Coker College

 

 

 

 

 

Academic Program Learning Outcomes

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

 

Because the basic mission of the Art Department is to teach students to think analytically and use art to express their ideas and demonstrate competencies in their major concentration and discipline, it is essential that the Core Skills described in the mission of Coker College and the Core Curriculum of the Art program be interwoven as we seek to educate our students in each of the four concentrations in Art. We strive to teach our majors to think, evaluate and create in a holistic manner. Therefore, our student learning outcomes for both the core skills and core curriculum have been presented in an interwoven pattern.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 1. Sketchbooks

Students will demonstrate proficiency in analytical thinking in art through the use of sketchbooks in studio courses.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students are able to develop ideas both visually and in writing as a result of analytical thinking.

 

Assessment

Sophomore Review is based on assessment guided by check sheet [1213]

 

Sketchbooks will be reviewed along with portfolio of student work.

 

Sketchbooks will be evaluated, by faculty, during introductory studio courses. (Art 100, Art 105, Art 270)

 

 

Results

Assessment determined that students who use their sketchbooks routinely progress more quickly as measured by Analytical and Conceptual scores of 3 and above on Art Department Assessment Summary [2810]. Analytical scores ranged from 1.3 to 4, with an average of 2.4. Conceptual thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.2 with an average of 2.5.

 

Successful students use their sketchbook analytically to examine and solve problems.

 

Actions and Improvements

We emphasize sketchbook use, particularly in introductory courses of Basic Design and Basic Drawing, with the goal of raising average scores for Conceptual and Analytical thinking approach 3s.  As an example, sketchbooks are now checked twice per semester, with 10% of the grade depending on them.  During the sophomore review, sketchbooks are now used to check (subjectively) for evidence of problem solving.

 

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 2. Artist in Residence

Students will demonstrate increased proficiency through exposure to alternative approaches to drawing provided by a visiting artist.

 

Outcomes

Assessment will show that through the opportunity to work with a visiting artist, students are willing to take risks so that their own artworks benefit from the use of varied approaches to drawing.

 

Assessment

Sophomore Review will assess the students' ability to try new ideas and experiment in their art production. The visiting artist will participate in this review adding a new dimension not just to teaching, but to assessment as well.

 

Results

Assessment determined that students who earn 3 or above in Creative and Conceptual scores on the Sophomore Review [1213] demonstrate a willingness to experiment and take risks as reported in Art Department Assessment Summary [2810].

 

Sophomore Review

Creative thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.3 with an average of 2.8 and Conceptual thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.2 with an average of 2.4.

 

??, the artist-in-residence for Spring 2006 semester, taught drawing, art appreciation and worked with seniors in Senior Studio, the capstone course. Her own art work combines drawing, installation and sound.

 

Fresh approaches were evident, particularly in student drawings during Sophomore review.

 

Actions and Improvements

Next year when ?? is on sabbatical, approach the selection of his sabbatical replacement in the same way, so that design students in particular may benefit from exposure to different philosophies and approaches to design.

 

Investigate ways to continue this program during semesters when no art department faculty are on sabbatical, since these experiences are beneficial to students and the program.

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 3. Gallery Visiting Artists

Students will demonstrate their ability to analyze and appreciate the work of other artists and will take creative risks in their own work as a result of viewing the work of, and speaking with artists who visit in conjunction with their gallery exhibitions.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that exposure to a variety of artists and their artwork encourage students to take creative risks in their own work.

 

Assessment

Sophomore Review will provide an opportunity to review student portfolios and assess creative thinking and willingness to take risks.

 

Results

Assessment determined that students who earn 3 or above in Creative and Conceptual scores on the Sophomore Review [1213] demonstrate a willingness to experiment and take risks as reported in Art Department Assessment Summary [2810]. It is difficult however, to determine if this is directly affected by those artists who visit the department in conjunction with their gallery exhibitions.

