . Key Indicator 8. This information is collected for each student and becomes a part of that students' field placement file. Sub-Standard 5e. TPA Child and Family Studies Professor Dr. Sub-Standard 3b.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Sub-Standard 2c.Child and Famliy Studies Course level.. Notes : Because of the value and importance placed on the effective use of student data to make instructional decisions. Target: Seventy-five percent of students responding to the survey and evaluation intsrument related to Assessment Module of the Degree +3 program will respond that they recognize the importance of the information offered during this instrument. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to evaluate students performance of required field placements and components with the goal of insuring that these include a significant range of diverse experiences in a variety of settings...Outcome Assessment Details http://folio..taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Expand the program to include graduate students seeking initial licensure.asp?qy. Results of evaluations of this experience reveal that over 75% recognize and understand the value of this information to them as future educators who will be held accountable for analyzing their own students' performance on standardized instruments..Survey Findings for Assessment Module Summary of Findings: All students who are either enrolled in 201 at UTC or who are attempting to meet Checkpoint 1 completed the required assessment module. Sub-Standard 2b. Review and consider refining the rubric used to evaluate field placements to insure that it addresses all aspects of this objective. Sub-Standard 4a. Valerie Rutledge.5. Target: Eighty percent of students completing clinical placements will achieve a score of acceptable or target on the rubric used to evaluate reflections related to required clinical placements. In addition. Cheryl Robinson.3.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 2a. Sub-Standard 4b. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Sub-Standard 4a. Indirect .4.2. Key Indicator 8. USA. they will respond to this instrument with at least 75% indicating that they recognize the importance/value of the information presented. TPA Department Head Supporting Attachments: Assessment Module Mapped to: USA. Sub-Standard 4c.Child and Famliy Studies Summary of Findings: Students' field placements and related components are evaluated using the dispositions evaluation instrument which has been adopted by the department.6.NCATE. Implementation Plan (timeline): Reflections submitted by students related to clinical placements will be collected and evaluated each semester for those courses which require placement hours.. Measures & Findings Assessment Module Course level..

develop seminars which address student needs and interests related to education. TPA Department Head Supporting Attachments: 4 of 4 8/6/2010 1:15 PM .asp?qy. Notes : Additional ways of measuring student dispositions will be identified and these will be implemented to insure that data about students' performance in these areas will be collected and analyzed.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 1g. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Offer more opportunities for participation in professional activities. Key Indicator 9. Field Placement Coordinator Sandra Jones. Measures & Findings Teacher Licensure Program Dispositions Course level. TPA Administrative Assistant Valerie Rutledge. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Professors will evaluate students' performance in the identified dispositions through completion of a reflection required in specific courses in each program.2. Sub-Standard 5f..1. data will be disaggrated at the program level for purposes of program review and revision to address dispositionrelated behaviors. Sub-Standard 5d. Sub-Standard 3a.3. Sub-Standard 5b. Sub-Standard 3c. techniques.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Survey Findings for Teacher Licensure Program Dispositions Summary of Findings: Faculty are asked to complete the dispositions assessment instrument for students in their courses... Key Indicator 9..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Key/Responsible Personnel: TPA Tenure-Track Faculty TPA Adjunct Faculty Carl Raus..INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 9..taskstream..NCATE. Indirect . Particular attention has been given to evaluating the commitment of students to professional growth through their attendance at and participation in a range of activities. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students will submit a disposition reflective paper via LiveText to professors in selected education courses and these papers will be analyzed to determine the level of performance demonstrated by students.. Sub-Standard 5c. Substantiating Evidence: Dispositions Mapped to: USA. Furthermore. and encourage students to investigate a wide range of possible professional development options. This documentation reveals that more students could engage in professional growth activities. Target: Professor will evaluate student demonstration of commitment to dispositions adopted by the unit as acceptable or target in 75% of the disposition areas. USA. This information is collected and compiled for each student.

com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: 75% Implementation Plan (timeline): Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Head Supporting Attachments: License Obtainment Mapped to: Measures & Findings 1 of 2 8/6/2010 1:16 PM .asp?qy. students who are admitted to candidacy will complete their Masters degree within three years from the time of their initial enrollment. course availability.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.Survey No Findings Added to Program Satisfaction Details/Description: Those students who receive Masters degree will express satisfaction with program delivery.Ed. August 06. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Initial Licensure MEd Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. Target: 90% Implementation Plan (timeline): Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Head Supporting Attachments: Student Program Satisfaction Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Program Satisfaction Program level. and relevance of course work as reported by means of a questionnaire. 2010 Measures and Findings Initial Licensure MEd Outcome Set Outcomes Student Retention Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Completion Rate Program level. Direct ..taskstream.Other No Findings Added to Completion Rate Details/Description: M.. Indirect .

students who complete their programs at UTC will submit appropriate documentation to their State Department of Education for additional degree status and their teaching license. Direct ..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio..asp?qy. Target: 100% Implementation Plan (timeline): Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Head Supporting Attachments: 2 of 2 8/6/2010 1:16 PM . No Mapping Professional Licensure Program level.Ed.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Other No Findings Added to Professional Licensure Details/Description: M.taskstream.

Key Indicator 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. but Details/Description: All students completing a program of study which leads to initial licensure for which a Praxis II test is required will achieve a passing score on the required content area test(s). Key Indicator 4. As a result.4. Key Indicator 3. 2010 Measures and Findings Middle Grades Education: BS Outcome Set Outcomes Praxis II Principles of Learning and Teaching Mapped to: USA. Key Indicator 1. Key Indicator 6.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 1a.6.5.Exam Findings for Praxis II .2.. The results vary for each of these. Key Indicator 3.3. USA.PLT Program level.5.1... Key Indicator 1.1. Sub-Standard 1d.taskstream.2. Key Indicator 3.5. Key/Responsible Personnel: Connie Cloud.4.4. Key Indicator 1. Certification Officer Sandra Jones. Sub-Standard 4d.4..Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 1c. Key Indicator 7. Key Indicator 6.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 1.3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Although 100% of candidates achieve a passing score on the required PLT for their program.NCATE. Measures & Findings Praxis II Program level. Sub-Standard 1b. Key Indicator 7. Key Indicator 6. This test has a pass rate of 100% for completers.asp?qy. Faculty teaching in this program will take the test to insure accurate and uptodate information about the content and format of the test is provided to students. Key Indicator 1. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: All students completing a program of study which leads to initial licensure will achieve a passing score on the required Principles of Learning and Teaching test(s).1. USA.1.2. particular attention will be paid to the Middle Grades Content test. Key Indicator 1. Direct . Key Indicator 7.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: Two percent of students in education programs 1 of 4 8/6/2010 1:14 PM .1. Key Indicator 7. Measures & Findings Praxis II . Key Indicator 1.6. Direct . Key Indicator 3.2.4.1. Sub-Standard 3c.3.3.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Performance of students will be monitored each testing year for each required PLT test. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Middle Grades Education: BS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.6.PLT Summary of Findings: 100% of students who complete a licensure track program in education achieved a passing score on the required Praxis II Principals of Teaching and Learning test. Key Indicator 3. Sub-Standard 4a.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 1.. Key Indicator 1. August 06.. Target: An additional two percent of students in initial licensure programs will achieve the required score on mandated PLT Praxis II tests the first time they take the test. Key Indicator 1. TPA Department Head Supporting Attachments: Praxis II .2. Sub-Standard 1c. Key Indicator 3. additional attention and analysis should reveal how many students must take the required test more than one time.Content Mapped to: USA. Key Indicator 4.NCATE. Key Indicator 1.Exam Findings for Praxis II Summary of Findings: Students taking the Praxis II tests for Middle Grades have two tests besides the PLT.3.2. Key Indicator 1. TPA Admnistrative Assistant Valerie Rutledge.

Sub-Standard 4d. Measures & Findings Clinical Experiences . Sub-Standard 3b.NCATE. Field Placement Coordinator Jan Gould. Key Indicator 4. Direct . Direct .. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to evaluate students performance of required field placements and components with the goal of insuring that these include a significant range of diverse experiences in a variety of settings.Child and Famliy Studies Summary of Findings: Students' field placements and related components are evaluated using the dispositions evaluation instrument which has been adopted by the department. Sub-Standard 4c.Sciences. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will demonstrate commitment to the profession by successfully completing required clinical placements and related components. Target: Eighty percent of students completing clinical placements will achieve a score of acceptable or target on the rubric used to evaluate reflections related to required clinical placements.. Have faculty members take this test to insure that the content of courses addresses the specific areas included on the test.Child and Family Studies Mapped to: USA.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 3a. Social Sciences.Child and Famliy Studies Course level. Details/Description: Students will demonstrate commitment to the profession by successfully completing required clinical placements and related components.taskstream.3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Clinical Experiences . Key Indicator 4. Sub-Standard 3c. Key/Responsible Personnel: Connie Cloud. Implementation Plan (timeline): Performance of students will be monitored each testing year for each subset of required content tests. This information is collected for each student and becomes a part of that students' field placement file..2. TPA Administrative Assistant Valerie Rutledge. Sub-Standard 4c.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.NCATE. Obtain additional test prep materials which can be made available to students to help them prepare.. Review and consider refining the rubric used to evaluate field placements to insure that it addresses all aspects of this objective. College Advisor Supporting Attachments: Clinical Experiences . will achieve the required score on mandated Praxis II content tests the first time they take the test(s). Sub-Standard 4b. Sub-Standard 4a. Key/Responsible Personnel: TPA Tenure Track Faculty TPA Adjunct Faculty Carl Raus..Student Artifact Findings for Clinical Experiences . This information is collected for each student and becomes a part of that students' field placement file. Implementation Plan (timeline): Reflections submitted by students related to clinical placements will be collected and evaluated each semester for those courses which require placement hours.Education Summary of Findings: Students' field placements and related components are evaluated using the dispositions evaluation instrument which has been adopted by the department.Education Mapped to: USA.1.. Reflections addressing specific questions will be submitted for those classes in which clinical experiences are required and will be evaluated via a common departmental rubric.Education Course level. English Supporting Attachments: more than 30 percent of students must take the test more than once.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 4.asp?qy. Sub-Standard 4d.. Sub-Standard 4a.. Math. Sub-Standard 4b.Student Artifact Findings for Clinical Experiences ... Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Provide test preparation sessions which focus on the content covered in the Middle Grades Content test. USA.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 3a.. Reflections addressing specific questions will be submitted for those classes in which clinical experiences are required and will be evaluated via a 2 of 4 8/6/2010 1:14 PM . Measures & Findings Clinical Experiences ...Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Sub-Standard 3c. TPA Department Head Arts and Sciences Department Heads . Certification Officer Sandra Jones. Sub-Standard 3b..

This information is collected and compiled for each student. USA. TPA Child and Family Studies Professor Dr. USA.. Key Indicator 8. TPA Department Head Supporting Attachments: Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Continue to evaluate students performance of required field placements and components with the goal of insuring that these include a significant range of diverse experiences in a variety of settings. Sub-Standard 3c. Cheryl Robinson.asp?qy.Survey Findings for Assessment Module Summary of Findings: All students who are either enrolled in 201 at UTC or who are attempting to meet Checkpoint 1 completed the required assessment module.. Sub-Standard 5d.5.3.. Sub-Standard 5c. Key Indicator 8.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 1g.. Target: Eighty percent of students completing clinical placements will achieve a score of acceptable or target on the rubric used to evaluate reflections related to required clinical placements.. Measures & Findings Assessment Module Course level. continue to work to develop and begin to present assessment module 2 to all education students pursuing licensure. Key Indicator 8. Valerie Rutledge. Review and consider refining the rubric used to evaluate field placements to insure that it addresses all aspects of this objective. Sub-Standard 2c.Unit Standards: Sub-Standard 2a. This module is part of the next more intensive focus on use of assessment information to make decisions about effective teaching methods. Sub-Standard 5f. Indirect . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students will complete the required assessment module (part 1) and related evaluation to demonstration their recognition of the improtance of this informaiton. Key Indicator 9.3. Sub-Standard 3a.Survey Findings for Teacher Licensure Program Dispositions Summary of Findings: Faculty are asked to complete the dispositions assessment instrument for students in their courses. 3 of 4 8/6/2010 1:14 PM .NCATE. Sub-Standard 5b..1.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 9.. they will respond to this instrument with at least 75% indicating that they recognize the importance/value of the information presented.4. Key Indicator 8. Pam Carter Dr.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.2. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr.2.. Target: Professor will evaluate student demonstration of commitment to dispositions adopted by the unit as acceptable or target in 75% of the disposition areas. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Expand the program to include graduate students seeking initial licensure.6. common departmental rubric.1. Sub-Standard 2b. Measures & Findings Teacher Licensure Program Dispositions Course level.. This documentation reveals that Details/Description: Professors will evaluate students' performance in the identified dispositions through completion of a reflection required in specific courses in each program. Sub-Standard 4a.INTASC-Principles (Model Standards for Beginner Teacher Licensing and Development): Key Indicator 8. Key/Responsible Personnel: Dr. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Assessment Module Mapped to: USA. Particular attention has been given to evaluating the commitment of students to professional growth through their attendance at and participation in a range of activities. In addition. Implementation Plan (timeline): Reflections submitted by students related to clinical placements will be collected and evaluated each semester for those courses which require placement hours. Implementation Plan (timeline): All students in EDUC 201 will complete Assessment Module 1 of the Degree + 3 program. Sub-Standard 5e.. Key Indicator 8.NCATE.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Indirect . Results of evaluations of this experience reveal that over 75% recognize and understand the value of this information to them as future educators who will be held accountable for analyzing their own students' performance on standardized instruments. Following completion. Kim Wingate Supporting Attachments: Dispositions Mapped to: USA... Key Indicator 9. Target: Seventy-five percent of students responding to the survey and evaluation intsrument related to Assessment Module of the Degree +3 program will respond that they recognize the importance of the information offered during this instrument.taskstream.

Key/Responsible Personnel: TPA Tenure-Track Faculty TPA Adjunct Faculty Carl Raus. data will be disaggrated at the program level for purposes of program review and revision to address dispositionrelated behaviors. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Offer more opportunities for participation in professional activities. TPA Department Head Supporting Attachments: more students could engage in professional growth activities. develop seminars which address student needs and interests related to education. Furthermore. Implementation Plan (timeline): Students will submit a disposition reflective paper via LiveText to professors in selected education courses and these papers will be analyzed to determine the level of performance demonstrated by students. Field Placement Coordinator Sandra Jones...taskstream. and encourage students to investigate a wide range of possible professional development options.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. TPA Administrative Assistant Valerie Rutledge.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 4 of 4 8/6/2010 1:14 PM .asp?qy.

The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential I. 2010 Measures and Findings Nursing: BSN Outcome Set Outcomes Synthesize theoretical and empirical knowledge Mapped to: USA.. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6. August 23. The SON advises all pre-nursing students. Tables 4. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed.CCNE. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Nursing: BSN Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Monday.10)..taskstream. Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4. one of our largest community of interest groups.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.11. Essential IX Measures & Findings Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. Indirect . the number of respondents was only 9 alumni Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 1 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. For the May 08 graduates. Essential III. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology. Prior to this time. This method was ineffective despite many reminders.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions.4. Essential IV. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. the rate of return was dismal. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement.

Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam. at six months. but did not participate before taking NCLEX. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. student gathering area. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space. and student in-put into the program.. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX.. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. This is also the Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 2 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .taskstream. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. Direct . a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. were enrolled in VATI. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. time did not change their perception. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. This is consistent with the exit interviews. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester. Of those nine alumni.

but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008.5). science. and other family situations. The benchmark is 85%. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy. benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness.taskstream. husband relocating. In 2006.3 2007 Pass Rate=87.. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. mathematics. closer to 3 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam.. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92. students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. and critical thinking. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Aggregated results are reported.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses. reading.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. As of August 2009. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate.

Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. This oversight has been corrected. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores.taskstream.. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. Essential IV Measures & Findings Employer Satisfaction Program level. the exit scores of the other classes.Survey Findings for Employer Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Obtaining survey data from employers has historically been difficult. however.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: BSN Employer Survey Target: Employers of BSN graduates Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Student Achievement Program level. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3).CCNE. This is an online individualized Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 4 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Quality of nursing practice Mapped to: USA. the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. where there is wide representation from the agenices employing graduates of our undergraduate program.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential III. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. Direct . Indirect . Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : To distribute surveys at the yearly Nursing Community Advisory Committee meeting. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor.

. were enrolled in VATI. mathematics. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. husband relocating. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. In 2006.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses.taskstream. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. As of August 2009.5). and critical thinking. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness. reading. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt.3 2007 Pass Rate=87. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4. Aggregated results are reported.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. The benchmark is 85%. and other family situations. science. NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy.. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness. students graduating in the 5 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. but did not participate before taking NCLEX.

the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. Tables 4. but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean.taskstream. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology.Survey Findings for Student and Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. Data will be available for Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 6 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . however. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. closer to the exit scores of the other classes. This oversight has been corrected. nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. The SON advises all pre-nursing students. Indirect .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.10). exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University.. Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site.11.. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. the rate of return was dismal.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.4. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student and Alumni Satisfaction Program level. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. one of our largest community of interest groups. This method was ineffective despite many reminders.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. Prior to this time.

Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Leadership skills Mapped to: USA. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. Exit Interviews: Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 7 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .10).taskstream. Essential VI. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space. review in the Resource Room.CCNE. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: BSN Employer Survey Target: Employers of BSN graduates Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level. Of those nine alumni.. This is consistent with the exit interviews.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University.Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. Essential VII Measures & Findings Employer Satisfaction Program level. the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. one of our largest community of interest groups. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. student gathering area. Essential V . For the May 08 graduates. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : To distribute surveys at the yearly Nursing Community Advisory Committee meeting. and student in-put into the program. Indirect . Indirect . The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. The SON advises all pre-nursing students. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6.. time did not change their perception. where there is wide representation from the agenices employing graduates of our undergraduate program. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program.Survey Findings for Employer Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Obtaining survey data from employers has historically been difficult.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential II.

.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. the process changed to better utilize our Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 8 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Of those nine alumni. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level. This method was ineffective despite many reminders. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Tables 4.11. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. This is consistent with the exit interviews. and student in-put into the program. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course.. time did not change their perception. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology. the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. Prior to this time.4. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. student gathering area. Direct . The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. the rate of return was dismal. For the May 08 graduates. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing.taskstream.

a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. mathematics. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy. As of August 2009.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. and other family situations. were enrolled in VATI.3 2007 Pass Rate=87. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. Aggregated results are reported. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007.. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4. science. but did not participate before taking NCLEX.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. The benchmark is 85%. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP).5). This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%.. resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. husband relocating. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate.taskstream. Since the exam is 9 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success. reading. and critical thinking. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX.

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass...

given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses, faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness. In 2006, students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking, but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean, closer to the exit scores of the other classes. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores, however, the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. This oversight has been corrected. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Research findings in practice
Mapped to:
USA- CCNE- The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential III, Essential IV, Essential IX

Measures & Findings
Student & Alumni Satisfaction
Program level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction
Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. The SON advises all pre-nursing students, one of our largest community of interest groups. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4.10). The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement, exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. Prior to this time, satisfaction with the Program was

Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments:

10 of 37

8/23/2010 10:57 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass...

measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. This method was ineffective despite many reminders; the rate of return was dismal. Tables 4.11- 4.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology, the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. For the May 08 graduates, the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. Of those nine alumni, 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. This is consistent with the exit interviews; time did not change their perception. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space, student gathering area, and student in-put into the program, we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Student Achievement
Program level; Direct - Exam

Findings for Student Achievement
Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course, N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark, a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing, and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester, having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008, the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to

Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments:

11 of 37

8/23/2010 10:57 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass...

graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass, were enrolled in VATI, but did not participate before taking NCLEX. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. As of August 2009, 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92.3 2007 Pass Rate=87.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. The benchmark is 85%. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4.5). This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy, husband relocating, and other family situations. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP), a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills, mathematics, reading, science, and critical thinking. Aggregated results are reported. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses, faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a

12 of 37

8/23/2010 10:57 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass...

means of gauging student learning effectiveness. In 2006, students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking, but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean, closer to the exit scores of the other classes. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores, however, the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. This oversight has been corrected. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Communication skills
Mapped to:
USA- CCNE- The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential II, Essential VI, Essential VII

Measures & Findings
Employer Satisfaction
Program level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Employer Satisfaction
Summary of Findings: Obtaining survey data from employers has historically been difficult. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : To distribute surveys at the yearly Nursing Community Advisory Committee meeting, where there is wide representation from the agenices employing graduates of our undergraduate program. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: BSN Employer Survey Target: Employers of BSN graduates Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments:

Employment Rate
Program level; Indirect - Interview

Findings for Employment Rate
Summary of Findings: Employment Rate: Employment rate is gathered at exit interview. Additionally, we are able to see our graduates employed over time through Preceptorship faculty feedback as many of our graduates ask to be preceptors when qualified. All students who desire employment have reported success over a multi-year period. Students in the Traditional Undergraduate Program are actively sought for positions as nurse techs before graduation and as professional nurses upon graduation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes :

Details/Description: Exit Interview Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments:

13 of 37

8/23/2010 10:57 AM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass...