 

Sophomore Review

Creative thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.3 with an average of 2.8 and Conceptual thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.2 with an average of 2.4.

 

We had three visiting artists this year plus two alumni who came to campus to speak with students about art and design.

 

There is a less measurable impact of the effect of visiting artists on student approaches to creative thinking because their exposure is so brief. (A one semester sabbatical replacement makes a much more significant impression.)

 

Actions and Improvements

Help students make connections between their own thinking processes and those of the visiting artists. Continue these discussions in formal and informal critiques after the artists have left, to maximize the benefit of varied approaches to the creative process.

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 5. Preparatory Writing

Students will use writing to delve into ideas in preparation for class discussions and class critiques.

 

Outcomes

In-Class writing and self-evaluations will raise the level of analytical thinking in art history classes and during studio class critiques.

 

Assessment

Sophomore and Senior reviews will assess analytical and conceptual thinking and writing.

 

In-class writing and self evaluations will be reviewed by instructor for evidence of analytical thinking.

 

Results

Assessment results determined that incorporating more writing into studio and art history courses improves analytical thinking as measured by scores of 3 and above in the Sophomore Review [1213] and 5 and above in the Senior Review [1214] and reported in the Art Department Assessment Summary [2810].

 

Sophomore Review

Writing effectiveness scores ranged from 0.0 to 3.7 with an average of 2.6, Analytical thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4 with an average of 2.6. and Conceptual thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.2 with an average of 2.5.

 

Senior Review

Writing effectiveness scores ranged from 3.5 to 6.0 with an average of 4.6, Analytical thinking scores ranged from 5.0 to 6.0 with an average of 5.6, and Conceptual thinking scores ranged from 4.8 to 6.0 with an average of 5.3.

 

In-class writing at the beginning of each new chapter in World Art Seminar has raised the level of discussion, so that students delve into ideas, raising questions and applying concepts to their own experience as artists.

 

Writing questions for Contemporary Critical Theory has taught students that good questions require sophisticated analytical thinking skills. As the questions improve, the class discussions become more lively and complex.

 

Self evaluation prepares Basic Design students for class critiques and allows them to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of work and apply it to subsequent projects.

 

Actions and Improvements

Since writing does clearly help students with analytical thinking, we will seek to expand this idea to other studio and art history courses.

 

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 6. Creativity in Art Production

Student artwork will demonstrate creative thinking and technical skill.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students demonstrate their creative thinking  and technical skill in the artworks they produce.

 

Assessment

Sophomore and senior reviews will assess student’s ability to think creatively and display technical skill required of successful art majors.

 

Results

Assessment determined that students who earn 3 or above in Creative and Technical scores on the Sophomore Review [1213] and 5 or above in Creative and Technical scores on the Senior Review [1214] meet the department objectives in creative thinking and technical skill as reported in Art Department Assessment Summary [2810].

 

Sophomore Review

Creative thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.3 with an average of 2.8 and Technical skill scores ranged from 1.4 to 3.7 with an average of 2.5.

 

Senior Review

Creative thinking scores ranged from 5.0 to 6.0 with an average of 5.6 and Technical skill scores ranged from 4.5 to 5.9 with an average of 5.3.

 

Actions and Improvements

While most of our seniors meet the department objectives for creative thinking and technical skill,  we can emphasize the importance of creative thinking by encouraging students to experiment with ideas in their sketchbooks. Research will also be emphasized since it is  an essential tool that introduces students to new artists, new techniques and new ways of thinking.

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 7. Senior Exhibition

Graduating seniors will demonstrate their ability to apply analytical thinking to their art production and in their writing.

 

Outcomes

Assessment will show that graduating students have learned to think analytically and independently.

 

Assessment

The comprehensive senior review process will assess a student’s ability to think analytically and independently.

 

Results

Assessment indicated that students achieved goals in analytical thinking in  their art production, as measured by  Analytical scores of 5 and above, while weaknesses were identified in Writing with   scores below 5 on the Senior Review [1214] as reported in the Art Department Assessment Summary [2810].

 

Senior Review

Analytical thinking scores ranged from 5.0 to 6.0 with an average of 5.6, Writing effectiveness scores ranged from 3.5 to 6.0 with an average of 4.6.

 

Research papers exhibited sophisticated degrees of analytical thinking. Senior exhibitions explored concepts of identity. Though themes were similar, research and resulting artworks were varied.

 

Actions and Improvements

We now work more with seniors in capstone Senior Studio courses on their Research papers to encourage the analytical examination of ideas, artistic philosophies and influences.

 

We developed a rubric [2791] to assess student writing in the Senior Research paper with the goal of providing more feedback and thereby improving scores in Writing.


Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates d learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 8. Critiques

During critiques, students will demonstrate their ability to assess their own and their fellow students work according to their understanding of the elements of form, art theory and thematic focus. Conceptual and technical issues will be addressed.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students demonstrate their ability to think independently and analytically through their participation in studio class critiques and sophomore and senior reviews.

 

Assessment

Sophomore and senior reviews will assess students' ability to speak effectively, think analytically and display technical and conceptual skills required of successful art majors.

 

Results

Assessment determined that students who actively participate in critiques progress more quickly as measured by Speaking, Analytical, Technical and Conceptual scores of 3 or above on Sophomore Review [1213] and 5 or above on Senior Review [1214], as reported in Art Department Assessment Summary [2810].

 

Sophomore Review

Speaking effectiveness scores ranged from 1.0 to 3.3 with an average of 2.3, Analytical thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4 with an average of 2.5. Technical skill scores ranged from 1.4 to 3.7 with an average of 2.5, while Conceptual thinking scores ranged from 1.3 to 4.2 with an average of 2.4.

 

Senior Review

Speaking effectiveness scores ranged from 4.0 to 5.5 with an average of 4.8, Analytical thinking scores ranged from 5.0 to 6.0 with an average of 5.6, Technical skill scores ranged from 4.5 to 5.9 with an average of 5.3, while Conceptual thinking scores ranged from 4.8 to 6.0 with an average of 5.3.

 

Students who are able to make well thought-out observations concerning fellow students' work notice rapid improvement in their ability to critically assess their own progress.

 

 

Actions and Improvements

We now explain to students in introductory courses of Basic Design and Drawing, the importance of making contributions to class critiques, since this enhances skills in analytical thinking and elevates the quality of the course for all students.  For example, it is pointed out to students that not participating in the review of anothers work prevents critical thinking of one’s own work--the same skill is involved.  Subjective assessments of this new approach show that there is a vast improvement in participation and quality of student work.

 

We will look for increase in average scores of Sophomores to indicate success in this area.

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 9. Effective Speaking

Art students will demonstrate effective speaking by using appropriate art concepts to explain their ideas and analyze works of art.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students speak effectively, using art concepts correctly to explain their ideas and analyze works of art.

 

Assessment

Sophomore and senior reviews will assess students' ability to speak effectively.

 

 

Results

Assessment determined that students who earn 3 or above in Speaking scores on the Sophomore Review [1213] and 5 or above in Speaking scores on the Senior Review [1214] demonstrate increased speaking proficiency as reported in Art Department Assessment Summary [2810].

 

Sophomore Review

Speaking effectiveness scores ranged from 1.0 to 3.3 with an average of 2.3.

 

Senior Review

Speaking effectiveness scores ranged from 4.0 to 5.5 with an average of 4.8.

 

Critiques offer students a great deal of practice in formulating ideas and clearly expressing their opinions about the work of fellow classmates.

 

We have also noticed that our art history class in contemporary critical theory has had a positive impact on the ability of students to express their ideas verbally.

 

Actions and Improvements

Critiques work well for the students who participate. We must engage each student in the process if they are all to succeed. This is particularly important early in a student’s college career and would be most beneficial to students in Basic Design and Drawing.