Substantiating Evidence:

Student & Alumni Satisfaction
Program level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction
Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. The SON advises all pre-nursing students, one of our largest community of interest groups. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4.10). The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement, exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. Prior to this time, satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. This method was ineffective despite many reminders; the rate of return was dismal. Tables 4.11- 4.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology, the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. For the May 08 graduates, the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. Of those nine alumni, 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. This is consistent with the exit interviews; time did not change their perception. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space, student gathering area, and student in-put into the program, we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments:

14 of 37

8/23/2010 10:57 AM

N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. but did not participate before taking NCLEX. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. As of August 2009. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.3 2007 Pass Rate=87.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. Direct . Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam.. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. Student Achievement Program level. Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 15 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . were enrolled in VATI. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. The benchmark is 85%. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness.. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing.taskstream.

closer to the exit scores of the other classes. Aggregated results are reported. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean. students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Measures & Findings 16 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. husband relocating. science. but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. reading. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy.CCNE. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Ethical manner Mapped to: USA.. mathematics. however. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. and other family situations.5). In 2006. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. This oversight has been corrected. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%.. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4.taskstream. and critical thinking.

Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4. Prior to this time. The SON advises all pre-nursing students. Additionally. Essential VIII Employer Satisfaction Program level.. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream.. Indirect .4. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement. we are able to see our graduates employed over time through Preceptorship faculty feedback as many of our graduates ask to be preceptors when qualified. Indirect . where there is wide representation from the agenices employing graduates of our undergraduate program.11.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.10). Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential IX . Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness.Interview Findings for Employment Rate Summary of Findings: Employment Rate: Employment rate is gathered at exit interview. Indirect . This method was ineffective despite many reminders. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : To distribute surveys at the yearly Nursing Community Advisory Committee meeting.Survey Findings for Employer Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Obtaining this data has been historically difficult. one of our largest community of interest groups. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%.Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Exit Interview Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. the rate of return was dismal. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: BSN Employer Survey Target: Employers of BSN graduates Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Employment Rate Program level.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 17 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . All students who desire employment have reported success over a multi-year period. Tables 4. Students in the Traditional Undergraduate Program are actively sought for positions as nurse techs before graduation and as professional nurses upon graduation.

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level. Of those nine alumni. questions. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Direct . This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 18 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology. the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. time did not change their perception. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. For the May 08 graduates. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. student gathering area.taskstream. and student in-put into the program..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. This is consistent with the exit interviews.

The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy. The benchmark is 85%. science.3 2007 Pass Rate=87.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. were enrolled in VATI. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses. reading. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. and other family situations.taskstream. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. In 2006. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4.. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. 99% probability of success. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in 19 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. husband relocating. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). As of August 2009.5). mathematics.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. but did not participate before taking NCLEX. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Aggregated results are reported.. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. and critical thinking.

Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Essential III. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. This method was ineffective despite many reminders.4.11. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions.Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. The SON advises all pre-nursing students. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6.. reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Evaluate own nursing practice Mapped to: USA.10). Tables 4. Prior to this time. Essential VIII Measures & Findings Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential II. Indirect .. one of our largest community of interest groups. Because of the difference in student Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 20 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . the rate of return was dismal. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. This oversight has been corrected. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys.CCNE. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. however.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. closer to the exit scores of the other classes. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores.taskstream. Essential V .

were enrolled in VATI. time did not change their perception.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam.taskstream. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months.. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. Direct . This is consistent with the exit interviews. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3).Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. and student in-put into the program. This is Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 21 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. population and teaching methodology. but did not participate before taking NCLEX. student gathering area. For the May 08 graduates. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. Of those nine alumni. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester.. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space.

3 2007 Pass Rate=87. The benchmark is 85%. and other family situations. and critical thinking. In 2006. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. As of August 2009. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons.5). Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP).taskstream. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92. students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4. Aggregated results are reported.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. science.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91. reading. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness. husband relocating. mathematics.. but lower means in writing skills 22 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy.. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills.

This oversight has been corrected. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology. Essential VII Measures & Findings Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential IX . however.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. the rate of return was dismal. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. The SON advises all pre-nursing students. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. and mathematics.10)..Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Life-long learning. one of our largest community of interest groups. Indirect . Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. Mapped to: USA. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness.CCNE. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores. This method was ineffective despite many reminders.taskstream. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. closer to the exit scores of the other classes. Tables 4. Prior to this time.4. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean.. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement. Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 23 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .11. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007.

the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months.CCNE.. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6.10).taskstream. one of our largest community of interest groups. For the May 08 graduates. exit interviews of Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 24 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . and student in-put into the program.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. The SON advises all pre-nursing students.. student gathering area.Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. Essential VII Measures & Findings Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. Of those nine alumni. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. Indirect . Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4. Direct . Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential I.Exam No Findings Added to Student Achievement Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Value individual differences Mapped to: USA. time did not change their perception. This is consistent with the exit interviews. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement.

For the May 08 graduates.taskstream.. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio..4.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site.11. the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. student gathering area. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. and student in-put into the program. Of those nine alumni. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 25 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester. the rate of return was dismal. Tables 4. students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam. time did not change their perception. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. Direct . This method was ineffective despite many reminders. This is consistent with the exit interviews. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level. Prior to this time. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology.

The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. reading. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. were enrolled in VATI. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. husband relocating. As of August 2009.5). This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness.. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University 26 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . The benchmark is 85%. Aggregated results are reported.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success. and other family situations. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. mathematics.3 2007 Pass Rate=87. and critical thinking. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. but did not participate before taking NCLEX.. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92. science. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4.

closer to the exit scores of the other classes. Indirect .The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential III Measures & Findings Employer Satisfaction Program level. where there is wide representation from the agenices employing graduates of our undergraduate program.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: BSN Employer Survey Target: Employers of BSN graduates Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Employment Rate Program level. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean.Interview Findings for Employment Rate Summary of Findings: Employment Rate: Employment rate is gathered at exit interview.CCNE. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores. students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : To distribute surveys at the yearly Nursing Community Advisory Committee meeting. general education courses. Students in the Traditional Undergraduate Program are actively sought for positions as nurse techs before graduation and as professional nurses upon graduation. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Demonstrate critical thinking skills. Mapped to: USA. This oversight has been corrected. Additionally. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months.Survey Findings for Employer Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Obtaining this data has been historically difficult. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness.. we are able to see our graduates employed over time through Preceptorship faculty feedback as many of our graduates ask to be preceptors when qualified. Indirect . In 2006.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. however. All students who desire employment have reported success over a multi-year period..taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Details/Description: Exit Interview Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 27 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .

The SON advises all pre-nursing students. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program.. one of our largest community of interest groups. the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. Of those nine alumni. time did not change their perception. and student in-put into the program. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Prior to this time. For the May 08 graduates. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. Tables 4.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. Indirect .11. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions.taskstream.10). Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 28 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. This method was ineffective despite many reminders.. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. the rate of return was dismal. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology. Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience.4. student gathering area.Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. This is consistent with the exit interviews.

The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing. The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness. As of August 2009. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. Student Achievement Program level.. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 29 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester.. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. The benchmark is 85%.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam.3 2007 Pass Rate=87. Direct . were enrolled in VATI. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse.taskstream. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. but did not participate before taking NCLEX. 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt.

Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). reading. and critical thinking. Mapped to: USA. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Professional behavior.CCNE.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Measures & Findings 30 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking.taskstream. In 2006. and other family situations. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy. closer to the exit scores of the other classes. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. but lower means in writing skills and mathematics. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. Aggregated results are reported. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate.5). faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness.. husband relocating. science. however. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. This oversight has been corrected. mathematics.

Indirect . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: BSN Employer Survey Target: Employers of BSN graduates Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Employment Rate Program level. satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. All students who desire employment have reported success over a multi-year period. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007.4. one of our largest community of interest groups. Students in the Traditional Undergraduate Program are actively sought for positions as nurse techs before graduation and as professional nurses upon graduation. Indirect . we are able to see our graduates employed over time through Preceptorship faculty feedback as many of our graduates ask to be preceptors when qualified.Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. Indirect . The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential VI. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : To distribute surveys at the yearly Nursing Community Advisory Committee meeting.taskstream. Prior to this time.11.Interview Findings for Employment Rate Summary of Findings: Employment Rate: Employment rate is gathered at exit interview. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness. Tables 4. Essential VIII Employer Satisfaction Program level.. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.10). Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4.13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 31 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . The SON advises all pre-nursing students. the rate of return was dismal. Additionally.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement.Survey Findings for Employer Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Obtaining this data has been historically difficult. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Exit Interview Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University. where there is wide representation from the agenices employing graduates of our undergraduate program. This method was ineffective despite many reminders.

and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. student gathering area. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. This is consistent with the exit interviews. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. and student in-put into the program. the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level.. questions. Direct . Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology.. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. Of those nine alumni. time did not change their perception. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: 32 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . The trends of the subsections of the RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008. For the May 08 graduates. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN.

23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. 99% probability of success. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92.taskstream. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later.5). NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. but did not participate before taking NCLEX. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4. In 2006. The benchmark is 85%. As of August 2009.3 2007 Pass Rate=87. students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in 33 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM .27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91. and critical thinking. University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. mathematics. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. husband relocating. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. Aggregated results are reported. reading. were enrolled in VATI.. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. science.. and other family situations.

Additionally. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Resource Management Mapped to: USA. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: BSN Employer Survey Target: Employers of BSN graduates Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Employment Rate Program level. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores.The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice (2008): Essential III. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months. reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. Indirect . All students who desire employment have reported success over a multi-year period. This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean. however. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam.Survey Findings for Student & Alumni Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Advisement: Details/Description: Advisement Exit Interviews 34 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . This oversight has been corrected. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : To distribute surveys at the yearly Nursing Community Advisory Committee meeting.CCNE. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. Indirect ..Interview Findings for Employment Rate Summary of Findings: Employment Rate: Employment rate is gathered at exit interview. closer to the exit scores of the other classes. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Exit Interview Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Student & Alumni Satisfaction Program level. Students in the Traditional Undergraduate Program are actively sought for positions as nurse techs before graduation and as professional nurses upon graduation. but lower means in writing skills and mathematics.. we are able to see our graduates employed over time through Preceptorship faculty feedback as many of our graduates ask to be preceptors when qualified. Essential V Measures & Findings Employer Satisfaction Program level. Indirect .Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Essential IV. where there is wide representation from the agenices employing graduates of our undergraduate program.taskstream.Survey Findings for Employer Satisfaction Summary of Findings: Obtaining this data has been historically difficult.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.

the number of respondents was only 9 alumni at six months. student gathering area. Tables 4. Direct . satisfaction with the Program was measured at one year post graduation by mail surveys. Exit Interviews: As a component of ongoing continuous quality improvement.taskstream. time did not change their perception..13 present the Undergraduate Exit interview questions. Because of the difference in student population and teaching methodology. one of our largest community of interest groups. The SON advises all pre-nursing students.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. This method was ineffective despite many reminders. The Benchmark for Pre-Nursing student satisfaction with advisement is 90%. we have responded and have processes in place: the renovation of space should be complete fall semester 2009 and we are actively trying to involve the students in governance of the SON. University-wide advisement of SON students median score on a scale of 1 to 6 is consistently 6. and student in-put into the program. Data will be available for review in the Resource Room. Advisement is considered an important component of University effectiveness.. Alumni Survey: Alumni satisfaction with the program is mixed. exit interviews of students at the end of the fifth semester began in spring 2007. Of those nine alumni. Block advisement is performed with traditional students enrolled in Undergraduate Program The Pre-Nursing Group evaluates the advising process each semester (table 4. Alumni Survey Target: Current and graduating students and alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: Student satisfaction with advisement and student satisfaction as they exit from the program are other indicators of program effectiveness. the rate of return was dismal. Of the overall mixed results such as classroom space.11. For the May 08 graduates. Summary data of question (4): “is there anything else you would like to share with us about your experiences at the SON?” will be available on site. The trends of the subsections of the Details/Description: ATI RN Predictor NCLEX exam Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Graduation Rate 35 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . Prior to this time. This is consistent with the exit interviews. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Student Achievement Program level.Exam Findings for Student Achievement Summary of Findings: ATI RN Predictor: The ATI RN-Predictor is used to measure the likelihood of student success on first attempt writing the NCLEX-RN exam. 33-50% were dissatisfied with some measures but 77% were satisfied with skills and competencies acquired from the program. the Gateway students complete an exit exam that measures their educational experience. Student satisfaction with the Pre-Nursing Advisement process continued to improve and SON advisement of all students is considered outstanding by the University.10).4.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.

Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.27% 2008 Pass Rate=100% 2009 Pass Rate=91. Beginning with students in Level 5 fall semester 2008.3 2007 Pass Rate=87. Pass rate for first time writers of the NCLEX-RN 2006 Pass Rate=92. As of August 2009.6% Graduation Rate: The graduation rate for the BSN Program is calculated by dividing the number of students entering the nursing major into the number of students graduating seven semesters later. This is an online individualized NCLEX preparation course that predicts 99% probability of success. The four students who withdrew did so for personal reasons such as complicated pregnancy. N440 in the fifth semester if they did not achieve the established benchmark. The majority of students graduating in December 2007 and May 2008 were enrolled in a required 3-semester credit NCLEX-preparation course. but did not participate before taking NCLEX. This benchmark was considered by ATI to be predictive of success on the NCLEX (table 4-3). Critical Thinking Target: Graduating BSN students Implementation Plan (timeline): Current Key/Responsible Personnel: Katherine Lindgren Supporting Attachments: RN-Predictor are used to evaluate the curriculum content and process.5). husband relocating.. The benchmark is 85%. The ATI recommended changing the scoring for the Comprehensive Predictor from percentile to percent probability of passing. This is also the benchmark used by the UT System and THEC for program effectiveness. and its recommended benchmark was 94% probability. Students graduating in December 2008 and May 2009 were now required to enroll in Virtual ATI (VATI) 2 weeks prior to graduation if their score on the RN-Predictor was less than the benchmark of 98% probability of passing NCLEX. The graduation rate for 2008 was 83% (table 4. 36 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . 23 of the 24 student who graduated in May 2009 have taken the NCLEX-RN exam: all have passed on the first attempt. The two students who were not successful in December of 2008 on first time pass. The 2009 pass rate only includes the class that graduated in December 2008. This is reflected on the 2009 Education Summary Report for the National Council of State Boards of Nursing.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass.taskstream. the process changed to better utilize our resources and student synthesis of learning in this culminating semester. a score in the 65th percentile or higher on the RN Comprehensive Predictor. and other family situations.. The SON current benchmark is 98% probability of passing NCLEX-RN. were enrolled in VATI. The Undergraduate students take the exam at the end of the fourth semester. NCLEX-RN: The SON benchmark is at or above the national percent passing of first time BSN candidates as specified by the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurse. This occurred because 4 students withdrew from the program and 3 students were dismissed for academic reasons. having one semester before taking the NCLEX-RN.

a standardized multiple-choice test used to measure content areas related to writing skills. and critical thinking. students graduating in the nursing major had higher mean scores in reading than other graduating students in the College and higher means than College and total University graduating students in science reasoning and critical thinking. The first cohort of Gateway students did not show a significant increase in scores. The first cohort of the RN to BSN Track began May 2007. but lower means in writing skills and mathematics.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_ass. Traditional Student Undergraduate Graduation Rates (calculation based upon seven semesters) 2006=93% 2007=88% 2008=83% CAAP: All undergraduate graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). This is likely a regression toward the mean phenomenon as this class entered with an unusually high mean. reading. faculty believe that comparing our students with University and College students is a means of gauging student learning effectiveness. the time between testing was abbreviated as the students not given the entrance test until they had been in the program for about 6 months..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. There was no difference in entry/exit Critical Thinking scores for the January 2007 graduates. science. Since the exam is given after the student has completed all SON courses in addition to University general education courses. however.. This group of students’ graduation rate is 96%. mathematics. Aggregated results are reported. In 2006. Critical Thinking: The SON also measures Critical Thinking using the ATI exam. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 37 of 37 8/23/2010 10:57 AM . University students are randomly assigned to take only one of the five tests mentioned during the semester before they graduate. closer to the exit scores of the other classes.taskstream. This oversight has been corrected.

CAPTE.Other Findings for Clinical Performance Instrument Safe Practice Summary of Findings: All students met CPI indicator #1 at entry-level at point of graduation.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Hard copies of individual student CPI records available upon request in the PT department.. August 06.CAPTE. Direct .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: 100% Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual Key/Responsible Personnel: Director of Clinical Education Supporting Attachments: APTA PT Clinical Performance Instrument (Web Link) Link to APTA Physical Therapist Clinical Performance 1 of 3 8/6/2010 1:11 PM . Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Clinical Performance Instrument (PHYT 790 Clinical Internship) results as submitted by clinical instructors.. Element CO-2. 2010 Measures and Findings Entry-Level DPT Outcomes NPTE Pass Rate Mapped to: USA. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 2008 pass rates (MHTML) Details/Description: This objective is measured by reviewing the pass rate report provided by the FSBPT. Indirect . Element CO-4 Measures & Findings Clinical Performance Instrument Safe Practice Program level.taskstream. Element CO-3 Measures & Findings NPTE Pass Rate Program level.asp?qy. Target: equal to or higher than the national average for pass rates for first time takers who are graduates of US PT programs Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Head/Accreditation Committee Supporting Attachments: Safe Practice Mapped to: USA. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Physical Therapy: DPT Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.Standards: Element CO-1.92%.Exam Findings for NPTE Pass Rate Summary of Findings: 100% first-time pass rate.Standards: Element CO-1. National average 85.

Standards: Element CO-1. http://www.cfm&CONTENTID=59105 CPI Entry-Level Competence Mapped to: USA.taskstream.org/AM/Template. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Clinical Performance Instrument (PHYT 790 Clinical Internship) results as submitted by clinical instructors. Instrument for students (June 2006).Standards: Element CO-1. The CPI used for this cycle was version December 1997.org/AM/Template. Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Clinical Performance Instrument (PHYT 790 Clinical Internship) results as submitted by clinical instructors.apta.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Element CO-2.asp?qy. Hard copy of document available in the PT Department (copyrighted document). Target: 100% Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual Key/Responsible Personnel: Director of Clinical Education Supporting Attachments: APTA PT Clinical Performance Instrument (Web Link) Link to APTA Physical Therapist Clinical Performance Instrument for students (June 2006). Element CO-2.CAPTE.Other Findings for Clinical Performance Instrument Professional Behavior Summary of Findings: All students met CPI indicator #3 at entry-level at point of graduation. Hard copy of document available in the PT Department (copyrighted document).com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.cfm?Section=CPI1& TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.CAPTE. 2 of 3 8/6/2010 1:11 PM .. The CPI used for this cycle was version December 1997. Indirect . The CPI used for this cycle was version December 1997. Indirect . http://www.cfm&CONTENTID=59105 Professional Behavior Mapped to: USA. Element CO-4 Measures & Findings Clinical Performance Instrument Professional Behavior Program level.Other Findings for Clinical Performance Instrument Entry Level Competence Summary of Findings: All students met CIP indicators #1-24 at entry-level at point of graduation. Hard copy of document available in the PT Department (copyrighted document).. Target: 100% Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual Key/Responsible Personnel: Director of Clinical Education Supporting Attachments: APTA PT Clinical Performance Instrument (Web Link) Link to APTA Physical Therapist Clinical Performance Instrument for students (June 2006). Indicator #3.cfm?Section=CPI1& TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Hard copies of individual student CPI records available upon request in the PT department. Indicators #1-24.apta. Element CO-4 Measures & Findings Clinical Performance Instrument Entry Level Competence Program level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Hard copies of individual student CPI records available upon request in the PT department.

asp?qy.apta.cfm?Section=CPI1& TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay. Direct . Target: 100% Implementation Plan (timeline): Annual graduation audit Key/Responsible Personnel: Registrar Department Head Supporting Attachments: 3 of 3 8/6/2010 1:11 PM . Element CO-2.CAPTE.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.org/AM/Template.Standards: Element CO-1.cfm&CONTENTID=59105 Successful Course Completion Mapped to: USA.Other Findings for Transcript Audit Summary of Findings: All graduates schieved a minimum of C in all entry-level DPT didactic courses.taskstream. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Transcript audit for each graduate of the program will show 100% successful completion (minimum C) of all entry-level DPT program courses. Element CO-4 Measures & Findings Transcript Audit Program level...Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. http://www.

2. 4. implement. August 06. #8: Design. 2. groups.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 10) Target: A score of 7 out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 7. Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Social Work: BSW Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. 8. (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: TOTAL SCORE Course Obj#10: Apply and evaluate research knowledge and skills through the development of a formal research proposal and completion of an agency-based research project. 3. 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II)Global Perspectives Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this measure was a 7 out of a possible 10.taskstream. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10possible points. #4: Apply enhanced bio-psycho-social assessment skills with families. (Program Objectives1. and evaluate a social action project in the community and. and organizations. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 6. 2010 Measures and Findings BSW Program Outcomes Outcomes 1. create a sustainable Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 1 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 3.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 8.asp?qy. 7. communities. 6. 4. Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II)Global Perspectives Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 9.. flowing from that. 5..