 

Advise students into Contemporary Critical Theory at the latest by first semester Junior year. Many students are ready for it by first semester Sophomore year.

Program: Art

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective 10. Technology literacy  

[SACS 3.4.14] The art program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in word processing, internet research and documentation, and computer graphics software.  For students with a graphic design concentration, a higher level of proficiency is expected.

 

Assessment

For students concentrating in Graphic and Web Design, the Senior Review will evaluate student achievement in the area of computer technology. 

 

For students concentrating in Photography, Fine Arts, and Art Education, a basic knowledge of Computer Graphics is assessed in Art 270, Introduction to Computer Graphics.

 

Word processing and documentation of research obtained from internet databases are assessed in the required art history courses.

 

Results

Assessment determined that students concentrating in Graphic Design who earn  5 or above in Technical scores on the Senior Review [1214] demonstrate advanced technology proficiency as reported in Art Department Assessment Summary [2810].

 

Senior Review

Technical skill scores for students concentrating in Graphic Design ranged from 5.0 to 5.9 with an average of 5.4.

 

Students who complete Art 270 with a C or better are proficient in word processing, internet research and documentation, and computer graphics software.

 

Actions and Improvements

The faculty developed a Technology rubric [2820]  for all art majors, in order to assess technology proficiency following Art 270, Introduction to Computer Graphics.


Program: Biology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

 

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline.

 

Assessment

Biology faculty will evaluate the core skills of students enrolled in the biology core courses  taken by biology and biology education majors in the Spring semester (BIO 111, 112, 211). Using a rubric of achievement for each of the core skills in the context of biology, the biology faculty will determine if majors achieve an appropriate level in each of the core skills at the end of the first and second year of the biology core curriculum.  This rubric can be seen as part of our syllabi.  Two "typical" syllabi are found as squid numbers [2828] and [2829].

 

By evaluating the core skills of students presenting their senior seminars, biology faculty will determine the core skills of majors in the fourth year of the biology program since the senior seminar is the capstone experience for biology and biology education majors.  A minimum of five faculty members in the sciences, including at least two biologists, will attend the presentation and rate student performance in each of the following areas directly relevant to the Core Skills:  Evaluate student performance in presenting their senior seminars (the capstone experience for biology and biology education majors).  A minimum of five faculty members in the sciences, including at least two biologists, will attend the presentation and rate student performance in each of the following areas:

 

Analytical Thinking: 

  Knowledge of Specific Topic (20 points)

  Analysis of Literature (10 pts)

Creative Thinking:

  Suitability of Topic (10 points)

  Presentation Style with regard to Creativity (5 pts)

Effective Speaking:

  Grammar and Diction (10 points)

  Presentation Style with regard to Effectiveness of Conveying        Information (5 points)

 

 Additionally, data is collected by the college as a whole as to our individual students' ranking in the area of core skills.  Biology faculty will use this data to compare our students with the college averages.

 

Results

Evaluation of the core skills during the senior seminar was done.  Results can be found in the document entitled "Senior Seminar Average Scores 2005-06" [2708].

 

Additionally, through the FACS system data was collected by the college as a whole as to our individual students' ranking in the area of core skills.  The biology major averages by class are as follows:

 

Sophomore:  Analytical thinking 1.3; Creative thinking 1.4; Writing Effectiveness 1.4; and Effective speaking 1.5.

 

Junior:  Analytical thinking 1.2; Creative thinking 1.3; Writing Effectiveness 1.2; and Effective speaking 1.5.

 

Senior:  Analytical 1.7; Creative thinking 1.6; Writing Effectiveness 1.5; and effective speaking 1.6. 

 

The College averages are as follows:

 

Sophomore:  Analytical thinking 1.21; Creative thinking 1.17; Writing effectiveness 1.13; and effective speaking 1.23.