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. group. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. (Program Objectives 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOcW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) 7. 2. 7. family. 3. 2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 2 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. 4. 8. 6.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. organizational. entity to continue the work to promote economic human rights in the community. 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 3. 2. and societal assets in solving individual and collective challenges. 5. 4. 5. community. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 3. 9. #4: Develop and apply skills to form mutually collaborative and respectful professional relationships that empower clients to become aware of and to utilize personal. #2: Strengthen and deepen understanding of populations at-risk and the need for social and economic justice. 7. 5. 4. 3. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Objectives 1. 5. 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.. particularly within organizational systems. 4. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 7. (Program Objectives 1.asp?qy. 7. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 6. 6. 8. 6. 9. #3: Apply and evaluate the problem-solving process at the macro level. 8. 9. (Program Objectives 1..

4. #7: Enhance and evaluate skills in verbal and written communication through the use of assignments from Social Action project. 3. 6. 4. 2. 5. 6. 6. SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SoCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 5. 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SoCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 9. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 points. #1: Describe the generalist social work abilities needed to work in macro settings. 8. 5. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Objectives 1. 9. 8.. (Program Objectives 1. 7. (Program Objectives 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.asp?qy. 8. 9. 8. 7. 2. 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience 3 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 4. 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. #10: Enhance and evaluate skills in verbal and written communication through the use of assignments from Social Action project. 3. 3. 4. 5. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. #5: Develop community assessment and program evaluation skills. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 3.taskstream. 9.. 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. (Program Objectives 1.

and communities from differing social. #6: Integrate one’s own diversity sensitivity to individuals. community. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : 4 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 8. 9. 5. 6. racial. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 3. 3. groups.asp?qy. 7. age. religious backgrounds. 8. 4. 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. age. 10). cultural. 4. Details/Description: Course Obj. #6: Integrate one’s own diversity sensitivity to individuals. 10) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8.taskstream. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. religious backgrounds. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. groups. cultural. organizational. 3. 5. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 7. 4. group. racial. 2. 7. family.. families. 4. 5. and societal assets in solving individual and collective challenges. #5: Develop community assessment and program evaluation skills. class. (Program Objectives 1. (Program Objectives 1. and those with different sexual orientations through participation in the community visitation field work. 6. 2. 9. 7. 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. class. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj.. 8. 9. #4: Develop and apply skills to form mutually collaborative and respectful professional relationships that empower clients to become aware of and to utilize personal. 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 6. 3. 2. and those with different sexual orientations through participation in the community visitation field work. and communities from differing social. families. (Program Objectives 1. 10). 5. (Program Objectives 1.

(Program Objectives1. and advocating for desired changes at all levels of government. 5. 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. formulating. 2. 7. (Program Goals #1. 4. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. #4. 5. 2. (Program Goals #1. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10possible points. influencing.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 3. 9. 6. 3. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #4: Apply strategies for continuous self-evaluation including supervision and consultation.asp?qy. and feedback from peers and other sources for self development. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj# 5: Demonstrate a commitment to ethical research practice and adherence to human subject protection safeguards.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9.. 4. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 5 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . #4. and demonstrate a commitment to the principles of social and economic justice.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #8: Apply appropriate strategies for analyzing. #5) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.taskstream. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 6.

asp?qy. (Program Goals #2.taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #2: Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. 4. data collection and Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. #4. 6. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #3: Demonstrate professional behavior congruent with the social work Code of Ethics and apply strategies to effectively identify. 2. #3. 6. 8. 3. interviewing. 9.. SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: IELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Synthesize and integrate varied sources to inform decisions and create solutions and appropriate problem-solving strategies congruent with the social work knowledge base. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 7.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 2. 5. 9. (Program Objectives 1. 7. #4) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 4. 6. (Program Goals #3. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10possible points. and resolve ethical conflicts in professional practice. 5. 3. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 3.. address. 8. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #4: Implement basic skills of engagement. 8. 9.

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 312(Human Behavior and the Social Environment) LIT REVIEW RUBRIC Findings for SOCW 312(Human Behavior and the Social Environment) LIT REVIEW RUBRIC 7 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . groups. 8.. 8. 6. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 3.. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 (Social Work Practice III) Eco map Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #2. (Program Objectives 1. 3. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 8.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 3. (Program Objectives 1. Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. organizations. 4. intervention and evaluation appropriate with individuals. (Program Objectives 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) 7.taskstream. 9. (Program Objectives 1. 7. 6. and communities. 3. 2. 9. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 9. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #2: Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. 2. 6. 6. Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. 2. 8. families.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.asp?qy. assessment. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 (Social Work Practice III) Eco map Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.

6. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW FACULTY Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6. 7. 7. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 2. Details/Description: Course Obj.2. 8) Course Obj..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Student Artifact Findings for SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6.asp?qy. 3. 3. 3. 9. #1: Implement beginning interpersonal skills that are culturally competent. 8. (Program Objectives 1. (Program Objectives 1. (Program Objectives 1. 2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 2. 2. 4. 8. 4. Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW FACULTY Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. #2: Develop and apply a framework for understanding and articulating social and cultural aspects relating to social work practice with special populations. 5.8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.. 5. 7. #7: Apply assessment skills within the context of human behavior and diversity across the lifespan with special emphasis given to interpretation of various theoretical perspectives. 6. (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Details/Description: Course Obj. #12: Evaluate various theoretical perspectives in terms of evidence-based practice and culturally competent social work practice. 5. 6.9) Course Obj. 8) Target: Fall 2009 Implementation Plan (timeline): A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Objectives 1. Course Obj. 7. 8. 2. #2: Demonstrate understanding of various theoretical explanations of forms of human diversity. 9). Direct . 6. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Course level. 6. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Course Obj. #1: Implement beginning interpersonal skills that are culturally competent. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall Semester 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) SOCW 342 (Human Behavior and the Social Environment) Rubric Findings for SOCW 342 (Human Behavior and the Social Environment) Rubric 8 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 7.taskstream. 3. 4. 6. (Program Objectives 1.

9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 8. 4. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 (Applied Research) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj# 5: Demonstrate a commitment to ethical research practice and adherence to human subject protection safeguards. 4.. and communities in all types of settings. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 342 (Human Behavior and the Social Environment) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 3. 3. 6.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. groups. 6. 2.. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 342 (Human Behavior and the Social Environment) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 2.taskstream. 3. 7. 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417 (Applied Research) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. organizations. 8. 5. 7. 6. (Program Objectives 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 9 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . and organizations. (Program Objectives1. Details/Description: Course Obj. 4. small groups.. communities. 2. 2. 4. families. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. #4: Apply enhanced bio-psycho-social assessment skills with families. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Findings for SOCW 442 (Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. (Program Objectives 1. #8: Critique the impact of sociocultural variables on human development and group and family functioning. 9. 5. 6.asp?qy. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 for this item.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 7. (Program Goals #1. 3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442 (Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #7: Apply a range of social work theories and evidence-based interventions with individuals. 8. #4. 10) Target: A score of 7 out of 10 points.

5. (Program Goal #2) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 4. 5. 5. #4. 3. 8. 8. 7. #4. 6.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 4. 8. 2.. effect positive change. (Program Goals #1. 7. 9.asp?qy. (Program Goals #1. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 10 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 9. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #10: Function professionally within an organizational system and when appropriate. 9. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 2.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 3. 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 7. 4. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 3. 6. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME #1: Apply culturally competent evidence-based practice skills adaptable to meet the needs of individuals and groups with diverse backgrounds by utilizing understandable language and multi-culturally sensitive communication skills. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #5: Understand the forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination and apply innovative social change strategies which promote both social and economic justice. 2.taskstream. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : 11 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . communities.. 6. and organizations. 3.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. (Program Goals #1. 4. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 2.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 490 ( Senior Seminar) Eportfolio Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8.asp?qy. 7. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 490 ( Senior Seminar) Eportfolio Rubric Details/Description: Cultural Competence Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 7. 8. #4: Apply enhanced bio-psycho-social assessment skills with families.taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6. SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #6: Understand and appreciate the history of the social work profession in the context of contemporary social policy and practice and utilize this knowledge to inform practice. 8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 for this item. 9. (Program Objectives 2. 2. groups. 5. 6. 9. (Program Objectives 1. 4. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. #4. Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Details/Description: Course Obj#9: Demonstrate a beginning ability and skill in using software packages to analyze statistical data. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Findings for SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 4. 7. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 3. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.

asp?qy. 4. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 2. #1: Describe the generalist social work abilities needed to work in macro settings. 5.taskstream. (Program Objectives 1. 6. 9. 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. #8: Design. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. 2. 4.. flowing from that. (Program Objectives 1. 2. 6. 3. and evaluate a social action project in the community and. 6. create a sustainable entity to continue the work to promote economic human rights in the community. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. implement. (Program Objectives 1. #2: Strengthen and deepen understanding of populations at-risk and the need for social and economic justice. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj... 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 3. 7. 9. 8. #8: Critique the impact of sociocultural variables on human development and group and family functioning. 7.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 2. Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 3. 3. 5. 4. 6.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 5. (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : 12 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 4. 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj.

4. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 4. 8. (Program Objectives 1.. 9. 8.taskstream.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SoCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 2. 3. #5: Develop community assessment and program evaluation skills. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : 13 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 8. (Program Objectives 1. 2.asp?qy. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. (Program Objectives 1. 9. 3.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 4. 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 6. 5. 4. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 7. 5. #10: Enhance and evaluate skills in verbal and written communication through the use of assignments from Social Action project. 8. 7. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 7. 6. particularly within organizational systems. 2. 3. 7. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 6. 6. 5. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. #3: Apply and evaluate the problem-solving process at the macro level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 3. 5. #7: Enhance and evaluate skills in verbal and written communication through the use of assignments from Social Action project. Implementation Plan (timeline): fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8.

#5: Develop community assessment and program evaluation skills.. 5. 2. 3. 5. 2. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Objectives 1. and communities from differing social.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. community. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. cultural. racial. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 6. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 8. 9. families. (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. and those with different sexual orientations through participation in the Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 9. 6. Target Achievement: Exceeded 14 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 9. #4: Develop and apply skills to form mutually collaborative and respectful professional relationships that empower clients to become aware of and to utilize personal. 4. 3. 8. organizational. 2.asp?qy. family. religious backgrounds. 4.. 7. #6: Integrate one’s own diversity sensitivity to individuals. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. class. Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 7. 3. 8. 7. 6. and societal assets in solving individual and collective challenges. (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. 4. #1: Describe the generalist social work abilities needed to work in macro settings. 10). age. groups. group. 5.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

and societal assets in solving individual and collective challenges. 8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 4. #4: Develop and apply skills to form mutually collaborative and respectful professional relationships that empower clients to become aware of and to utilize personal. class. (Program Objectives 1. age. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 5. religious backgrounds.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.. 9. 8. 5. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 3. groups. community. 8. families. (Program Objectives 2. 9. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : 15 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 7. (Program Objectives 1. 3. 3. 4. racial. 9. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. group. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 5. (Program Objectives 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 3. 2. 2. 6. cultural.taskstream. 7. 7. 8. organizational. 7. 6. and communities from differing social. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Findings for SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 10). family. 6.. #6: Integrate one’s own diversity sensitivity to individuals. 6. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.asp?qy. and those with different sexual orientations through participation in the community visitation field work. community visitation field work. 2. 9. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj #10: Apply APA standards to professional writing with special attention to using non-biased language. 4. Implementation Plan (timeline): fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj.

taskstream. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 7. 7. 8.) (Program Objectives 2. 8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 8. 9. 6. 10) Comments: Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. 6. 6.asp?qy. 9.. 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Details/Description: B. (Course Obj #9: Objectively critique published studies in the social work literature. 3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. and understand how the methods differ with regard to causality and generalizability..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. (Program Objectives 2. Summarizes main findings in the literature on topic. Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Details/Description: 2. 3) Findings for SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #5: Apply APA standards to professional writing with special attention to using non-biased language. Target Achievement: Exceeded 16 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #7: Describe how the scientific approach can be used to test the efficacy of social interventions.) (Program Objectives 2.) (Program Objectives 2. (Course Obj #2Compare and contrast the scientific approach with other ways of obtaining knowledge. 3.

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #8: Utilize APA styles and formats when writing professional documents.) (Program Objectives 2. 4.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 5.asp?qy. 4. 3) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 6. Target Achievement: Met 17 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: TOTAL SCORE Course Obj#10: Apply and evaluate research knowledge and skills through the development of a formal research proposal and completion of an agency-based research project. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. (Program Objectives 2. 10) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 3. 5. 7. 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. (Program Objectives1. 9. 3) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #3: Compare the major research designs and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each. 9. 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7..) (Program Objectives 2. 6. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj#7: Compare and contrast both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies in social science research including the strengths and limitations of both paradigms.. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417 ( Applied Research) Final Research Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.taskstream.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 6. 4. 5. 2. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 5. (Program Objectives1. 4.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 3.. 5. 7.taskstream. (Program Objectives1. 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj# 5: Demonstrate a commitment to ethical research practice and adherence to human subject protection safeguards. 6. 5. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.asp?qy. Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 2. 2. 4.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : 18 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points . (Program Objectives1. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: as specific as possible): Course Obj# 5: Demonstrate a commitment to ethical research practice and adherence to human subject protection safeguards. 7. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Objectives1. 3. 6. 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj#6: Recognize the impact of research on oppressed and vulnerable populations and the ethical and value dilemmas related to researching these populations. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 7. 4. 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 6. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj# 5: Demonstrate a commitment to ethical research practice and adherence to human subject protection safeguards.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: (Course Obj #7: Describe how the scientific approach can be used to test the efficacy of social interventions. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 5.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 4. 6. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. (Program Objectives 2.) (Program Objectives 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #3: Demonstrate professional behavior congruent with the social work Code of Ethics and apply strategies to effectively identify. 4. address. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.3.asp?qy. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 6. 9. and resolve ethical conflicts in professional practice. 7. 3.. #4. 2. #3. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome 19 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 7. 9. 8. (Program Goals #2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9.taskstream. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.. 8. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj#4: Evaluate the efficacy and significance of specific interventions used in social work practice through the use of self and agency evaluation. 8. 9. 3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #6: Understand and appreciate the history of the social work profession in the context of contemporary social policy and practice and utilize this knowledge to inform practice. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Synthesize and integrate Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 20 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 6. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Goals #1. 5. and advocating for desired changes at all levels of government.taskstream. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #5: Understand the forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination and apply innovative social change strategies which promote both social and economic justice. 7. 6. 5. 3. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 2. 8.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. #4..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 2. 6. 9. 4. #4.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #8: Apply appropriate strategies for analyzing. 9. 4. 3. 4. 2. 8. (Program Goals #1. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 8. influencing. (Program Goals #1.asp?qy. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 9. and demonstrate a commitment to the principles of social and economic justice. #4. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 3. 7. formulating. 5.

8. #4) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 8..Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. (Program Goals #1. 5. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 9.. (Program Goals #3. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) 9. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. and communities in all types of settings. #4. 2. 6. 8. 7. 4. 2. (Program Goal #2) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 6. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #7: Apply a range of social work theories and evidence-based interventions with individuals. 4. 5. 2. 9. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome 21 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 5. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 4. 6. small groups. 3. organizations. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 3.asp?qy. 7. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME #1: Apply culturally competent evidence-based practice skills adaptable to meet the needs of individuals and groups with diverse backgrounds by utilizing understandable language and multi-culturally sensitive communication skills. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. families. 9. varied sources to inform decisions and create solutions and appropriate problem-solving strategies congruent with the social work knowledge base. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 3.

5. #4.. 4. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Details/Description: Integrate social work ethics and values into generalist social work practice. Demonstrate a sense of professionalism and a positive identification with the social work profession. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Details/Description: Integrate the components and dynamics of ecological and systems perspectives as applied to generalist social work practice. 6. 6. Implementation Plan (timeline): fAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. (Program Objectives 1. 4.taskstream. (Program Objectives 2. 8. 8. Discussed “who you are” and how that impacts (or will likely impact) clients in your upcoming field practicum and future practice. 7. 2. (Program Goals #1. 10) Comments: Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. effect positive change. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Details/Description: 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 22 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 3. 3. 6. 9. 7. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 7. 4. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. 9. 6. (Program Objectives 2.. 8.asp?qy. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. LEARNING OBJECTIVE #10: Function professionally within an organizational system and when appropriate.

8. 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Details/Description: (11. 8. 2.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 3. (Program Objectives 1. (Program Objectives 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 3. 6. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Objectives 1. 8. Integrate the components and dynamics of ecological and systems perspectives as applied to generalist social work practice. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Details/Description: Reflective Paper: (Course Obj #2. 8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric Details/Description: Analyze generalist practice through an ecological/person-in-environment and systems theory lens. Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Details/Description: 1. 6. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 23 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 6. 6. 2. (Course Obj #2: Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.. 7. 7.taskstream. (Program Objectives 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 9. 9.

2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Details/Description: A.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 3. 6. families. 8. 4.. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 6. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 24 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . (Program Objectives 1.taskstream.. (Program Objectives 1. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 3. Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. data collection and assessment.asp?qy. (Program Objectives 1. 3. groups. 8. and communities. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Details/Description: (Course Obj #2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. organizations. Genogram (Course Obj #2: Recognize the psychosocial needs and strengths of individuals and families. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Details/Description: (Course Obj #4: Implement basic skills of engagement. 9. interviewing. intervention and evaluation appropriate with individuals. 9. SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Details/Description: Critical Thinking Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Ecomap Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 2. 2. 9. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 8. 6. 7.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.

3. 2. 2. #12: Evaluate various theoretical perspectives in terms of evidence-based practice and culturally competent social work practice.9) Course Obj. (Program Objectives 1. 3. 6. (Program Objectives 2.2. 8) Course Obj.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Socw Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 312(Human Behavior adn the Social Environment) LIT REVIEW RUBRIC Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. (Program Objectives 2. 5. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. #2: Demonstrate understanding of various theoretical explanations of forms of human diversity.8. 3.taskstream. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 312(Human Behavior adn the Social Environment) LIT REVIEW RUBRIC Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.. (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 312(Human Behavior adn the Social Environment) LIT REVIEW RUBRIC Details/Description: Course Obj. 5. 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.asp?qy. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 8) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 25 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . #7: Apply assessment skills within the context of human behavior and diversity across the lifespan with special emphasis given to interpretation of various theoretical perspectives. (Program Objectives 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 312(Human Behavior adn the Social Environment) LIT REVIEW RUBRIC Details/Description: Course Obj#8: Apply enhanced analytical and critical thinking skills through the development of an annotated bibliography and literature review. 3. 7.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Details/Description: #1: Implement beginning interpersonal skills that are culturally competent. 9) Findings for SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6. SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram Details/Description: Course Obj#11. 7. 6. 4. 8. 7. 2. 6. 3. 4. 6. (Program Objectives 1. 6. Integrate the components and dynamics of ecological and systems perspectives as applied to generalist social work practice. 8.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

9). #2: Develop and apply a framework for understanding and articulating social and cultural aspects relating to social work practice with special populations. 7. (Program Objectives 1. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. (Program Objectives 1. 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW all faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 2. 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : 26 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . #1: Implement beginning interpersonal skills that are culturally competent. and organizations. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 3. 4.. 6. (Program Objectives 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Findings for SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.asp?qy. 2. 4. Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj.. 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm Details/Description: Course Obj. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 4. 4. 2. 6. (Program Objectives 1. 7. 9. communities. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. groups. 8. 8. 9. 6.. #4: Apply enhanced bio-psycho-social assessment skills with families.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 6. 3. 2. #8: Critique the impact of sociocultural variables on human development and group and family functioning. 5. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 342 ( Human behavior and Social Environment II) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. Course Obj. 8.taskstream.

6. 4. 8. #8: Design. 4. group. 3. 5. Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 9. 9. 8. and societal assets in solving individual and collective challenges.. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. create a sustainable entity to continue the work to promote economic human rights in the community. 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. organizational.taskstream. implement. #3: Apply and evaluate the problem-solving process at the macro level.. 6. (Program Objectives 1. 7. (Program Objectives 1. Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. flowing from that. 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 2. 6. 3. (Program Objectives 1. 7. #4: Develop and apply skills to form mutually collaborative and respectful professional relationships that empower clients to become aware of and to utilize personal. community. 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 5. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 4.asp?qy. Target Achievement: Exceeded 27 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. and evaluate a social action project in the community and. (Program Objectives 1. 5.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. particularly within organizational systems. 9. #2: Strengthen and deepen understanding of populations at-risk and the need for social and economic justice. 8. 2. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SoCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 6. 5. 4. family. 3. 3. 7.

9.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 3. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 8. 7. (Program Objectives 1. 5. 6. 6. (Program Objectives 1.. 8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 6. 5. 8.asp?qy. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. 4. 4. 9. 4. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 6. 4. #7: Enhance and evaluate skills in verbal and written communication through the use of assignments from Social Action project. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 8. 3. 5. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : 28 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . #1: Describe the generalist social work abilities needed to work in macro settings. #5: Develop community assessment and program evaluation skills. 9. 5.. 2. 2. 2.taskstream. 9.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 2. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SoCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 3. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj. #5: Develop community assessment and program evaluation skills. 7. (Program Objectives 1. (Program Objectives 1. 7. 3. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj.

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. 9. 3. 2. ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. age. 3. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 29 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 9. 5.. (Program Objectives 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. family.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. racial. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. community. group.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. cultural. 5. families.taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. 2. class. #6: Integrate one’s own diversity sensitivity to individuals. organizational. #6: Integrate one’s own diversity sensitivity to individuals. families. (Program Objectives 1. 4. and those with different sexual orientations through participation in the community visitation field work. #5: Develop community assessment and program evaluation skills. 6. 7. groups. 7.. 4. 2. 3. 9. 6. 6. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 10). 5. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 8. 8. religious backgrounds. #4: Develop and apply skills to form mutually collaborative and respectful professional relationships that empower clients to become aware of and to utilize personal. and communities from differing social. and societal assets in solving individual and collective challenges. 8. 4. 10). groups. 7.asp?qy. (Program Objectives 1.