 

Junior:  Analytical thinking 1.31; Creative thinking 1.27; Writing effectiveness 1.23; effective speaking 1.36.

 

Senior:  Analytical thinking 1.47; Creative thinking 1.51; Writing effectiveness 1.43; effective speaking 1.57.

 

In all but 2 categories our majors are above the college averages in the core skills.

 

Actions and Improvements

Biology faculty were pleased with the fact that our majors on a whole scored above the averages in the core skills, but we will continue to review all core skills instructional practices in Biology and monitor all senior seminar core skills results as well as FACS results.

 

Any areas of student needs in the core skills as related to performance in Biology will be addressed by assignments or activities given by the Biology faculty.

Program: Biology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.  Specifically, Biology students will demonstrate proficiency in the use of word processing, the use of the internet, and the use of the operating system.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

Faculty will evaluate their students in classes that incorporate a technology component.  The rubric used in this evaluation can be seen in [2830].

 

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.

 

By evaluating students presenting their senior seminars, biology faculty will determine the basic technology literacy of majors in the fourth year of the biology program since the senior seminar is the capstone experience for biology and biology education majors.  A minimum of five faculty members in the sciences, including at least two biologists, will attend the presentation and rate student performance in:  Appropriate Use of Technology (10 points).

 

Results

Results can be seen for the "appropriate use of technology" section of the senior seminar evaluation sheet in the document "Senior Seminar Average Scores 2005-06" [2708].  The average in this section was a 9.43 out of 10.

 

Actions and Improvements

Faculty continue to monitor literacy skills development and provide assistance to students as needed.  Additionally, Faculty will give assignments as needed to assist students in developing the required proficiencies for the biology major.

 

Biology faculty have discussed the issue of creating a checklist that monitors technology literacy at the Sophomore level as well as at the Senior level in the 291 and 491 biology courses respectively.  This checklist will be implemented in the 2007-2008 year.

Program: Biology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will demonstrate proficiency in each of the major areas of biological knowledge (molecular, subcellular, cellular, molecular, organismal, and population biology), and they will be able to successfully engage in independent or directed research projects and/or internships (student teaching internships for biology education majors); and they will be able to successfully prepare and deliver a senior seminar presentation.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that by end of their senior year, students will be knowledgeable in each of the  major areas of biological knowledge, have successfully participated in an independent or directed research projects and/or internship, and have presented an acceptable senior seminar.

 

Assessment

1.         Faculty will administer a written entrance/exit exam  to students in their first semester and in their last.  The exam, developed by the current biology faculty, consists of two sections: Section I tests student proficiency in molecular, subcellular, and cellular biology, and Section II tests student proficiency in organismal and population biology.

         

2.         Faculty will keep systematic records of student scores on national exams (e.g., GRE, MCA, Praxis II) in the relevant subject areas in biology. 

 

3.         Faculty will evaluate students' abilities to answer general, biologically-related questions following the presentation of their required senior seminar.  This ability is evaluated by a form using a point system.  This particular section is entitled “General Knowledge of Discipline” and is given a total score of 30 points.  A minimum of 5 faculty in the sciences evaluate each student.

 

4. Faculty will evaluate annually student success in the research projects and/or internships in which they have participated to meet graduation requirements for the biology major.  The biology faculty will evaluate student performance by reviewing student journals and/or other written materials resulting from the internships, evaluations by on-site internship supervisors, and evaluations by the academic internship supervisors.