2. 3. religious backgrounds. (Program Objectives1. 3. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: TOTAL SCORE Course Obj#10: Apply and evaluate research knowledge and skills through the development of a formal research proposal and completion of an agency-based research project. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 7. 7. 5. 6. 4. 6. #1: Describe the generalist social work abilities needed to work in macro settings. 4. cultural. racial. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 30 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 5.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 3. 4. (Program Objectives 1. 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) 8. (Program Objectives 1. 9. age. 9. 5. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) Rubric-Community Experience Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. and communities from differing social. 8. 6. 8. 5. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.. 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 407( Social Work Practice III) RubricCommunity Experience Details/Description: Course Obj. 4.asp?qy. 7..taskstream. 8. 2. 9. (Program Objectives 1. #1: Describe the generalist social work abilities needed to work in macro settings. 2. and those with different sexual orientations through participation in the community visitation field work. class. 6. 8.

asp?qy. 5. 4. 7. 6. 7. (Program Objectives1.. 7. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj# 5: Demonstrate a commitment to ethical research practice and adherence to human subject protection safeguards. 3. SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj#9: Demonstrate a beginning ability and skill in using software packages to analyze statistical data. (Program Objectives1. 4. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 2. 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6. 4. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.taskstream. 6.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 6. 3.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 7. 5. 4. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj#6: Recognize the impact of research on oppressed and vulnerable populations and the ethical and value dilemmas related to researching these populations. (Program Objectives1. (Program Objectives 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj# 5: Demonstrate a commitment to ethical research practice and adherence to human subject protection safeguards. 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. 2. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 31 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 2. 5.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW Faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.. #4. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 5.taskstream. 7. and resolve ethical conflicts in professional practice.3. (Program Objectives 2. 6. 9. (Program Objectives 2. #3. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. #5) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 2. 8. (Program Goals #1. 7.asp?qy. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : 32 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 6. 8. 5. 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: Course Obj#7: Compare and contrast both qualitative and quantitative research methodologies in social science research including the strengths and limitations of both paradigms. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Socw faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. 4. (Program Goals #2. 3. SOCW 417(Applied Research )Rubric Details/Description: (attach annotated bibliography of references): Course Obj#4: Evaluate the efficacy and significance of specific interventions used in social work practice through the use of self and agency evaluation.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #3: Demonstrate professional behavior congruent with the social work Code of Ethics and apply strategies to effectively identify. 4. 4. 9. #4. address. 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #6: Understand and appreciate the history of the social work profession in the context of contemporary social policy and practice and utilize this knowledge to inform practice.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 9.

and advocating for desired changes at all levels of government. 2. LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 3. 6. 9. 8.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 7. 4. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. #5) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 5. 2. #4. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 7. 6. #4. and demonstrate a commitment to the principles of social and economic justice. 5. formulating. 10 Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #8: Apply appropriate strategies for analyzing. 6. influencing. (Program Goal #2) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : 33 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 4. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOME #1: Apply culturally competent evidence-based practice skills adaptable to meet the needs of individuals and groups with diverse backgrounds by utilizing understandable language and multi-culturally sensitive communication skills. 8. (Program Goals #1. and feedback from peers and other sources for self development. 9. 5..asp?qy. 8. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #4: Apply strategies for continuous self-evaluation including supervision and consultation. (Program Goals #1. 3. 2. 7.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 3. 4.taskstream. 9..

7. 8. 5. 6. 7. (Program Goals #3. 9. 8. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #5: Understand the forms and mechanisms of oppression and discrimination and apply innovative social change strategies which promote both social and economic justice.. (Program Goals #1. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy. 9. 8. 4. 2. 4. Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. organizations. 2. 6. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. 3. 6. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #9: Critically evaluate and analyze the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions with individuals. 3. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. 9. 5. #4.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word) Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. 4. 7. and communities. 10 Findings for SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 9. #4) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1. (Program Goals #1. using a variety of qualitative and quantitative methods. small groups. 5. #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1.Outcome Assessment Details http://folio.taskstream. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 34 of 37 8/6/2010 1:12 PM . 3. #4. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: SOCW 442( Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome Details/Description: IELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #2: Synthesize and integrate varied sources to inform decisions and create solutions and appropriate problem-solving strategies congruent with the social work knowledge base. families. 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points.

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric
Details/Description: Integrate social work ethics and values into generalist social work practice. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric
Details/Description: Integrate social work ethics and values into generalist social work practice. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric
Details/Description: 1. Discussed “who you are” and how that impacts (or will likely impact) clients in your upcoming field practicum and future practice. Demonstrate a sense of professionalism and a positive identification with the social work profession. (Program Objectives 2, 4, 6, 9, 10) Comments: Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Rubric
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram
Details/Description: (Course Obj #4: Implement basic skills of engagement, interviewing, data collection and assessment, intervention and evaluation appropriate with individuals, families, groups, organizations, and communities. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,

Findings for SOCW 306 ( Social Work Practice I) Genogram
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7.

35 of 37

8/6/2010 1:12 PM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 312 LIT REVIEW RUBRIC
Details/Description: Course Obj. #2: Demonstrate understanding of various theoretical explanations of forms of human diversity. (Program Objectives 1,2, 3, 6,8,9) Course Obj. #7: Apply assessment skills within the context of human behavior and diversity across the lifespan with special emphasis given to interpretation of various theoretical perspectives. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8) Course Obj. #12: Evaluate various theoretical perspectives in terms of evidence-based practice and culturally competent social work practice. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 for this item. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: Socw all faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Findings for SOCW 312 LIT REVIEW RUBRIC
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 6. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm
Details/Description: Course Obj. #1: Implement beginning interpersonal skills that are culturally competent. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9). Course Obj. #2: Develop and apply a framework for understanding and articulating social and cultural aspects relating to social work practice with special populations. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Findings for SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm
Details/Description: #1: Implement beginning interpersonal skills that are culturally competent. (Program Objectives 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9) Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009

Findings for SOCW 333(Social Work Practice with Special Populations) Midterm
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 7. Target Achievement: Met

36 of 37

8/6/2010 1:12 PM

Outcome Assessment Details

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp?qy...

Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 442 (Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome
Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #7: Apply a range of social work theories and evidence-based interventions with individuals, families, small groups, organizations, and communities in all types of settings. (Program Goals #1, #4, #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1, 2, 3, 4. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10 possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): FAll 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Findings for SOCW 442 (Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

SOCW 442 (Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome
Details/Description: FIELD EDUCATION STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVE #10: Function professionally within an organizational system and when appropriate, effect positive change. (Program Goals #1, #4, #5) LINKED WITH PROGRAM OBJECTIVES # 1, 2, 3, 4. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Target: A score of 7 points out of 10possible points. Implementation Plan (timeline): Fall 2009 Key/Responsible Personnel: SOCW faculty Supporting Attachments: ProgramGoalsObj (Microsoft Word)

Findings for SOCW 442 (Field Education II) Field Learning Outcome
Summary of Findings: The mean score for this item was 8. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

37 of 37

8/6/2010 1:12 PM

Outcome Assessment Details

Page 1 of 16

Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Engineering: BSE Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday, August 06, 2010

Measures and Findings

Engineering
Outcomes

Outcome 1
Mapped to:
USA- ABET-Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Element (a), Element (k)

Measures & Findings
College Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP)
Program level; Direct - Exam

Findings for College Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP)
Summary of Findings: The CAAP results for UTC engineering students graduating during the 2008-2009 academic year are: Writing: UTC mean = 64.67 (n= 9) which is 58.89 national percentile Mathematics: UTC mean = 63.28 (n= 7) which is 89.15 national percentile Science: UTC mean = 65.08 (n=12) which is 74.33 national percentile Reading: UTC mean = 61 (n=9) which is 42.33 national percentile Critical Thinking: UTC mean = 65.75 (n=12) which is 71.67 national percentile The goals for Writing and Reading were not met during this academic year. The writing score is close to meeting its goal; however the reading score is much lower than desired. In addition, the average UTC Writing score as a national percentile has increased over the last four years. The UTC reading score as a national percentile has decreased significant in the last year. Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : The 2009-2010 scores for both writing and reading will be assessed closely to see if there is a negative trend. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: College Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) is a standardized test that covers 5 sections – writing, reading, mathematics, science, and critical thinking. The completion of a section of the CAAP is a University requirement for graduation. The engineering program uses CAAP results to evaluate (1) proficiency in basic technical subjects that support engineering and (2) broad knowledge of subjects outside of engineering, such as social studies. Results in the “Math” and “Science” categories are used to assess Outcome 1. Target: Graduating Seniors from the Engineering Programs Score should be greater than or equal to the 60th percentile of the national scores. Implementation Plan (timeline): Every Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Student, Administrative Assistant Supporting Attachments:

Course Assessments
Course level; Direct - Other

Findings for Course Assessments
Summary of Findings: ENGR 222, 270, 303, and 307 are assessed for this outcome.

Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp... 8/6/2010

Outcome Assessment Details

Page 2 of 16

curriculum. Learning objectives have been established for each course, and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. Upon completion of a course, the instructor assembles a course folder. If the course is involved in the assessment process, the instructor completes a course assessment form similar to that shown in Figure 3. This form is used to score each learning objective based on the level of achievement demonstrated in student work contained in the course folder. The scoring, which ranges from 1 to 3, indicates whether the performance of the assessed students reflects an expected level of achievement (score of 2), a higher than expected level of achievement (score of 3), or a lower than expected level of achievement (score of 1). Two to three additional reviewers from the engineering faculty also complete assessment forms. The scores from the three to four assessments are averaged and recorded on the first page of the form. This gives a course-specific mean score for each program outcome supported. The instructor is required to examine the completed forms and make recommendations for course modifications to address any deficiencies. The next time the course is taught, the course instructor examines the prior assessment form to see what changes to the course were suggested. Significant changes are brought to the attention of the engineering faculty. Action is taken on an as-needed basis. Target: Courses that introduce and emphasize program objectives. Outcome assessment average should be greater than or equal to 2.0. Implementation Plan (timeline): Course assessments are completed in a two year cycle with half the ENGR courses being evaluated in the first year and the other half being evaluated in the second year. Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal and all CECS faculty Supporting Attachments:

ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR

222: 270: 303: 307:

The course assessments average a ?? out of 3.0. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

FE Exam
Program level; Direct - Exam

Findings for FE Exam
Summary of Findings: The 20082009 UTC FE Average % Correct Scores as a Percent of National % Correct Scores are

Details/Description: The Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination is a nationally administered test developed by the

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp... 8/6/2010

The FE exam covers subject matter taught in a typical baccalaureate engineering program and includes the following range of subjects: Chemistry Computers Electricity and Magnetism Engineering Economics Engineering Mechanics Engineering Probability and Statistics Ethics & Business Practices Fluid Mechanics Material Properties Mathematics Strength of Materials Thermodynamics Mathematics: 95. The metric goals established for the FE exam are that the overall score for UTC engineering students for each outcome will be at least 95 percent of the corresponding national average score.33% Strength of Materials: 109.Outcome Assessment Details Page 3 of 16 National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES). Material Properties. Notes : Target is met for all except one subject area.35% Computers: 94.2010 data will be reviewed to see if the % downward is a trend or just a minor "blip". Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : The faculty will review the FE questions being asked under the computer applications area to ensure clear understanding of the subject requirements.06% ENGR Probability and Statistics: 103. This goal was chosen because we have a commitment to produced students who perform at least as well as the average national engineering population of graduates. The FE exam results are obtained from the Tennessee State Board of Architectural and Engineering Examiners in Nashville following each fall and spring test.asp.. 8/6/2010 .58% Chemisry: 98. Computers. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the categories related to that outcome. All engineering students at UTC are strongly encouraged to take the FE exam toward the end of their senior year. Math. Some students take the general test in both the morning and afternoon sessions while others elect to take the subject test in the afternoon. Engineering Mechanics.. In addition the 2009 . Target: Graduating Engineering Students from the various engineering programs 95% of National average per each subject area Implementation Plan (timeline): Every Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal (UG Assistant Dean) and McDonald Supporting Attachments: http://folio.09% Engineering Mechanics: 115.79% The area of computer applications is slightly lower than the projected goal of 95%. Then the faculty will identify where in the curriculum the topics are covered/addressed and ensure they are sufficient. The FE categories considered for Objective 1 are Chemistry.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.taskstream. Substantiating Evidence: as well as more specific topics related to various engineering disciplines. and Engineering Probability and Statistics.

35% Fluid Mechanics: 112. Thermodynamics. fluid mechanics.. Some students take the general test in both the morning and afternoon sessions while others elect to take the subject test in the afternoon. 8/6/2010 . Element Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) (k) examination is a nationally administered test developed by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES).04% Elect & Magnetism: 108.. Direct . All engineering students at UTC are strongly encouraged to take the FE exam toward the end of their senior year. and specialty topics. The metric goals established for the FE exam are that the overall score for UTC engineering students for each outcome will be at least 95 percent of the corresponding national average score. The FE categories considered for Objective 2 are Electricity and Magnetism.Outcome Assessment Details Page 4 of 16 Outcome 2 Mapped to: Measures & Findings FE Exam Findings for FE Exam Summary of Findings: The FE Exam assessment is based on the morning general exam on the following topics: electricity & magnetism. Fluid Mechanics. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Program level. and thermodynamics. Strength of Materials. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the categories related to that outcome. Target: Graduating Engineering http://folio. material properties. The FE exam covers subject matter taught in a typical baccalaureate engineering program and includes the following range of subjects: Chemistry Computers Electricity and Magnetism Engineering Economics Engineering Mechanics Engineering Probability and Statistics Ethics & Business Practices Fluid Mechanics Material Properties Mathematics Strength of Materials Thermodynamics as well as more specific topics related to various engineering disciplines.63% The UTC Engineering students exceed target achievements in all subject areas.Exam USA.16% Thermodynamics: 108.taskstream. The FE exam results are obtained from the Tennessee State Board of Architectural and Engineering Examiners in Nashville following each fall and spring test.1% Material Properties: 104.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Engineering Economics. engineering economics.asp.ABET-Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Details/Description: The Programs: Element (e). The level of achievement is provided below: ENGR Economics: 100. This goal was chosen because we have a commitment to produced students who perform at least as well as the average national engineering population of graduates.

.37.65-67) Outcome 5: (2003: 17. A member of the Engineering faculty analyzes and interprets the EBI provided data and reports the results.48.42.66) (2005: 41.39.44. Outcome 2: (2003: 43.69) (2007: 41.55) (2007: 49. Indirect ..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.45.48.46) (2007: 15.49) (2007: 44. (EBI) produces a standardized.38.57) An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for http://folio.49) (2005: 15. The 2007 data is for all engineering graduating seniors for 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 (2 academic years).50) (2005: 36.40.44. 8/6/2010 .42.54.40. The responses from all engineering students are reviewed for the ENGR program since the seven outcomes being assessed are outcomes of all engineering programs and most of the knowledge and skills associated with the outcomes are developed in the core ENGR courses.64) Outcome 7: (2003: 46) (2005: 43.50) Outcome 4: (2003: 53-63) (2005: 39.38) (2007:36.37.43) Outcome 3: (2003: 38.Outcome Assessment Details Page 5 of 16 Students from the various engineering programs 95% of National average per each subject area Implementation Plan (timeline): Every Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal (UG Assistant Dean) and McDonald Supporting Attachments: Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Program level. Inc. The survey contains a number of questions relevant to the seven ENGR program outcomes. The survey was given to UTC engineering students in 2005 & 2007.47) Outcome 6: (2003: 45) (2005: 42. The questions that relate to each outcome are identified below. The 2005 data is for all engineering graduating seniors for 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 (2 academic years).taskstream.60-63. national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States.asp.46.53.47) (2007: 39.Survey No Findings Added to Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Details/Description: Educational Benchmark.40. UTC uses this survey to aid in evaluating ENGR program outcomes 2 through 7.

ABET-Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Element (b).com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. The instructor is required to examine http://folio. the instructor assembles a course folder. This gives a course-specific mean score for each program outcome supported. the instructor completes a course assessment form similar to that shown in Figure 3. Element (k) Measures & Findings Course Assessments Course level. a higher than expected level of achievement (score of 3). 8/6/2010 . Learning objectives have been established for each course. UG Assistant Dean Supporting Attachments: Outcome 3 Mapped to: USA. EBI provides UTC with the UTC specific scores (overall and major) as well as scores collected from other participating schools. The scores from the three to four assessments are averaged and recorded on the first page of the form. The scoring. or a lower than expected level of achievement (score of 1). The survey is scored by EBI. and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes.Other No Findings Added to Course Assessments Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum. Every other year the collection of surveys (from the past 2 years) are provided to EBI. Two to three additional reviewers from the engineering faculty also complete assessment forms. Direct .Outcome Assessment Details Page 6 of 16 the questions related to that outcome. Key/Responsible Personnel: CECS Department Heads. Upon completion of a course.taskstream.. indicates whether the performance of the assessed students reflects an expected level of achievement (score of 2). which ranges from 1 to 3. Target: All UTC Graduating Engineering Students The metric goals established for the EBI survey are that the overall UTC score for each outcome will exceed the overall average score for all participating institutions reported by EBI Implementation Plan (timeline): Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. This form is used to score each learning objective based on the level of achievement demonstrated in student work contained in the course folder..asp. If the course is involved in the assessment process.

The responses from all engineering students are reviewed for the ENGR program since the seven outcomes being assessed are outcomes of all engineering programs and most of the knowledge and skills associated with the outcomes are developed in the core ENGR courses. Inc. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the questions related to that outcome.asp.taskstream. The survey contains a number of questions relevant to the seven ENGR program outcomes.. Target: All UTC Graduating Engineering Students The metric goals established for the EBI survey are that the overall UTC score for each outcome will exceed the overall average score for all http://folio.Outcome Assessment Details Page 7 of 16 the completed forms and make recommendations for course modifications to address any deficiencies. the course instructor examines the prior assessment form to see what changes to the course were suggested. Target: Courses that introduce and emphasize program objectives. national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States.Survey No Findings Added to Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Details/Description: Educational Benchmark. Implementation Plan (timeline): Course assessments are completed in a two year cycle with half the ENGR courses being evaluated in the first year and the other half being evaluated in the second year. 8/6/2010 . Significant changes are brought to the attention of the engineering faculty. UTC uses this survey to aid in evaluating ENGR program outcomes 2 through 7. Indirect .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Action is taken on an as-needed basis.. Objective assessment average should be greater than or equal to 2. (EBI) produces a standardized.0. The next time the course is taught. Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal and all CECS faculty Supporting Attachments: Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Program level. A member of the Engineering faculty analyzes and interprets the EBI provided data and reports the results.

. Learning objectives have been established for each course. Two to three additional reviewers from the engineering faculty also complete assessment forms.Other No Findings Added to Course Assessments Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum.asp. 8/6/2010 . the instructor completes a course assessment form similar to that shown in Figure 3. Direct . the course instructor examines the prior assessment form to see what changes to the course were suggested. If the course is involved in the assessment process. The instructor is required to examine the completed forms and make recommendations for course modifications to address any deficiencies.. Key/Responsible Personnel: CECS Department Heads. The survey is scored by EBI. and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes.taskstream. UG Assistant Dean Supporting Attachments: Outcome 4 Mapped to: USA. indicates whether the performance of the assessed students reflects an expected level of achievement (score of 2).ABET-Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Element (c) Measures & Findings Course Assessments Course level. Significant changes http://folio. or a lower than expected level of achievement (score of 1). The scoring. the instructor assembles a course folder. Upon completion of a course. This gives a course-specific mean score for each program outcome supported.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. which ranges from 1 to 3.Outcome Assessment Details Page 8 of 16 participating institutions reported by EBI Implementation Plan (timeline): Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. a higher than expected level of achievement (score of 3). EBI provides UTC with the UTC specific scores (overall and major) as well as scores collected from other participating schools. Every other year the collection of surveys (from the past 2 years) are provided to EBI. The scores from the three to four assessments are averaged and recorded on the first page of the form. This form is used to score each learning objective based on the level of achievement demonstrated in student work contained in the course folder. The next time the course is taught.

Survey No Findings Added to Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Details/Description: Educational Benchmark. Inc. national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. Every other year the collection of surveys (from the past 2 years) are provided to EBI. Target: Courses that introduce and emphasize program objectives.Outcome Assessment Details Page 9 of 16 are brought to the attention of the engineering faculty. Implementation Plan (timeline): Course assessments are completed in a two year cycle with half the ENGR courses being evaluated in the first year and the other half being evaluated in the second year. Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal and all CECS faculty Supporting Attachments: Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Program level.asp. UTC uses this survey to aid in evaluating ENGR program outcomes 2 through 7. (EBI) produces a standardized. Objective assessment average should be greater than or equal to 2. The responses from all engineering students are reviewed for the ENGR program since the seven outcomes being assessed are outcomes of all engineering programs and most of the knowledge and skills associated with the outcomes are developed in the core ENGR courses. The http://folio. A member of the Engineering faculty analyzes and interprets the EBI provided data and reports the results. The survey contains a number of questions relevant to the seven ENGR program outcomes. 8/6/2010 . Action is taken on an as-needed basis. Indirect .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail..0. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the questions related to that outcome..taskstream. Target: All UTC Graduating Engineering Students The metric goals established for the EBI survey are that the overall UTC score for each outcome will exceed the overall average score for all participating institutions reported by EBI Implementation Plan (timeline): Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year.

If the course is involved in the assessment process. the course instructor examines the prior assessment form to see what changes to the course were suggested. Learning objectives have been established for each course. UG Assistant Dean Supporting Attachments: Outcome 5 Mapped to: USA. Two to three additional reviewers from the engineering faculty also complete assessment forms.ABET-Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Element (d). Element (g) Measures & Findings Course Assessments Course level. Objective assessment average should http://folio. or a lower than expected level of achievement (score of 1).. 8/6/2010 . Action is taken on an as-needed basis.asp. Upon completion of a course.Other No Findings Added to Course Assessments Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Outcome Assessment Details Page 10 of 16 survey is scored by EBI. Direct . EBI provides UTC with the UTC specific scores (overall and major) as well as scores collected from other participating schools.. The next time the course is taught. The scoring. Target: Courses that introduce and emphasize program objectives. which ranges from 1 to 3. and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. a higher than expected level of achievement (score of 3).taskstream. the instructor assembles a course folder. Significant changes are brought to the attention of the engineering faculty. Key/Responsible Personnel: CECS Department Heads. the instructor completes a course assessment form similar to that shown in Figure 3. The instructor is required to examine the completed forms and make recommendations for course modifications to address any deficiencies. This form is used to score each learning objective based on the level of achievement demonstrated in student work contained in the course folder. indicates whether the performance of the assessed students reflects an expected level of achievement (score of 2). The scores from the three to four assessments are averaged and recorded on the first page of the form. This gives a course-specific mean score for each program outcome supported.

Implementation Plan (timeline): Course assessments are completed in a two year cycle with half the ENGR courses being evaluated in the first year and the other half being evaluated in the second year. UG Assistant Dean Supporting Attachments: http://folio.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. A member of the Engineering faculty analyzes and interprets the EBI provided data and reports the results. The survey contains a number of questions relevant to the seven ENGR program outcomes.0. Every other year the collection of surveys (from the past 2 years) are provided to EBI.. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the questions related to that outcome.. Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal and all CECS faculty Supporting Attachments: Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Program level.asp. Target: All UTC Graduating Engineering Students The metric goals established for the EBI survey are that the overall UTC score for each outcome will exceed the overall average score for all participating institutions reported by EBI Implementation Plan (timeline): Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. Indirect .Survey No Findings Added to Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Details/Description: Educational Benchmark. 8/6/2010 . Inc. national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. Key/Responsible Personnel: CECS Department Heads. (EBI) produces a standardized. The responses from all engineering students are reviewed for the ENGR program since the seven outcomes being assessed are outcomes of all engineering programs and most of the knowledge and skills associated with the outcomes are developed in the core ENGR courses. UTC uses this survey to aid in evaluating ENGR program outcomes 2 through 7.taskstream. The survey is scored by EBI.Outcome Assessment Details Page 11 of 16 be greater than or equal to 2. EBI provides UTC with the UTC specific scores (overall and major) as well as scores collected from other participating schools.

ABET-Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Element (f). Significant changes are brought to the attention of the engineering faculty. which ranges from 1 to 3. Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal and all CECS faculty http://folio..Outcome Assessment Details Page 12 of 16 Outcome 6 Mapped to: USA. a higher than expected level of achievement (score of 3). Upon completion of a course. This form is used to score each learning objective based on the level of achievement demonstrated in student work contained in the course folder. Learning objectives have been established for each course. Direct . Element (i) Measures & Findings Course Assessments Course level. and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. The scores from the three to four assessments are averaged and recorded on the first page of the form. The scoring. indicates whether the performance of the assessed students reflects an expected level of achievement (score of 2). the instructor assembles a course folder.Other No Findings Added to Course Assessments Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum. Action is taken on an as-needed basis.asp. If the course is involved in the assessment process. the instructor completes a course assessment form similar to that shown in Figure 3. Two to three additional reviewers from the engineering faculty also complete assessment forms. 8/6/2010 . Objective assessment average should be greater than or equal to 2. The next time the course is taught. Implementation Plan (timeline): Course assessments are completed in a two year cycle with half the ENGR courses being evaluated in the first year and the other half being evaluated in the second year.. or a lower than expected level of achievement (score of 1).0. the course instructor examines the prior assessment form to see what changes to the course were suggested. Target: Courses that introduce and emphasize program objectives.taskstream. The instructor is required to examine the completed forms and make recommendations for course modifications to address any deficiencies. This gives a course-specific mean score for each program outcome supported.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

Target: Graduating Engineering Students from the various engineering programs 95% of National average per each subject area http://folio.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.taskstream. The metric goals established for the FE exam are that the overall score for UTC engineering students for each outcome will be at least 95 percent of the corresponding national average score. All engineering students at UTC are strongly encouraged to take the FE exam toward the end of their senior year. The FE exam covers subject matter taught in a typical baccalaureate engineering program and includes the following range of subjects: Chemistry Computers Electricity and Magnetism Engineering Economics Engineering Mechanics Engineering Probability and Statistics Ethics & Business Practices Fluid Mechanics Material Properties Mathematics Strength of Materials Thermodynamics as well as more specific topics related to various engineering disciplines.Outcome Assessment Details Page 13 of 16 Supporting Attachments: FE Exam Program level. 8/6/2010 .. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the categories related to that outcome.asp.Exam Findings for FE Exam Summary of Findings: UTC: 82..1% Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : None Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination is a nationally administered test developed by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES). The FE categories considered for Objective 6 are Ethics & Business Practices.96% Nat'l: 74. Direct . This goal was chosen because we have a commitment to produced students who perform at least as well as the average national engineering population of graduates.67% UTC % Correct vs Nat'l % Correct: 111. Some students take the general test in both the morning and afternoon sessions while others elect to take the subject test in the afternoon. The FE exam results are obtained from the Tennessee State Board of Architectural and Engineering Examiners in Nashville following each fall and spring test.

8/6/2010 . Every other year the collection of surveys (from the past 2 years) are provided to EBI. Indirect . (EBI) produces a standardized. The survey is scored by EBI. Inc. EBI provides UTC with the UTC specific scores (overall and major) as well as scores collected from other participating schools. Key/Responsible Personnel: CECS Department Heads. UG Assistant Dean Supporting Attachments: Outcome 7 Mapped to: Measures & Findings http://folio. A member of the Engineering faculty analyzes and interprets the EBI provided data and reports the results. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the questions related to that outcome. UTC uses this survey to aid in evaluating ENGR program outcomes 2 through 7.asp. The survey contains a number of questions relevant to the seven ENGR program outcomes. The responses from all engineering students are reviewed for the ENGR program since the seven outcomes being assessed are outcomes of all engineering programs and most of the knowledge and skills associated with the outcomes are developed in the core ENGR courses.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.. Target: All UTC Graduating Engineering Students The metric goals established for the EBI survey are that the overall UTC score for each outcome will exceed the overall average score for all participating institutions reported by EBI Implementation Plan (timeline): Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year..taskstream.Survey No Findings Added to Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Details/Description: Educational Benchmark. national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States.Outcome Assessment Details Page 14 of 16 Implementation Plan (timeline): Every Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Wigal (UG Assistant Dean) and McDonald Supporting Attachments: Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Program level.

mathematics. UTC uses this survey to aid in evaluating ENGR program outcomes 2 through 7. An overall score for each outcome is formed by averaging the scores for the questions related to that outcome. The survey contains a number of questions relevant to the seven ENGR program outcomes.Exam Findings for College Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Summary of Findings: The Outcome 7 CAAP results for UTC engineering students graduating during the 20072008 academic year are: Critical Thinking: UTC mean = 65.Outcome Assessment Details Page 15 of 16 USA. Inc. Results in the “critical thinking” category is used to assess Outcome 7. A member of the Engineering faculty analyzes and interprets the EBI provided data and reports the results.. (EBI) produces a standardized.67 national percentile Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: College Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) is a standardized test that covers 5 sections – writing.Survey No Findings Added to Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Details/Description: Educational Benchmark. Administrative Assistant Supporting Attachments: Graduating Senior Survey (EBI) Program level. 8/6/2010 .. The responses from all engineering students are reviewed for the ENGR program since the seven outcomes being assessed are outcomes of all engineering programs and most of the knowledge and skills associated with the outcomes are developed in the core ENGR courses. national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. and critical thinking. Element (j) College Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP) Program level. Direct . Target: Graduating Seniors from the Engineering Programs Implementation Plan (timeline): Every Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Student. reading.asp. Indirect . The engineering program uses CAAP results to evaluate (1) proficiency in basic technical subjects that support engineering and (2) broad knowledge of subjects outside of engineering.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.ABET-Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs: Element (h). science. The completion of a section of the CAAP is a University requirement for graduation. Target: All UTC Graduating Engineering Students The metric goals established for the EBI survey are that the overall UTC score for each outcome will exceed the overall average score for all participating institutions reported by http://folio.75 (n=12) which is 71.taskstream. such as social studies.

taskstream. 8/6/2010 .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Key/Responsible Personnel: CECS Department Heads. UG Assistant Dean Supporting Attachments: http://folio. Every other year the collection of surveys (from the past 2 years) are provided to EBI. EBI provides UTC with the UTC specific scores (overall and major) as well as scores collected from other participating schools.. The survey is scored by EBI.asp.Outcome Assessment Details Page 16 of 16 EBI Implementation Plan (timeline): Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year..

asp.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority .Exam Findings for 2nd prioirty Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Summary of Findings: The assessment in subject area met or exceed the national ME mean.0 to 3. target for all ME majors to be 85% in all subjects related to Outcome 1 Implementation Plan (timeline): Evaluated annually in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: ME department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the analysis Supporting Attachments: http://folio. August 06. 2010 Measures and Findings Mechanical Engineering: BSME Outcomes .0 to 3. Dynamics Material Science. Math and Statics Target: From a 0% to 100% scale. Subjects are Chemistry.0 scale.Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Program level.0 on a 1.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Average of all examination category scores relevant to Outcome 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the FE review subject sessions every semester with a strengthted review in the mathematics. Fundamentals engineering.0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd prioirty . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2.0 on scale of 1. 303.0 mean) of this outcome.Outcome Assessment Details Page 1 of 11 Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Mechanical Engineering: BSME Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. & 307 course files to find evidence Outcome 1 Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 1 if student get > 2.taskstream. All percentages greater than the 85% target except mathematics which was 82%. Direct .for current students Outcomes 1. sciences and computers Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .Course Assessment Course level. math. 8/6/2010 . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENGR assessment of ENGR 222.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2. Direct .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.. Computers. 270.

Portfolio Findings for 1st priority .0 to 3. Direct . 309.taskstream. 447. The subject parts are writing. Indirect . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Every year. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ME assessment of ENME 304. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success of this outcome. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 2 if student get > 2.asp. 442.0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): http://folio. Engineering Tools Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority . ME seniors take one part of the CAAP exit exam. while ENME 445..0 scale. 446. Also. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey. Target: Seniors scores for each subject are compared to the national norms for each subject with the target of our ME seniors to meet and exceed the national averages Implementation Plan (timeline): Annually Key/Responsible Personnel: ME department head Supporting Attachments: 4th priority . Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually. reading and critical thinking.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2. science. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation. mathematics.0 on a 1.0 mean) of this outcome. 443. 347. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle. 348.EBI Senior Survey Program level. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle.CAAP exam Summary of Findings: The UTC ME CAAP scores met or exceeded the national average for engineering students taking the CAAP test. Direct . Supporting Attachments: 2. ENME 440 and 441 are used for students in the energy option. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. & 450 course files to find evidence Outcome 2. or 448 are used for student in the mechanical option.0 to 3.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally. 8/6/2010 ..Course Assessment Course level.0 on scale of 1.Survey Findings for 4th priority . (meeting and exceeding the national average of students taking CAAP) Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Annually.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Outcome Assessment Details Page 2 of 11 3rd priority .CAAP exam Program level.Exam Findings for 3rd priority . Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 1 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 1 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey.

Engineering Experimentation Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .asp. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle.0 on scale of 1. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle.Outcome Assessment Details Page 3 of 11 Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority .EBI Senior Survey Program level.. Thermodynamics.Course Assessment Course level.Exam Findings for 2nd priority Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Summary of Findings: The assessment in subject areas met or exceed the national ME mean. Direct . Direct .Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Program level. and Mechanics of Materials.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 8/6/2010 . All percentages greater than the 85% target.0 on a 1. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation. Target: From a 0% to 100% scale.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority .. Indirect . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Average of all examination category scores relevant to Outcome 2.taskstream. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Every year.Survey Findings for 3rd priority . Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 3 if student get > 2. Subjects are Electrical Circuits.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally.0 scale. target for all ME majors to be 85% in all subjects related to Outcome 2 Implementation Plan (timeline): Evaluated annually in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: ME department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the analysis Supporting Attachments: 3rd priority .0 to 3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the Details/Description: ME assessment of ENME 347 & 447 course files to find evidence Outcome 3. Supporting Attachments: 3. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 2 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 2 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey. Fluid Mechanics. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the FE review subject sessions every semester with a strengthted review in the mathematics and other targeted subject areas (where percentages fall below the 85% target).0 to http://folio.

0 scale.EBI Senior Survey Program level. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle.. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 2nd priority ..EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME Details/Description: Every year.0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally.0 to 3. Engineering Design Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .0 on scale of 1.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority .0 to 3.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2.Outcome Assessment Details Page 4 of 11 3. & 450 course files to find evidence Outcome 4. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Every year.0 mean) of this outcome.Survey Findings for 2nd priority .0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority .0 on a 1. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 4 if student get > 2. 447. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey.Survey Findings for 2nd priority .taskstream. Indirect . 443. http://folio.0 mean) of this outcome. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENGR assessment of ENGR 185. Supporting Attachments: 4. Direct . Indirect .asp. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 3 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 3 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey. 385 and 485 & ENME 442. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually. 8/6/2010 .Course Assessment Course level.EBI Senior Survey Program level.

Notes : Details/Description: Every year.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 5 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 5 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 5.Course Assessment Course level.0 mean) of this outcome.0 on a 1. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENGR assessment of ENGR 185. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle. Supporting Attachments: seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally..asp. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually.taskstream. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. 247. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle.0 to 3. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 4 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 4 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority . Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle.0 scale.0 on scale of 1. 8/6/2010 . Indirect . Direct .0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority . Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually.Outcome Assessment Details Page 5 of 11 each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey.. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 5 if student get > 2. 329. 385 and 485 & course files to find evidence Outcome 5.EBI Senior Survey Program level.0 to 3. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME http://folio. Engineering Communication and Team Building Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .Survey Findings for 2nd priority .EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally.

Supporting Attachments: Substantiating Evidence: 6. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENGR assessment of ENGR 485 & ENME 450 course files to find evidence Outcome 6.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2.Exam Findings for 3rd priority Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Summary of Findings: The assessment in subject area met or exceed the national ME mean. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle.0 to 3. target for all ME majors to be 85% in all subjects related to Outcome 6 Implementation Plan (timeline): Evaluated annually in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: ME http://folio..0 on scale of 1. Direct .EBI Senior Survey Program level.Outcome Assessment Details Page 6 of 11 faculty to help with the evaluation. Direct .Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Program level.Survey Findings for 2nd priority .0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority . Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation.0 scale. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 6 if student get > 2.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 6 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 6 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Every year. All percentages greater than the 85% target.asp.0 on a 1. 8/6/2010 . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the FE review subject sessions every Details/Description: Average of all examination category scores relevant to Outcome 6.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally.Course Assessment Course level.0 mean) of this outcome. Engineering Ethics & Professional Development Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority . Indirect . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. Target: From a 0% to 100% scale.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority . Supporting Attachments: 3rd priority . each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey.0 to 3.. Subject is Ethics.

CAAP exam Summary of Findings: The UTC ME CAAP scores met or exceeded the national average for engineering students taking the CAAP test. Engineering in Global Societal Context Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .. Direct .Exam Findings for 2nd priority . Direct . science. mathematics.0 to 3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success of this outcome.0 scale. Indirect . ENME 441 is assessed.CAAP exam Program level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.0 on a 1.Survey Findings for 3rd priority . but for ME students in the mechanical option.0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority .EBI Senior Survey Program level. For ME students in the energy option. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENME assessment of ENME 443 & ENME 450 course files to find evidence Outcome 7. reading and critical thinking.asp. ENME 445 is assessed.0 to 3. 8/6/2010 .taskstream. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey.0 mean) of this outcome. (meeting and exceeding the national average of students taking CAAP) Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Annually. ME seniors take one part of the CAAP exit exam. Target Achievement: Met Details/Description: Every year. Target: Seniors scores for each subject are compared to the national norms for each subject with the target of our ME seniors to meet and exceed the national averages Implementation Plan (timeline): Annually Key/Responsible Personnel: ME department head Supporting Attachments: 3rd priority .Outcome Assessment Details Page 7 of 11 department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the analysis Supporting Attachments: semester with a strengthted review in the mathematics and other targeted subject areas (where percentages fall below the 85% target).Portfolio Findings for 1st priority . Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 7 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior http://folio.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2. The subject parts are writing.0 on scale of 1. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 7. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 7 if student get > 2.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally.Course Assessment Course level.

taskstream. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle.Outcome Assessment Details Page 8 of 11 responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 7 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey.. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 8 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 8 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle. Indirect . Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Every year. & 447 course files to find evidence Outcome 8. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. Direct ..0 mean) of this outcome. Engineering Skills to Model Systems Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority . Supporting Attachments: http://folio. 8/6/2010 . ENME 445 is assessed.443.EBI Senior Survey Program level.0 to 3. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority .Survey Findings for 2nd priority . Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 8.asp.Course Assessment Course level. For ME students in the energy option. ENME 440 is assessed. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENME assessment of ENME 309.0 on scale of 1. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally.0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority .0 on a 1.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2. Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 8 if student get > 2.0 scale. but for ME students in the mechanical option.0 to 3. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually.

All percentages greater than the 85% target. Direct . ENME 445 or ENME 448 is assessed.0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority . Computers.0 mean) of this outcome.Course Assessment Course level..Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Program level. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Average of all examination category scores relevant to Outcome 9. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 9 if student get > 2.0 to 3.0 scale.0 on a 1. 347. Statics. 348. target for all ME majors to be 85% in all subjects related to Outcome 9 Implementation Plan (timeline): Evaluated annually in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: ME department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the analysis Supporting Attachments: 3rd priority . but for ME students in the mechanical option.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 8/6/2010 . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. & 443 course files to find evidence Outcome 9.Outcome Assessment Details Page 9 of 11 9. 442.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority .taskstream.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally. Mathematics. Subjecta are Chemistry. Electrical Circuits.0 to 3.0 on scale of 1. Mechanics of Materials.Exam Findings for 2nd priority Fundamentals of Engineering Exam Summary of Findings: The assessment in subject area met or exceed the national ME mean. Target: From a 0% to 100% scale.Survey Findings for 3rd priority . Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 9 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 9 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are http://folio. Fluid Mechanics..asp. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the FE review subject sessions every semester with a strengthted review in the mathematics and other targeted subject areas (where percentages fall below the 85% target). Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENME assessment of ENME 309. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey Details/Description: Every year. and Ethics. Dynamics. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey. For ME students in the energy option. Thermodynamics. Indirect . Material Science.EBI Senior Survey Program level. Direct . ENME 440 is assessed. Engineering Skills to Analyze Systems Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2.

Direct .Course Assessment Course level..0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: 2nd priority . Direct . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. 443 & 450 course files to find evidence Outcome 10. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation..Survey Findings for 2nd priority .0 on scale of 1.0 to 3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: ENME assessment of ENME 442.0 scale. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 10.Course Assessment http://folio. Indirect . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle.Course Assessment Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2.0 mean) of this outcome. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority . Supporting Attachments: 11.0 to 3.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally.0 on a 1. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey. Engineering Professionalism Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .Outcome Assessment Details Page 10 of 11 using the EBI senior survey. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 10 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 10 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey.asp. Supporting Attachments: results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle.EBI Senior Survey Program level. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 10 if student get > 2. Engineering Skills to Design Systems Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings 1st priority .Course Assessment Course level.Portfolio Findings for 1st priority . 8/6/2010 . Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle.taskstream. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Every year.

. Indirect . Supporting Attachments: http://folio.0 to 3.Survey Findings for 2nd priority .Outcome Assessment Details Page 11 of 11 Details/Description: ENME assessment of ENME 442. 8/6/2010 .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 447 & 450 course files to find evidence Outcome 11.0 scale. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the evaluation of seniors on a continuing two-year cycle using the EBI survey results for UTC ME students and comparing them to the national ME results of those schools using the EBI survey for the same two-year cycle.0 on a 1. Scores evaluated every two-years in a six year cycle. Target: On assessment form for the course being evaluated for Outcome 11 if student get > 2. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: 2nd priority .0 to 3.asp. 443.0 mean) of this outcome.EBI Senior Survey Summary of Findings: The UTC ME seniors expressed opinions concerning the questions mapped to this outcome that met and exceeded the responses from ME students from all universities participating in the EBI survey nationally. Implementation Plan (timeline): Surveyed annually.taskstream. Key/Responsible Personnel: ME Department head and appointed ME faculty to help with the evaluation. each ME senior takes the EBI Senior survey. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Every year..EBI Senior Survey Program level. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : To continue the use of the assessment tools to monitor this student's success (> 2. Specific survey questions are identified for Outcome 11 and are used to assess the outcome Target: The target is for the mean scores for the UTC ME senior responses for the target questions supporting Outcome 11 to meet or exceed national mean scores for the total participating schools that are using the EBI senior survey.0 on scale of 1.0 then that student work assess meets the outcome Implementation Plan (timeline): Process performed every 2 years in a six year cycle Key/Responsible Personnel: Engineering faculty assessment committee assigned Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: The students assessed in course met or exceeded the assessment mean of 2.

Upon completion of a course. Target: Portfolio's accessed must score greater than 2 on a scale of 1 to 3. Direct . The FE exam covers subject matter taught in a typical baccalaureate engineering program.asp. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination is a nationally administered test developed by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES). with 3 being the highest. 8/6/2010 .taskstream. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum.0.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.1 which meets the set target of 2. All CE students at UTC are strongly encouraged to take the FE exam toward the end of their senior year. The course folder is then evaluated by at least three faculty members. Direct . August 06. Learning objectives have been established for each course.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are recommended at this time.Portfolio Findings for Fundamental Knowledge Summary of Findings: Average score on the portfolio's was 2. 2010 Measures and Findings Civil Engineering: BS Outcome Set Outcome Fundamental Knowledge Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Fundamental Knowledge Other level.. the instructor assembles a course folder. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are required at the present time. Target: Our students will score 85% of the national average Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET Coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments: Fundamental Knowledge Course level.Exam Findings for Fundamental Knowledge Summary of Findings: Our students scored 97% of the national average. Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET http://folio. Our students scored well above the target of 85%.Outcome Assessment Details Page 1 of 6 Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Civil Engineering: BS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes.

Outcome Assessment Details

Page 2 of 6

coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Contemporary, Societal and Global Issues
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Contemporary, Societal and Global Issues
Other level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Contemporary, Societal and Global Issues
Summary of Findings: Our students scored 106% of the national average. Our students scored well above the target of 90%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are recommended at this time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Educational Benchmark, Inc. (EBI) produces a standardized, national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. Target: Our students will score 90% of participating schools' average score Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Contemporary, Societal and Global Issues
Course level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Contemporary, Societal and Global Issues
Summary of Findings: Average score on the portfolio's was 2.0 which meets the set target of 2.0. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : No curricular improvements are required at the present time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum. Learning objectives have been established for each course, and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. Upon completion of a course, the instructor assembles a course folder. The course folder is then evaluated by at least three faculty members. Target: Portfolio's accessed must score greater than 2 on a scale of 1 to 3, with 3 being the highest. Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Modern Engineering Tools
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Modern Engineering Tools
Program level; Direct - Exam

Findings for Modern Engineering Tools
Summary of Findings: Our students scored 100% of the national average. Our students scored well above the target of 85%.

Details/Description: The Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination is a nationally administered test developed by the National Council of Examiners for

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp... 8/6/2010

Outcome Assessment Details

Page 3 of 6

Engineering and Surveying (NCEES). The FE exam covers subject matter taught in a typical baccalaureate engineering program. All CE students at UTC are strongly encouraged to take the FE exam toward the end of their senior year. Target: All students will score 85% of national average score Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are required at the present time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Modern Engineering Tools
Course level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Modern Engineering Tools
Summary of Findings: Average score on the portfolio's was 2.2 which meets the set target of 2.0. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are required at the present time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum. Learning objectives have been established for each course, and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. Upon completion of a course, the instructor assembles a course folder. The course folder is then evaluated by at least three faculty members. Target: Portfolio's accessed must score greater than 2 on a scale of 1 to 3, with 3 being the highest. Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Effective Communication and Team Work
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Effective Communication and Team Work
Other level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Effective Communication and Team Work
Summary of Findings: Our students scored 108% of the national average. Our students scored well above the target of 90%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are recommended at this time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Educational Benchmark, Inc. (EBI) produces a standardized, national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. Target: Our students will score 90% of participating schools' average score Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Effective Communication and

Findings for Effective

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp... 8/6/2010

Outcome Assessment Details

Page 4 of 6

Team Work
Course level; Direct - Portfolio

Communication and Team Work
Summary of Findings: Average score on the portfolio's was 2.2 which exceeds the set target of 2.0. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are required at the present time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum. Learning objectives have been established for each course, and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. Upon completion of a course, the instructor assembles a course folder. The course folder is then evaluated by at least three faculty members. Target: Portfolio's accessed must score greater than 2 on a scale of 1 to 3, with 3 being the highest. Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Ethical Responsibilty and Professional Societies
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Ethical Responsibility and Professional Societies
Other level; Direct - Exam

Findings for Ethical Responsibility and Professional Societies
Summary of Findings: Our students scored 94% of the national average. Our students scored well above the target of 85%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements at this time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: The Fundamentals of Engineering (FE) examination is a nationally administered test developed by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying (NCEES). The FE exam covers subject matter taught in a typical baccalaureate engineering program. All CE students at UTC are strongly encouraged to take the FE exam toward the end of their senior year. Target: All students will score 85% of national average score Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Ethical Responsibility and Professional Societies
Other level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Ethical Responsibility and Professional Societies
Summary of Findings: Our students scored 94% of the national average. Our students scored well above the target of 90%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are recommended at this time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Educational Benchmark, Inc. (EBI) produces a standardized, national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. Target: Our students will score 90%

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp... 8/6/2010

Outcome Assessment Details

Page 5 of 6

of participating schools' average score Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Plan and Conduct Experiments
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Plan and Conduct Experiments
Other level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Plan and Conduct Experiments
Summary of Findings: Our students scored 110% of the national average. Our students scored well above the target of 90%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are recommended at this time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Educational Benchmark, Inc. (EBI) produces a standardized, national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. Target: Our students will score 90% of participating schools' average score Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Plan and Conduct Experiments
Course level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Plan and Conduct Experiments
Summary of Findings: Average score on the portfolio's was 2.2 which exceeds the set target of 2.0. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are required at the present time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum. Learning objectives have been established for each course, and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. Upon completion of a course, the instructor assembles a course folder. The course folder is then evaluated by at least three faculty members. Target: Portfolio's accessed must score greater than 2 on a scale of 1 to 3, with 3 being the highest. Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Major Dseign in Civil Engineering
Mapped to:
No Mapping

Measures & Findings
Major Design in Civil Engineering
Course level; Direct - Portfolio

Findings for Major Design in Civil Engineering
Summary of Findings: Average score on the portfolio's was 1.9 which barley meets the set target of 2.0.

Details/Description: A key tool in the assessment of program outcomes

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp... 8/6/2010

Outcome Assessment Details

Page 6 of 6

is the evaluation of courses within the curriculum. Learning objectives have been established for each course, and these objectives have been mapped to corresponding program outcomes. Upon completion of a course, the instructor assembles a course folder. The course folder is then evaluated by at least three faculty members. Target: Portfolio's accessed must score greater than 2 on a scale of 1 to 3, with 3 being the highest. Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

Target Achievement: Not Met Recommendations : No curricular improvements at this time. The faculty adopted a wait and see approach. The department will continue to monitor and this outcome will be assessed in the next cycle of assessment. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Major Design in Civil Engineering
Other level; Indirect - Survey

Findings for Major Design in Civil Engineering
Summary of Findings: Our students scored 110% of the national average. Our students scored well above the target of 90%. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : No curricular improvements are recommended at this time. Notes : Substantiating Evidence:

Details/Description: Educational Benchmark, Inc. (EBI) produces a standardized, national survey that is administered to students at engineering schools throughout the United States. Graduating seniors complete the EBI survey at the end of the fall and spring semester every year. Target: Our students will score 90% of participating schools' average score Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: ABET coordinator within the CE department Supporting Attachments:

http://folio.taskstream.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp... 8/6/2010

(2) physical fluid dynamics. especially in relation to the dissertation research project. Key/Responsible Personnel: Program coordinator and faculty examiners.taskstream. 4) Given that this is an innovative interdisciplinary program in which no undergraduate major provides complete preparation for the program. it was found that a systematic and thorough orientation and advisement process was needed for incoming students. 2) Computational engineering coursework is heavily project oriented and requires at an intermediate level of scientific programming skills.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Implementation Plan (timeline): Assessment is made at the time of the preliminary exam.Exam Findings for Competency in the Three Computational Engineering Core Areas Summary of Findings: 1) Students with non-engineering backgrounds need exposure to engineering problem solving as well as some important physics-related topics related to computational field simulation. All students’ exams include material from topics (1) and (3).Outcome Assessment Details Page 1 of 4 Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Computational Engineering: PhD Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. This review and exam provides a global perspective of coursework. 5). based on the dissertation research area. Target: All students score very good or excellent (4+) in 3 exams and satisfactory (3+) in the 4th (1-5 scale). (3) mathematics of computation. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : 1) Based on the advisement process. Faculty have noticed that a small number of students have had difficulty with various mathematical manipulations and derivations requiring skills that should have been mastered in undergraduate mathematics courses. students needing Details/Description: At or near the completion of all coursework. Supporting Attachments: http://folio. (4) parallel scientific computing..asp. August 06. 8/6/2010 . These exams cover four of the following five major topics: (1) computational fluid dynamics. Direct . Many new students struggle with completing their course-related projects because of a lack of programming skills. 3) Most new students needed introduction to computational engineering as soon as possible. 2010 Measures and Findings Computational Engineering: PhD Outcome Set Outcomes Academic Preparation Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Competency in the Three Computational Engineering Core Areas Program level.. and (5) grid generation. the other two areas are determined by the student and their major advisor. students are given a comprehensive examination on material from the three core areas of computational engineering.

a mathematics review test will be given during the new-student orientation and advisement process to provide early diagnosis of any weaknesses relevant to the curriculum. and interpreting computed results. assignment of cubical space.Outcome Assessment Details Page 2 of 4 more background are required to take 2-3 undergraduate engineering courses in vector statics.. 5). authorization for SimCenter computer access. fluid mechanics. To reinforce all three outcome objectives. 3) All new students are given introductory projects in simulationrelated programming designed to provide practical experience in formulating a numerical algorithm. 3) computer resources. 8/6/2010 . and thermodynamics (these courses are not counted as part of students' graduate degree).asp. 2) A new 1-hour course was introduced to provide basic orientation and instruction in computer skills needed early in the program. Students are to complete these projects during the summer that follows their first two. 7) faculty and staff. the Department Head also gives a PowerPoint presentation “New Student Orientation” to all new students covering 1) program objectives. 4) expectations of faculty and students. Early in the first semester. full-time semesters. 5) academic requirements.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.taskstream. and a booklet “Process Information for New Students” explaining administrative processes such as registration and payroll encountered by new SimCenter students. the program’s working environment that includes students in the team research conducted in the SimCenter is explained.. Beginning in the Fall 2010 semester. compiling and debugging the software. 2) building. There is a mutual expectation among SimCenter faculty and students that students are expected to have meaningful technical interactions with multiple faculty and with other students. The orientation includes a formal advisement interview and checklist. Notes : http://folio. and 8) the summer project. 4) An orientation process for each individual student was developed and implemented by the Program Coordinator. implementing the algorithm in software. a SimCenter tour. 6) research requirements.

Target: 75% rated as "Making Excellent Progress" and 25% rated as "Expected to Make Progress. and M.Survey Findings for Assessment of Research Progress Summary of Findings: 77% of the faculty who reported significant/regular or occasional interactions with the 10 Ph. which is consistent with their election of the non-thesis option.D.asp. Supporting Attachments: Independent Research Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Assessment of Research Progress Program level. An anecdotal survey of faculty documents both significant/regular and occasional faculty/student interactions that relate specifically to research activities. 8/6/2010 .” Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Although this is a small sample. (Thesis) students had regular research interactions with about 2 faculty and occasional interactions with an additional 4-5 faculty. students who have graduated assessed their research as “Making Excellent Progress.S.Other Findings for Quality of Dissertation Research Summary of Findings: The results of the anecdotal assessment by faculty of dissertation quality and student Details/Description: Students submit a written dissertation that is reviewed by the major advisor and http://folio.D. and occasional interaction with at least two faculty. Implementation Plan (timeline): Survey is conducted yearly near the end of the Spring semester.Outcome Assessment Details Page 3 of 4 Substantiating Evidence: Communication and Teamwork Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Assessing Teamwork Program level. as opposed to normal student-instructor interactions associated with coursework.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Current students (Fall 2009) with 1 or more years in the program are also developing significant interaction with multiple faculty members. On average.." Implementation Plan (timeline): Assessment is made annually around the end of spring semester. non-thesis students had significantly less faculty interaction and less research progress than other students. Key/Responsible Personnel: Program coordinator. Supporting Attachments: Quality of Dissertation Research Program level.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The program monitors and assesses this outcome by obtaining individual evaluations of each student from all SimCenter academic and research faculty in the program. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Informal survey of faculty members' perception of students' progress with research. Direct . Indirect .” whereas 21% of faculty reported these students as “Expected to Make Progress.Survey Findings for Assessing Teamwork Summary of Findings: Both Ph. Target: All students having significant/regular research interactions with at least two faculty. Key/Responsible Personnel: Program coordinator.taskstream. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Results obtained thus far are viewed as excellent outcomes for graduates and evidence of success in meeting this program objective. these results are viewed as excellent outcomes for graduates and evidence of success in meeting this program objective. Indirect .

. Supporting Attachments: research expertise for the ten Ph. 8/6/2010 .com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: http://folio.taskstream.asp. The Program Coordinator subsequently consults with faculty and records an anecdotal assessment of the dissertation quality and student research expertise.Outcome Assessment Details Page 4 of 4 committee members. Key/Responsible Personnel: Program coordinator and Dissertation committee.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Assessment is made following committee approval of the dissertation. students who have graduated are: A (70%) and B (30%). the number of samples observed thus far is considered small and the actual 70%-30% findings are considered excellent outcomes for students and evidence that this program objective is being achieved. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Although the quantitative goals of 75% (A) and 25% (B) were technically not met.D. Target: 75% of dissertations rated as "A" and 25% rated as "B". after which the faculty and committee members conduct an oral exam to complete their evaluation of the dissertation. Students present and defend their dissertation in a general audience.

act. Critical Thinking.edu/Administration/PlanningEvaluationAndInstitutionalResearch/caap. and since students are randomly assigned to sections. However.Exam Findings for MFT Summary of Findings: The Computer Science Major Field Test was developed by the Educational Testing Service. founded in 1959. mathematics. the SAT. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Portions of the CAAP test are required of all graduates of UTC. and UTC as a whole. this objective measure has been retained. which is the source of the information in this report. to provide one measure of how well the outcomes covered by this test are met by our students.Outcome Assessment Details Page 1 of 24 Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Computer Science Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday. The only results currently available are those of the 2008 and 2009 exams. Students are randomly chosen to take different modules of the test: Reading. such as surveys. allowing comparisons among majors at UTC.. having five students take the test would not insure that each section would provide a even a single result. the small number of CS graduates makes this impracticable. ACT is a nonprofit corporation. National statistics also allow comparison of UTC students’ level of proficiency with that of students in a variety of universities across the United States. wellrespected exams as the GRE. These results are not the only measure we apply. and extrapolating those results to our CS majors. Writing Essay.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Results are reported for the Computer Science program.. but each student is randomly assigned to be tested in only one of the five areas: writing skills. reading.org/caap/. The computer science test is a two- Details/Description: The Major Field Test is given to seniors every http://folio.taskstream. More information on the CAAP test may be found at http://www. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : More frequent exams. This would not allow any results obtained to be statistically significant. science. Even looking at graduates of the college of Engineering and Computer Science still provides a very small sample size. we feel justified in examining the performance of UTC students as compared to national norms. based on incoming qualifications. then to national averages. However. 2010 Measures and Findings (A . at least as well qualified as those in other majors. are subjective. graduating seniors are required to take the CAAP test as a condition of graduation from UTC. and since our students are. As described on the web site http://www. The original plan was that CS majors would be compared to all college majors. Mathematics. Target: Senior Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Department Head Supporting Attachments: MFT Direct . nationally-normed test which measures proficiency of five elements of UTC’s general education program. then all UTC students. The CAAP. the nonprofit organization behind such seminal.php.K) ABET Outcomes for Computer Science Outcome Outcome A Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings CAAP Program level. Direct Exam Findings for CAAP Summary of Findings: All UTC graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). 8/6/2010 . Science.utc. It would take a minimum of five graduates to have even one student taking each section of the test. including the ACT test required by many colleges and universities for admission. while continuing to search for any additional objective measures of this content. Writing Skills. which offers a wide variety of assessment instruments and services. developed by the ACT organization. the College of Engineering and Computer Science. is a standardized. The results of each graduating class on these test modules are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. but since our other measures.asp. and critical thinking. since our students take the same general education courses as the other students at UTC. August 06. which provides measures of student General Education achievement. and PRAXIS. We will continue to use the information which CAAP provides.. although it is imperfect.

and other topics such as intelligent systems. supply feedback as to whether students in a program are having difficulty in a given subject area. it was agreed in 2008 that this test would be taken by graduating seniors every second year. Target: All students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. Discrete Structures and Algorithms and Systems) are also used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester.taskstream. and more information may be found at this site. Assessment indicators. each year. the evaluation results were to be examined for trends and evidence of weaknesses in the program by the Assessment Committee. use of numerical targets would be reexamined. beginning Spring 2008. The results from the three subsections (Programming. In addition. 8/6/2010 . a process was proposed by which the Assessment Committee would compare our students’ scores. Head Supporting Attachments: hour. Direct Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process.org. multiple choice examination designed to test content knowledge in the areas of discrete structures (at least 15 percent). professional issues. ranging from small liberal arts college to large state research universities. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Results of the test are given and compared to previous results Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Program Rubrics Program level. Computer Organization and Architectures.Outcome Assessment Details Page 2 of 24 two years. setting percentage goals for scores at this point was thought to be impractical. software engineering (at least 3 percent). Direct Exam Details/Description: http://folio. The test covers Programming Fundamentals. Head/Assessment Coordinator Supporting Attachments: Student/Course Survey Findings for Student/Course Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report. As the number of students currently in the program is small. However. which allows a program to compare its performance to that of the numerous other programs. systems (at least 16 percent). However. but no formal process was in place. and appropriate recommendations will be made to the CSE faculty. this test was formerly given to graduating seniors only once every five years. as a group. For evaluation of results. information management (at least 3 percent).com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.asp. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. one average (B-C) Course level. Information on the MFT is taken from www. As the number of students in the program increases. Due to cost constraints. algorithms and complexity (at least 16 percent). which participate in the exam nationally. Results are provided for individual test takers and for the university computer science program as a whole. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. and human computer interaction. a Comparative Data Guide is generated each year. Operating Systems.ets. Computer Science Theory. Any areas in which our students scored more than one standard deviation below the national mean would be brought to the attention of the full CSE faculty at the annual fall retreat for discussion. Algorithms. to the national averages using a comparison of the number of standard deviations away from the national averages our students were in different categories. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes. Target: Senior Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every 3 years Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. in the form of average percentage of correct answers in particular content areas. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. Results of the test in the past have been used as an informal measure of program success. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. and Computational Mathematics... Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : We are fine tuning the rubrics. due to a recognition of the need for more objective measurement of how well students in our program achieve outcomes and compare to those at other universities. programming (at least 21 percent).

taskstream. it was thought that the three years of professional practice between the two should give the graduate a more mature perspective. The survey also included questions regarding such issues as continuing education. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Outcome B Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Alumni Survey Program level.asp. the alumni survey would be useful in assessing fulfillment of both the Outcomes and the Objective of the program. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L. of 2005 graduates. 8/6/2010 . The survey is a contneous online survey with enough security parameters to allow only legitimate alumni. and was planned to take place each spring semester. However. Head Supporting Attachments: http://folio.. and each graduate would be surveyed only once. what the graduate now most wishes had been taught. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. regarding successful fulfillment of Outcomes) were asked on both the alumni survey and the senior survey.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. was to serve as a baseline against which future results would be compared. and in determining how well our outcomes imply our objective of preparing the student for successful practice of the Computer Science profession.g. Some objective information. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies.. Many of the same questions (e. the Details/Description: The survey of alumni is the primary means of measuring the opinions of the alumni on how well the outcomes were achieved at the time of graduation. Indirect . from a more mature perspective. such as rates of graduate school acceptance and increasing levels of responsibility of alumni. The surveys would also be used in the periodic assessment of the mission and objective. provide a valuable indicator of outcomes as well.Survey Findings for Alumni Survey Summary of Findings: The survey of alumni was initiated in spring 2008.. As with the senior survey.Outcome Assessment Details Page 3 of 24 For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. could also be collected using this instrument. Target: Alumni Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Online Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. and a much more realistic assessment of how well this program actually prepared him or her for the profession – for this reason. It was planned that graduates would be surveyed three years after graduation to give them a chance to become fully functioning Computer Science professionals. commitment to lifelong learning (which is especially critical in the Computer Science profession) and strengths and weaknesses of the program. Target: Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Head of Department/Assessment Coordinator Supporting Attachments: student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. in 2009. The survey conducted spring 2008.

student internships. and at least one meeting has taken place in each semester since that time. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in http://folio. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. Direct . Head Supporting Attachments: Program Rubrics Program level. 8/6/2010 . Target: All students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: DH/Assessment Coordinator Supporting Attachments: Senior Survey Program level. These encounters include informal focus groups with a few faculty members. in the event of special needs. and the first meeting of the board took place on January 24. and the College of Engineering and Computer Science Industrial Advisory Board (IAB).Outcome Assessment Details Page 4 of 24 survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined. The College Industrial Advisory Board has been in place for many years.taskstream. The evolution of the department assessment processes has led to the establishment of Reading Day. Indirect . giving two regularly scheduled meetings each school year. three years after graduation. faculty consulting. The CSE department has established a departmental Industrial Advisory Board to provide more specific feedback on the needs of local industry related to our programs and the performance of our graduates whom they have employed Target: Program Implementation Plan (timeline): Twice a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept.Focus Group Findings for Insdustrial Advisory Board/Employers Summary of Findings: The board was established in fall 2007. as the regularly scheduled meeting of the Advisory Board with the department faculty. but is more focused on Engineering than Computer Science. IEEE participation. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation. and comparison of results from multiple years.. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes. additional meetings with the board will be scheduled. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. How this should be handled will be addressed by the Assessment Committee in the 2009-10 school year. A prйcis of the board meeting is included in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. All minutes of the meetings with the advisory board will be available for inspection by the members of the ABET team at the time of the fall visit. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Insdustrial Advisory Board/Employers Program level. Indirect . the day between the last day of classes and the first day of exams in each semester. The initial plan was for each student to be surveyed only once.Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Informal industry and employer interactions and inputs have always been part of the program. However. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Needs fine tuning. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. and will continue to be administered each spring. 2008. alumni from more than one graduation year responded. but with the web application.asp.. The members of the advisory board have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting our programs now and in the future.

The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Results from both 2008 and 2009 surveys are discussed in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3.g. The surveys would also be used in the periodic assessment of the mission and objective. In 2009. Many of the same questions (e. along with graphs of the results of the 2008 and 2009 administrations of the survey. it was thought that the three years of professional practice between the two should give the graduate a more mature perspective. commitment to lifelong learning (which is especially critical in the Computer Science profession) and strengths and weaknesses of the program. The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E.Outcome Assessment Details Page 5 of 24 CPSC 490. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. assuring that each student takes the survey once. could also be collected using this instrument. and each graduate would be surveyed only once.. to make sure that each student takes it only once. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey. Some objective information. It was planned that graduates would be surveyed three years after graduation to give them a chance to become fully functioning Computer Science professionals. areas needing improvement. A copy of the survey given to seniors in Spring 2008 is included in Appendix B-4-6-b. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. The form was designed to make it numerically scorable. The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site.taskstream. and when he or she is close to graduation. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester.Survey Findings for Alumni Survey Summary of Findings: The survey of alumni was initiated in spring 2008.. such as rates of graduate school acceptance and increasing levels of responsibility of alumni. 8/6/2010 . Indirect .asp. provide a valuable indicator of outcomes as well. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results. The survey also included questions regarding such issues as continuing education.. and a much more realistic assessment of how well this program actually prepared him or her for the profession – for this reason. and was planned to take place each spring semester. from a more mature perspective. Target: Senior Students CPSC 490 Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Deaprtment Head/Assessment Coordinator Supporting Attachments: CPSC 490. was to serve as a baseline against which future results would be compared. and in determining how well our outcomes imply our objective of preparing the Details/Description: The survey of alumni is the primary means of measuring the opinions of the alumni on how well the outcomes were achieved at the time of graduation. regarding successful fulfillment of Outcomes) were asked on both the alumni survey and the senior survey. Changes. what the graduate now most wishes had been taught. Head Supporting Attachments: http://folio. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. of 2005 graduates. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Outcome C Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Alumni Survey Program level. However. The survey is a contneous online survey with enough security parameters to allow only legitimate alumni. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results. Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once. additions. a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. The survey conducted spring 2008. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. This survey will continue to be refined. and effects of changes from year to year. Target: Program Alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Online (ongoing) Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. the alumni survey would be useful in assessing fulfillment of both the Outcomes and the Objective of the program.

which participate in the exam nationally. and will continue to be administered each spring. systems (at least 16 percent). Target: Program Implementation Plan (timeline): Every 3 years Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. but with the web application.Survey Findings for Course Objects/Student Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report. well-respected exams as the GRE. Head Supporting Attachments: MFT Program level. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation. In addition. 8/6/2010 . The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. ranging from small liberal arts college to large state research universities. which allows a program to compare its performance to that of the numerous other programs. professional issues. multiple choice examination designed to test content knowledge in the areas of discrete structures (at least 15 percent). The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown.Exam Findings for MFT Summary of Findings: The Computer Science Major Field Test was developed by the Educational Testing Service.asp. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. and human computer interaction. supply feedback as to whether students in a program are having difficulty in a given subject area. Head Supporting Attachments: http://folio. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies.Outcome Assessment Details Page 6 of 24 student for successful practice of the Computer Science profession. How this should be handled will be addressed by the Assessment Committee in the 2009-10 school year. and Details/Description: The Major Field Test is given to seniors every two years. Information on the MFT is taken from www. algorithms and complexity (at least 16 percent).taskstream. and comparison of results from multiple years. the nonprofit organization behind such seminal. Results are provided for individual test takers and for the university computer science program as a whole. the SAT. software engineering (at least 3 percent).org.. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Discrete Structures and Algorithms and Systems) are also used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. a Comparative Data Guide is generated each year. programming (at least 21 percent). Direct . in 2009.ets. The results from the three subsections (Programming. and PRAXIS. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program.. one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. three years after graduation. The initial plan was for each student to be surveyed only once. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Course Objects/Student Survey Course level. As with the senior survey. information management (at least 3 percent). and other topics such as intelligent systems. Assessment indicators. Target: All Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. Indirect . alumni from more than one graduation year responded. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Recommendations : Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined. in the form of average percentage of correct answers in particular content areas. The computer science test is a two-hour.

The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes. beginning Spring 2008. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. As the number of students currently in the program is small. 8/6/2010 . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Results of the test are given and compared to previous results Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Program Rubrics Program level.asp. Changes. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results. a process was proposed by which the Assessment Committee would compare our students’ scores.Outcome Assessment Details Page 7 of 24 more information may be found at this site. Operating Systems. Any areas in which our students scored more than one standard deviation below the national mean would be brought to the attention of the full CSE faculty at the annual fall retreat for discussion. Target: Students http://folio. a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. Due to cost constraints. but no formal process was in place. Direct . The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. Algorithms. use of numerical targets would be reexamined. The test covers Programming Fundamentals. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs fine tuning. each year. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once. The form was designed to make it numerically scorable. areas needing improvement. this test was formerly given to graduating seniors only once every five years. Indirect . However. As the number of students in the program increases. Target: Student work Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. For evaluation of results. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results. However. setting percentage goals for scores at this point was thought to be impractical. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. assuring that each student takes the survey once. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. and effects of changes from year to year. to the national averages using a comparison of the number of standard deviations away from the national averages our students were in different categories. it was agreed in 2008 that this test would be taken by graduating seniors every second year.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site.Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. Computer Organization and Architectures... Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. Results of the test in the past have been used as an informal measure of program success. as a group. and Computational Mathematics. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey. and appropriate recommendations will be made to the CSE faculty.taskstream. Computer Science Theory. additions. Head Supporting Attachments: Senior Survey Program level. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty. due to a recognition of the need for more objective measurement of how well students in our program achieve outcomes and compare to those at other universities.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. In Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. the evaluation results were to be examined for trends and evidence of weaknesses in the program by the Assessment Committee.

Outcome Assessment Details Page 8 of 24 Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. The members of the advisory board have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting our programs now and in the future. Head Supporting Attachments: Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts Program level. one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report.Focus Group Findings for Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts Summary of Findings: The board was established in fall 2007. additional meetings with the board will be scheduled. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. These encounters include informal focus groups with a few faculty members. Head Supporting Attachments: Program Rubrics Findings for Program Rubrics http://folio. The College Industrial Advisory Board has been in place for many years.. However. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : More informal contacts Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Informal industry and employer interactions and inputs have always been part of the program. the day between the last day of classes and the first day of exams in each semester.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. 8/6/2010 . as the regularly scheduled meeting of the Advisory Board with the department faculty.asp. Target Achievement: Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined.taskstream. IEEE participation. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring. All minutes of the meetings with the advisory board will be available for inspection by the members of the ABET team at the time of the fall visit. Head Supporting Attachments: 2009. and the first meeting of the board took place on January 24. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies. but is more focused on Engineering than Computer Science. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Outcome D Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Course Objects/Student Survey Program level. to make sure that each student takes it only once.. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. giving two regularly scheduled meetings each school year.Survey Findings for Course Objects/Student Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report. Indirect . The CSE department has established a departmental Industrial Advisory Board to provide more specific feedback on the needs of local industry related to our programs and the performance of our graduates whom they have employed. and at least one meeting has taken place in each semester since that time. and when he or she is close to graduation. and the College of Engineering and Computer Science Industrial Advisory Board (IAB). The evolution of the department assessment processes has led to the establishment of Reading Day. Indirect . 2008. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. A prйcis of the board meeting is included in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. faculty consulting. in the event of special needs. student internships. Target: Program Implementation Plan (timeline): Twice a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept.

Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring. Head Supporting Attachments: Outcome E Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Alumni Survey Program level. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. Many of the same questions (e. to make sure that each student takes it only once.asp. and when he or she is close to graduation. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes.Every Spring Key/Responsible Personnel: dept. Changes. Head Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process.CPSC 490 Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. of 2005 graduates. it was thought that the three years of professional practice between the two should give the graduate a more mature perspective. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. The form was designed to make it numerically scorable.Survey Findings for Alumni Survey Summary of Findings: The survey of alumni was initiated in spring 2008. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. The survey conducted spring 2008. provide a valuable indicator of outcomes as well. Direct . a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone.. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. and was planned to take place each spring semester. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey.g. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year . In 2009.taskstream. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown.. The survey is a contneous online survey with enough security parameters to allow only legitimate alumni. additions.Student Artifact Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. Target: Program alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Online . The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E. areas needing improvement. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Senior Survey Indirect . The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.ongoing Key/Responsible Personnel: Assessment committee Supporting Attachments: http://folio.Outcome Assessment Details Page 9 of 24 Program level. Indirect . It was planned that graduates would be surveyed three years after graduation to give them a chance to become fully functioning Computer Science professionals. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. 8/6/2010 . Details/Description: The survey of alumni is the primary means of measuring the opinions of the alumni on how well the outcomes were achieved at the time of graduation. was to serve as a baseline against which future results would be compared. However. and each graduate would be surveyed only once. regarding successful fulfillment of Outcomes) were asked on both the alumni survey and the senior survey. from a more mature perspective. and effects of changes from year to year. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. assuring that each student takes the survey once. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. Target: Senior Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a Year .. Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : needs fine tuning. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program.

Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. in 2009. alumni from more than one graduation year responded. could also be collected using this instrument. Target Achievement: Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. 8/6/2010 . one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Course Objects/Student Survey Program level. How this should be handled will be addressed by the Assessment Committee in the 2009-10 school year.. commitment to lifelong learning (which is especially critical in the Computer Science profession) and strengths and weaknesses of the program.Outcome Assessment Details Page 10 of 24 and a much more realistic assessment of how well this program actually prepared him or her for the profession – for this reason. The initial plan was for each student to be surveyed only once. but with the web application. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L.Survey Findings for Course Objects/Student Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report.taskstream. The surveys would also be used in the periodic assessment of the mission and objective. three years after graduation. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Program Rubrics Program level. As with the senior survey. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes. and in determining how well our outcomes imply our objective of preparing the student for successful practice of the Computer Science profession. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. and will continue to be administered each spring.. Target: Student work Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Spring Semester http://folio.asp. Indirect . Direct . Some objective information. the alumni survey would be useful in assessing fulfillment of both the Outcomes and the Objective of the program. and comparison of results from multiple years. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. The survey also included questions regarding such issues as continuing education. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation. such as rates of graduate school acceptance and increasing levels of responsibility of alumni. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. Target Achievement: Exceeded Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. what the graduate now most wishes had been taught.

and was planned to take place each spring semester. and a much more realistic assessment of how well this program actually prepared him or her for the profession – for this reason. The survey conducted spring 2008.. Many of the same questions (e. Target: Program alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Online . The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site. it was thought that the three years of professional practice between the two should give the graduate a more mature perspective. to make sure that each student takes it only once. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. However. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year when CPSC 490 is taught Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Outcome F Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Alumni Survey Program level. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. and each graduate would be surveyed only once. along with graphs of the results of the 2008 and 2009 administrations of the survey. and when he or she is close to graduation. areas needing improvement. Indirect . and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results.taskstream. from a more mature perspective. The survey also included questions regarding such issues as continuing education. In 2009. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams. was to serve as a baseline against which future results would be compared. It was planned that graduates would be surveyed three years after graduation to give them a chance to become fully functioning Computer Science professionals. additions. The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E. Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. The survey is a contneous online survey with enough security parameters to allow only legitimate alumni.ongoing. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty.Survey Findings for Alumni Survey Summary of Findings: The survey of alumni was initiated in spring 2008. provide a valuable indicator of outcomes as well.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program. Results from both 2008 and 2009 surveys are discussed in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3.. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey.. Details/Description: The survey of alumni is the primary means of measuring the opinions of the alumni on how well the outcomes were achieved at the time of graduation.Outcome Assessment Details Page 11 of 24 Key/Responsible Personnel: Faculty Supporting Attachments: Recommendations : Needs fine tuning.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. regarding successful fulfillment of Outcomes) were asked on both the alumni survey and the senior survey. 8/6/2010 . ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once. the alumni survey would be useful in assessing fulfillment of both the Outcomes and the Objective of the program. Indirect . Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Senior Survey Program level. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Needs refining. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. of 2005 graduates. A copy of the survey given to seniors in Spring 2008 is included in Appendix B-4-6-b. assuring that each student takes the survey once. and effects of changes from year to year. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. what the graduate now most wishes had been taught. Changes.asp. The form was designed to make it numerically scorable. a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results.g. This survey will continue to be refined. Key/Responsible Personnel: Assessment committee Supporting Attachments: http://folio.

Outcome Assessment Details Page 12 of 24 commitment to lifelong learning (which is especially critical in the Computer Science profession) and strengths and weaknesses of the program. A prйcis of the board meeting is included in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. and in determining how well our outcomes imply our objective of preparing the student for successful practice of the Computer Science profession. three years after graduation. such as rates of graduate school acceptance and increasing levels of responsibility of alumni. All minutes of the meetings with the advisory board will be available for inspection by the members of the ABET team at the time of the fall visit. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L. could also be collected using this instrument.asp. and the first meeting of the board took place on January 24. in 2009. As with the senior survey. and will continue to be administered each spring.Focus Group Findings for Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts survey/ Summary of Findings: The board was established in fall 2007. but is more focused on Engineering than Computer Science. How this should be handled will be addressed by the Assessment Committee in the 2009-10 school year. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. http://folio. and at least one meeting has taken place in each semester since that time. Results: Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Course Objects/Student Survey Program level. The College Industrial Advisory Board has been in place for many years. The initial plan was for each student to be surveyed only once. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation. student internships. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies. the day between the last day of classes and the first day of exams in each semester.Survey Findings for Course Objects/Student Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report. 8/6/2010 . one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. and comparison of results from multiple years. The evolution of the department assessment processes has led to the establishment of Reading Day. IEEE participation. but with the web application. 2008. Some objective information. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program.taskstream. Indirect . These encounters include informal focus groups with a few faculty members. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. and the College of Engineering and Computer Science Industrial Advisory Board (IAB).. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. alumni from more than one graduation year responded. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. faculty consulting. The CSE department has established a departmental Industrial Advisory Board to provide more specific feedback on the needs of local industry related to our programs and the performance of our graduates whom they have employed. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts survey/ Program level. as the regularly scheduled meeting of the Advisory Board with the department Details/Description: Informal industry and employer interactions and inputs have always been part of the program.. Indirect . The surveys would also be used in the periodic assessment of the mission and objective.

asp. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. and when he or she is close to graduation. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs more fine tuning. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. Target: Student work Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Spring Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Faculty Supporting Attachments: Senior Survey Program level. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty. This survey will continue to be refined. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program. to make sure that each student takes it only once. The form was designed to make it numerically scorable. However.Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. The members of the advisory board have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting our programs now and in the future. and effects of changes from year to year. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year when CPSC 490 is taught. giving two regularly scheduled meetings each school year. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone.. Direct . assuring that each student takes the survey once. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : More informal meetings Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Program Rubrics Program level. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. Indirect . A copy of the survey given to seniors in Spring 2008 is included in Appendix B-4-6-b.Outcome Assessment Details Page 13 of 24 Target: Program Implementation Plan (timeline): Twice a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Head of Department Supporting Attachments: faculty. areas needing improvement. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty.taskstream. Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. in the event of special needs. Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Outcome G http://folio. Changes. additional meetings with the board will be scheduled. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : needs fine tuning. The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey. Results from both 2008 and 2009 surveys are discussed in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. In 2009. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. additions. along with graphs of the results of the 2008 and 2009 administrations of the survey. The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E. 8/6/2010 .. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams.

the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. Changes.asp.. and effects of changes from year to year. Direct . The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. Indirect .. Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. 8/6/2010 . Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year when CPSC 490 is taught Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: http://folio. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. Indirect . a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. This survey will continue to be refined. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes.taskstream. Target: Student work Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Spring Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Faculty Supporting Attachments: Senior Survey Program level.Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs fine tuning. A copy of the survey given to seniors in Spring 2008 is included in Appendix B-4-6-b. and will continue to be Details/Description: Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. areas needing improvement. The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program. along with graphs of the results of the 2008 and 2009 administrations of the survey. The form was designed to make it numerically scorable. The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E. assuring that each student takes the survey once. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty. additions. Results from both 2008 and 2009 surveys are discussed in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Program Rubrics Program level. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty.Outcome Assessment Details Page 14 of 24 Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Course Objects/Student Survey Program level. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. In 2009. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.Survey Findings for Course Objects/Student Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once.

The survey is a contneous online survey with enough security parameters to allow only legitimate alumni. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. it was thought that the three years of professional practice between the two should give the graduate a more mature perspective.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. what the graduate now most wishes had been taught. Target: Program alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Online . How this should be handled will be addressed by the Assessment Committee in the 2009-10 school year. The survey conducted spring 2008. The surveys would also be used in the periodic assessment of the mission and objective. provide a valuable indicator of outcomes as well. to make sure that each student takes it only once. Direct . and will continue to be administered each spring.Survey Findings for Alumni Survey Summary of Findings: The survey of alumni was initiated in spring 2008. the alumni survey would be useful in assessing fulfillment of both the Outcomes and the Objective of the program.ongoing.Outcome Assessment Details Page 15 of 24 administered in the senior capstone course each spring. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Recommendations : Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined. It was planned that graduates would be surveyed three years after graduation to give them a chance to become fully functioning Computer Science professionals.Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each http://folio. regarding successful fulfillment of Outcomes) were asked on both the alumni survey and the senior survey. from a more mature perspective. However. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. such as rates of graduate school acceptance and increasing levels of responsibility of alumni. Many of the same questions (e. was to serve as a baseline against which future results would be compared. of 2005 graduates. commitment to lifelong learning (which is especially critical in the Computer Science profession) and strengths and weaknesses of the program. and in determining how well our outcomes imply our objective of preparing the student for successful practice of the Computer Science profession. and when he or she is close to graduation.. As with the senior survey. alumni from more than one graduation year responded. Indirect .taskstream.. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Needs more fine tuning. and a much more realistic assessment of how well this program actually prepared him or her for the profession – for this reason. 8/6/2010 . and comparison of results from multiple years. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. in 2009. The initial plan was for each student to be surveyed only once. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Outcome H Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Alumni Survey Program level. three years after graduation. and was planned to take place each spring semester.asp. Some objective information. and each graduate would be surveyed only once. Key/Responsible Personnel: Assessment committee Supporting Attachments: Program Rubrics Program level. could also be collected using this instrument. but with the web application. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation.g. The survey also included questions regarding such issues as continuing education.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The survey of alumni is the primary means of measuring the opinions of the alumni on how well the outcomes were achieved at the time of graduation.

of 2005 graduates. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. Indirect .ongoing http://folio. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. additions. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes.. Indirect . the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey.. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results.Outcome Assessment Details Page 16 of 24 A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. Target: Program alumni Implementation Plan (timeline): Online . The form was designed to make it numerically scorable. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. from a more mature perspective.asp. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results. The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once. Target: Student work Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Spring Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Faculty Supporting Attachments: allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. to make sure that each student takes it only once. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams. along with graphs of the results of the 2008 and 2009 administrations of the survey. Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs fine tuning. regarding successful fulfillment of Outcomes) were asked on both the alumni survey and Details/Description: The survey of alumni is the primary means of measuring the opinions of the alumni on how well the outcomes were achieved at the time of graduation. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year when CPSC 490 is taught Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Outcome I Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Alumni Survey Program level. provide a valuable indicator of outcomes as well. was to serve as a baseline against which future results would be compared.g. The survey is a contneous online survey with enough security parameters to allow only legitimate alumni. In 2009. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty. and was planned to take place each spring semester. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. Many of the same questions (e. Results from both 2008 and 2009 surveys are discussed in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. assuring that each student takes the survey once.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. areas needing improvement.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program. and each graduate would be surveyed only once. Changes. 8/6/2010 . It was planned that graduates would be surveyed three years after graduation to give them a chance to become fully functioning Computer Science professionals. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. This survey will continue to be refined. The survey conducted spring 2008. a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Senior Survey Program level.Survey Findings for Alumni Survey Summary of Findings: The survey of alumni was initiated in spring 2008.taskstream. and when he or she is close to graduation. and effects of changes from year to year.. A copy of the survey given to seniors in Spring 2008 is included in Appendix B-4-6-b. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs fine tuning.

and the College of Engineering and http://folio. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. what the graduate now most wishes had been taught. alumni from more than one graduation year responded. IEEE participation. However. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. How this should be handled will be addressed by the Assessment Committee in the 2009-10 school year. and at least one meeting has taken place in each semester since that time. The survey also included questions regarding such issues as continuing education..com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Indirect . it was thought that the three years of professional practice between the two should give the graduate a more mature perspective. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts Program level. commitment to lifelong learning (which is especially critical in the Computer Science profession) and strengths and weaknesses of the program. but with the web application. one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. Indirect . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Recommendations : Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined.Outcome Assessment Details Page 17 of 24 Key/Responsible Personnel: Assessment committee Supporting Attachments: the senior survey. These encounters include informal focus groups with a few faculty members. in 2009. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation.taskstream. and a much more realistic assessment of how well this program actually prepared him or her for the profession – for this reason. As with the senior survey. A prйcis of the board meeting is included in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. and the first meeting of the board took place on January 24. Some objective information. The surveys would also be used in the periodic assessment of the mission and objective. 2008. and in determining how well our outcomes imply our objective of preparing the student for successful practice of the Computer Science profession.Survey Findings for Course Objects/Student Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report. student internships. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies. the alumni survey would be useful in assessing fulfillment of both the Outcomes and the Objective of the program. and will continue to be administered each spring. 8/6/2010 .. The initial plan was for each student to be surveyed only once.asp. three years after graduation. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. and comparison of results from multiple years. All minutes of the meetings with the advisory board will be available for inspection by Details/Description: Informal industry and employer interactions and inputs have always been part of the program. such as rates of graduate school acceptance and increasing levels of responsibility of alumni. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Course Objects/Student Survey Program level. faculty consulting. could also be collected using this instrument. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course.Focus Group Findings for Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts Summary of Findings: The board was established in fall 2007.

each year. Computer Science Theory. ranging from small liberal arts college to large state research universities. as the regularly scheduled meeting of the Advisory Board with the department faculty. the nonprofit organization behind such seminal.taskstream. but is more focused on Engineering than Computer Science. this test was formerly given to graduating seniors only once every five years..Outcome Assessment Details Page 18 of 24 Computer Science Industrial Advisory Board (IAB).Exam Findings for MFT Summary of Findings: The Computer Science Major Field Test was developed by the Educational Testing Service. and human computer interaction. it was agreed in 2008 that this test would be taken by graduating seniors every second year. However. Operating Systems. Head Supporting Attachments: the members of the ABET team at the time of the fall visit. and other topics such as intelligent systems. and Computational Mathematics. professional issues. Discrete Structures and Algorithms and Systems) are also used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. Due to cost constraints. As the number of students currently in the program is small. The CSE department has established a departmental Industrial Advisory Board to provide more specific feedback on the needs of local industry related to our programs and the performance of our graduates whom they have employed. programming (at least 21 percent). but no formal process was in place. Results are provided for individual test takers and for the university computer science program as a whole. The test covers Programming Fundamentals. multiple choice examination designed to test content knowledge in the areas of discrete structures (at least 15 percent). systems (at least 16 percent). 8/6/2010 . additional meetings with the board will be scheduled. supply feedback as to whether students in a program are having difficulty in a given subject area. due to a recognition of the need for more objective measurement of how well students in our program achieve outcomes and compare to those at other universities. software engineering (at least 3 percent). Target: Program Implementation Plan (timeline): Every 3 years Key/Responsible Personnel: Head of Department Supporting Attachments: http://folio.org. the evaluation results were to be examined for trends and evidence of weaknesses in the program by the Details/Description: The Major Field Test is given to seniors every two years. Any areas in which our students scored more than one standard deviation below the national mean would be brought to the attention of the full CSE faculty at the annual fall retreat for discussion. Algorithms. Assessment indicators. Direct .ets. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : More informal meetings Notes : Substantiating Evidence: MFT Program level. The results from the three subsections (Programming. giving two regularly scheduled meetings each school year. in the form of average percentage of correct answers in particular content areas. the day between the last day of classes and the first day of exams in each semester. Results of the test in the past have been used as an informal measure of program success. setting percentage goals for scores at this point was thought to be impractical. well-respected exams as the GRE. the SAT.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target: Program Implementation Plan (timeline): Twice a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. which allows a program to compare its performance to that of the numerous other programs. In addition.asp. The evolution of the department assessment processes has led to the establishment of Reading Day. Computer Organization and Architectures. which participate in the exam nationally. and PRAXIS. to the national averages using a comparison of the number of standard deviations away from the national averages our students were in different categories. The computer science test is a two-hour. in the event of special needs.. information management (at least 3 percent). a process was proposed by which the Assessment Committee would compare our students’ scores. However. For evaluation of results. beginning Spring 2008. and more information may be found at this site. a Comparative Data Guide is generated each year. as a group. The College Industrial Advisory Board has been in place for many years. However. algorithms and complexity (at least 16 percent). The members of the advisory board have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting our programs now and in the future. Information on the MFT is taken from www.

assuring that each student takes the survey once. This survey will continue to be refined. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year when CPSC 490 is taught Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Outcome J http://folio. and appropriate recommendations will be made to the CSE faculty. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams. to make sure that each student takes it only once. Direct . The form was designed to make it numerically scorable. use of numerical targets would be reexamined. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs fine tuning. Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty.taskstream. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. 8/6/2010 . The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. As the number of students in the program increases. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. areas needing improvement.. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring. additions. and when he or she is close to graduation. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. Changes. along with graphs of the results of the 2008 and 2009 administrations of the survey. In 2009. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once.asp. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Needs fine tuning.Other Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. and effects of changes from year to year.Outcome Assessment Details Page 19 of 24 Assessment Committee. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment.. Target: Student work Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Spring Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Faculty Supporting Attachments: Senior Survey Indirect . The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends. Results from both 2008 and 2009 surveys are discussed in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. A copy of the survey given to seniors in Spring 2008 is included in Appendix B-4-6-b. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Results of the test are given and compared to previous results Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Program Rubrics Program level. The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site. a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the effectiveness of our program. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation and evaluation of the results. The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.

beginning Spring 2008. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Portions of the CAAP test are required of all graduates of UTC. and PRAXIS.ets. since our students take the same general education courses as the other students at UTC. but no formal process was in place. a Comparative Data Guide is generated each year. developed by the ACT organization.edu/Administration/PlanningEvaluationAndInstitutionalResearch/caap. Direct Exam Findings for MFT Summary of Findings: The Computer Science Major Field Test was developed by the Educational Testing Service. Writing Skills. but since our other measures.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. The computer science test is a twohour. Results are provided for individual test takers and for the university computer science program as a whole. founded in 1959. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We need to give this exam more frequently.taskstream. and Computational Mathematics. Writing Essay. Information on the MFT is taken from www. while continuing to search for any additional objective measures of this content. graduating seniors are required to take the CAAP test as a condition of graduation from UTC. and extrapolating those results to our CS majors.. it was agreed in 2008 that this test would be taken by graduating seniors every second year. Mathematics. Assessment indicators. and other topics such as intelligent systems. and human computer interaction. For evaluation of results. the SAT. allowing comparisons among majors at UTC.utc. In addition. including the ACT test required by many colleges and universities for admission. ranging from small liberal arts college to large state research universities. due to a recognition of the need for more objective measurement of how well students in our program achieve outcomes and compare to those at other universities. Target: senior Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every 3 years Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. then to national averages. 8/6/2010 . reading. National statistics also allow comparison of UTC students’ level of proficiency with that of students in a variety of universities across the United States. Target: Senior Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. supply feedback as to whether students in a program are having difficulty in a given subject area. having five students take the test would not insure that each section would provide a even a single result. Results of the test in the past have been used as an informal measure of program success. and UTC as a whole. ACT is a nonprofit corporation. programming (at least 21 percent). Discrete Structures and Algorithms and Systems) are also used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. although it is imperfect. the College of Engineering and Computer Science. to the national averages using a comparison of the number of standard deviations away from Details/Description: The Major Field Test is given to seniors every two years. which provides measures of student General Education achievement. this objective measure has been retained. at least as well qualified as those in other majors. and since students are randomly assigned to sections. and since our students are. and critical thinking. which allows a program to compare its performance to that of the numerous other programs. The results currently available are those of the 2008 and 2009 exams. algorithms and complexity (at least 16 percent). However. and more information may be found at this site. software engineering (at least 3 percent).Outcome Assessment Details Page 20 of 24 Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings CAAP Program level. However. multiple choice examination designed to test content knowledge in the areas of discrete structures (at least 15 percent). which offers a wide variety of assessment instruments and services. The test covers Programming Fundamentals. which is the source of the information in this report. Due to cost constraints. nationally-normed test which measures proficiency of five elements of UTC’s general education program..org. to provide one measure of how well the outcomes covered by this test are met by our students. mathematics. The results of each graduating class on these test modules are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester.asp. Algorithms. science. such as surveys. the small number of CS graduates makes this impracticable.org/caap/. as a group. are subjective.act. Head Supporting Attachments: http://folio. As described on the web site http://www. then all UTC students. The CAAP. information management (at least 3 percent). The results from the three subsections (Programming. in the form of average percentage of correct answers in particular content areas. These results are not the only measure we apply. Critical Thinking. wellrespected exams as the GRE. This would not allow any results obtained to be statistically significant. Computer Science Theory. The original plan was that CS majors would be compared to all college majors. It would take a minimum of five graduates to have even one student taking each section of the test. Operating Systems.php. Head Supporting Attachments: MFT Program level. More information on the CAAP test may be found at http://www. this test was formerly given to graduating seniors only once every five years. the nonprofit organization behind such seminal. However. a process was proposed by which the Assessment Committee would compare our students’ scores. is a standardized.. We will continue to use the information which CAAP provides. Computer Organization and Architectures. Direct Exam Findings for CAAP Summary of Findings: All UTC graduating seniors are required to take the Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP). Even looking at graduates of the college of Engineering and Computer Science still provides a very small sample size. professional issues. which participate in the exam nationally. Students are randomly chosen to take different modules of the test: Reading. but each student is randomly assigned to be tested in only one of the five areas: writing skills. Science. systems (at least 16 percent). we feel justified in examining the performance of UTC students as compared to national norms. Results are reported for the Computer Science program. based on incoming qualifications.

Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Course level. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. Direct Student Artifact Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. each year.asp. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs fine tuning. However. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies.taskstream. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L. As the number of students in the program increases. As the number of students currently in the program is small. and appropriate recommendations will be made to the CSE faculty. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. http://folio. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student.. one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. use of numerical targets would be reexamined. the evaluation results were to be examined for trends and evidence of weaknesses in the program by the Assessment Committee. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Results of the test are given and compared to previous results Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Program Rubrics Program level. Target: All Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. Head Supporting Attachments: Student/Course Survey Findings for Student/Course Survey Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report.. 8/6/2010 . setting percentage goals for scores at this point was thought to be impractical. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. Indirect Survey Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. Any areas in which our students scored more than one standard deviation below the national mean would be brought to the attention of the full CSE faculty at the annual fall retreat for discussion.Outcome Assessment Details Page 21 of 24 the national averages our students were in different categories.

three years after graduation. of 2005 graduates. what the graduate now most wishes had been taught. The survey is a contneous online survey with enough security parameters to allow only legitimate alumni. However. and a much more realistic assessment of how well this program actually prepared him or her for the profession – for this reason. Head Supporting Attachments: Course Objects/Student Survey Findings for Course Objects/Student Survey http://folio. provide a valuable indicator of outcomes as well. The surveys would also be used in the periodic assessment of the mission and objective. it was thought that the three years of professional practice between the two should give the graduate a more mature perspective. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: The survey of alumni is the primary means of measuring the opinions of the alumni on how well the outcomes were achieved at the time of graduation. As with the senior survey. the alumni survey would be useful in assessing fulfillment of both the Outcomes and the Objective of the program. alumni from more than one graduation year responded. Target: Alumni Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Online Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. and will continue to be administered each spring. commitment to lifelong learning (which is especially critical in the Computer Science profession) and strengths and weaknesses of the program. and each graduate would be surveyed only once. such as rates of graduate school acceptance and increasing levels of responsibility of alumni. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program.Survey Findings for Alumni Survey Summary of Findings: The survey of alumni was initiated in spring 2008.asp. The survey also included questions regarding such issues as continuing education. 8/6/2010 . and comparison of results from multiple years.g. but with the web application. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation. could also be collected using this instrument. Some objective information. How this should be handled will be addressed by the Assessment Committee in the 2009-10 school year..Outcome Assessment Details Page 22 of 24 Target: All students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. was to serve as a baseline against which future results would be compared. The initial plan was for each student to be surveyed only once. Many of the same questions (e.. and was planned to take place each spring semester. from a more mature perspective. Indirect . Results: Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Recommendations : This survey will continue to be refined. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. The survey conducted spring 2008.. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department.taskstream. Head Supporting Attachments: Outcome K Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Alumni Survey Program level. It was planned that graduates would be surveyed three years after graduation to give them a chance to become fully functioning Computer Science professionals. and in determining how well our outcomes imply our objective of preparing the student for successful practice of the Computer Science profession. in 2009. regarding successful fulfillment of Outcomes) were asked on both the alumni survey and the senior survey.

Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Every semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Summary of Findings: The results of the student survey and portfolios of typical student work are included with the course report.asp. The members of the advisory board have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting our programs now and in the future. The survey is administered through the class Blackboard site.Other Findings for Program Rubrics Summary of Findings: The course student surveys allow us to capture the students’ input into the assessment process. The survey consists of the Outcome competencies that broadly measure the http://folio. The assessment team’s evaluation of the course artifacts and evaluation of each Outcome A-K/L gives us a measure of the effectiveness of our instruction and the extent to which students meet the set objectives and program outcomes.taskstream. A prйcis of the board meeting is included in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. Direct . Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Needs fine tuning.Survey Findings for Senior Survey Summary of Findings: A survey of seniors in the CS concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. The team reviews the course objectives and mapping each spring or more often if review is requested by faculty teaching the course. The course artifacts provide the instructor’s measure of student competencies. The student survey results and portfolios in the course reports are used in the course review and evaluation of the appropriate competencies for Program Outcomes A-K/L.Survey Details/Description: For each core course a team composed of those faculty who have special expertise with the course (they have taught the course or subsequent courses that have prerequisite competencies from the course) prepares a list of course objectives and a student survey designed to gauge the students’ perception of their attainment of the course objectives. as the regularly scheduled meeting of the Advisory Board with the department faculty. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Informal industry and employer interactions and inputs have always been part of the program. The plan was that after the instructor of CPSC 490 administered the survey.Focus Group Findings for Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts Summary of Findings: The board was established in fall 2007. The evolution of the department assessment processes has led to the establishment of Reading Day. and at least one meeting has taken place in each semester since that time.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. Each rubric is designed to assess one program outcome A-K/L and the extent that each program outcome was met was measured based on the course outcome competencies listed in each program outcome. 2008. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : More informal meetings. Target: Student work Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year Spring Semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Faculty Supporting Attachments: Senior Survey Indirect . additional meetings with the board will be scheduled.. and the College of Engineering and Computer Science Industrial Advisory Board (IAB). giving two regularly scheduled meetings each school year. However. IEEE participation. and the first meeting of the board took place on January 24. assuring that each student takes the survey once. The team identifies the mapping of course objectives to Outcome competencies. The College Industrial Advisory Board has been in place for many years. The portfolios consists of all of the exercises and exams for at least three students – one excellent (A) student. a course that all senior CSE students must take as a capstone. Indirect . Target: Program Implementation Plan (timeline): Twice a year Key/Responsible Personnel: Dept. the day between the last day of classes and the first day of exams in each semester. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Industrial Advisory Board/Employers Contacts Program level. the Assessment Committee would perform an initial collation Details/Description: A survey of seniors in the CSE concentrations was developed to be given each spring in CPSC 490. Head Supporting Attachments: Program Rubrics Program level.Outcome Assessment Details Page 23 of 24 Program level. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Rubrics were identified for each A-K/L Outcome by the faculty. 8/6/2010 . in the event of special needs. ensuring that each student is surveyed once and only once. faculty consulting. These encounters include informal focus groups with a few faculty members. student internships.. Indirect . one average (B-C) student and one poor (D-F) student – is included in the course report. but is more focused on Engineering than Computer Science. a course that all senior CS students must take as a capstone. The CSE department has established a departmental Industrial Advisory Board to provide more specific feedback on the needs of local industry related to our programs and the performance of our graduates whom they have employed. All minutes of the meetings with the advisory board will be available for inspection by the members of the ABET team at the time of the fall visit.

areas needing improvement. to make sure that each student takes it only once.. since these were the first officially approved outcomes for the ISA program. The survey questions and the mapping of the questions to Outcome competencies is given in Appendix E. and when he or she is close to graduation. In 2009. the survey was altered to reflect the newly approved outcomes for the ISA programs and for the Scientific Applications and Software Systems concentrations in the department. additions. The results of the survey are used in the faculty evaluation of all Outcomes A-K/L at the end of the spring semester. Target: Students Implementation Plan (timeline): Once a year when CPSC 490 is taught Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: and evaluation of the results. The Outcomes section of the survey has both “scored” responses and space for seniors to comment. and emphases of the program may be altered based on these results. along with graphs of the results of the 2008 and 2009 administrations of the survey. Results from both 2008 and 2009 surveys are discussed in the “Assessment Results” section of Appendix B-4-3. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: http://folio. The survey was also converted to a web format for easier administration and easier collation and comparison of results from multiple years. All surveys and results will be available for inspection by future accreditation teams. The form was designed to make it numerically scorable.. A copy of the survey given to seniors in Spring 2008 is included in Appendix B-4-6-b. This survey will continue to be refined.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. and effects of changes from year to year. and therefore facilitate the evaluation of trends.Outcome Assessment Details Page 24 of 24 effectiveness of our program.taskstream. Changes. which would then be discussed each fall in the pre-semester retreat for all CSE faculty. Target Achievement: Exceeded Recommendations : Needs fine tuning. 8/6/2010 . Each survey question is mapped to one or more competencies.asp. the 2008 results for the outcomes for the two other concentrations in the department are not shown. and will continue to be administered in the senior capstone course each spring.

August 06.Other Findings for Fundamental Knowledge Summary of Findings: 80% of students passed their core courses with a minimum grade of B. Implementation Plan (timeline): Each semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Instructor Supporting Attachments: Communication Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Communication Course level. Direct .Outcome Assessment Details Page 1 of 2 Report: Assessment Plan Details for: Engineering: MS Report Generated by TaskStream Workspace: Academic Program Assessment Assessment Plan: 2008-2009 Assessment Cycle: Assessment Plan and Assessment Findings Assessment Plan Template: Academic Program Assessment Report Generated: Friday.0/4.taskstream.asp..0) in all core courses. Computational. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: There are 6 concentrations in the Engineering master's program. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students need to communicate effectively in written and oral format with their classmates and instructor in each core course. Direct . and we are going to do this through by having stricter participation policy. Participation is an indication that students understand the concept of the course material. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We would like to increase this ratio to 85% for next year. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We would like to increase this ratio to 85% for next year. Target: 80% of students will get an average of 3. Electrical. This will be evaluated using a combination of class interaction and peer evaluations that are used for group projects in core courses.0/5. 8/6/2010 .Other Findings for Communication Summary of Findings: 80% of students got an average of 3. 2010 Measures and Findings MS Engineering Outcome Set Outcome Fundamental Knowledge Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Fundamental Knowledge Course level. Civil. Industrial.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail. such as Chemical. and Mechanical.. Implementation Plan (timeline): Each semester Key/Responsible Personnel: http://folio.0 from their peer review evaluation.0 from their peer review evaluation. Target: 80% of students will make a minimum of B (3.0/5. Graduate students are required to take 3-5 core graduate courses in their disciplines.

one from the Department.Other Findings for Research Summary of Findings: 90% of students made a minimum 80/100 in their their thesis or project checklist and written report. Target: 90% of students will make a minimum 80/100 in their capstone checklist and written report.Outcome Assessment Details Page 2 of 2 Instructor Supporting Attachments: Research Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings Research Course level. and work with them throughout their thesis or project. 8/6/2010 . Students must form a committee with an adviser and at least two committee members.. Students performance is measured by grading their written report and using a checklist to measure their presentations. and one from outside.taskstream.asp.com/Folio/CIPReports/AMSReports_outcome_assessment_detail.. Notes : Substantiating Evidence: Details/Description: Students are required to write either a thesis or project by applying the engineering tools and techniques that they learned in the program and present it. Direct . Implementation Plan (timeline): Each semester Key/Responsible Personnel: Thesis or Project Adviser and Committee Supporting Attachments: Diversity Mapped to: No Mapping Measures & Findings No measures specified http://folio. Target Achievement: Met Recommendations : We'd like to increase this ratio to 85/100 for 90% of students.