 

5. Faculty will evaluate student performance in presenting their senior seminars (the capstone experience for biology and biology education majors).  A minimum of five faculty members in the sciences, including at least two biologists, will attend the presentation and rate student performance in each of the following areas:

 

General Knowledge of Discipline (30 points)

Appropriate Use of Technology (10 pts)

Analytical Thinking: 

  Knowledge of Specific Topic (20 points)

  Analysis of Literature (10 pts)

Creative Thinking:

  Suitability of Topic (10 points)

  Presentation Style with regard to Creativity (5 pts)

Effective Speaking:

  Grammar and Diction (10 points)

  Presentation Style with regard to Effectiveness of Conveying Information (5 points)

 

 

 

Results

1.  Entrance/exit exams were given to both incoming Freshman biology majors and graduating biology majors.  The average exam scores for Section I/Section II for Freshman was 16.85/18 and for Seniors was 30/34.5 (not a longitudinal study).  Individual data for these scores can be found in the document "Bioassessment test scores 2005-06" [2702].

 

2.  No scores of national exams were recorded as no student participated in these exams.

 

3.  Seniors had an average score of 24.34 out of 30 in the section entitled "General Knowledge of Discipline".  This information can be found in the document "Senior Seminar Average Scores 2005-06" [2708].

 

4.  Graduating seniors participated in internships and were evaluated on their performance. The internships were found to be satisfactory and appropriate for the requirement for graduation.  However, only one student incorporated his internship into a course.  That student received an "A" grade in that course.

 

5.  Students were evaluated on their senior seminars by at least 5 faculty.  Average overall scores were 83.9 out of 100.  Individual scores in each category can be found in the document "Senior Seminar Average Scores 2005-06" [2708].  The evaluation form was changed this year to better reflect our core skills.  Because of this comparisons to previous years are not useful.

 

Actions and Improvements

Faculty continue to review the core curriculum and review the entrance/exit exam for appropriateness.  Additionally, faculty will continue to monitor student performance, provide assistance as needed in areas where limitations are seen, and make program adjustments as needs indicate.

 

Again, one action that was taken this year was the updating of the faculty evaluation form for the Senior seminar to better reflect our core skills.

Program: Business Administration

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

 

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment will show that BA program majors will increase their core skills in the context of the discipline.

 

Assessment

Each faculty member will rate students' abilities in the core curriculum courses. These results are reported in the annual assessment report of the program as consensus ratings of remedial, fresh/soph, jr/sr, or graduate level.  Also, FACS results are examined for BA majors.

 

Results

Coker College cumulative (including anything since 03/FA) averages

Class  A         C         W        S

FR       0.87    0.88    0.82    0.92

SO      1.21    1.17    1.13    1.23

JR       1.31    1.27    1.23    1.36

SR      1.47    1.51    1.43    1.57

GR      1.70    1.73    1.68    1.78

 

GR  = The last row is students who graduated.

N = number of samples, not number of students. There are multiple

samples per student.

SCALE:

A: 0 = remedial, 1 = fresh/soph, 2 = jr/sr, 3 = grad

 

Department   MAJ    Class  N         A         C         W        S

Business       BA       FR       57        1.0       1.0       1.1       0.9

Business       BA       SO      158     1.2       1.1       1.1       1.1

Business       BA       JR       348     1.3       1.2       1.3       1.4

Business       BA       SR      414     1.7       1.6       1.5       1.8

Business       BA       TR       2          1.0       0.5       0.5       1.0

 

Business Majors at Coker College show, on average, a steady progression in all major skills over the course of their four years here.  From the Freshman to Senior years, the average analytical thinking score increases 70% from 1.0 to 1.7; the creative thinking score increases 60% from 1.0 to 1.6; the writing score increases 36% from 1.1 to 1.5; and the speaking ability score increases 100% from .9 to 1.8.  This is a good indication that the Coker College Business Curriculum and the level of instruction lead to significant improvements in the writing and speaking ability of its majors, as well as in their ability to think both analytically and creatively.

 

In comparison with Coker College students in general, Coker College Business Majors receive higher average ratings in all of these categories by their Senior year:  in analytical thinking, Coker College Business Majors have an average rating which is 16% higher than Senior year Coker College students in general (1.7 vs. 1.47); in creating thinking, Coker College Business Majors have an average rating which is 6% higher than Senior year Coker College students in general (1.6 vs. 1.51); in writing ability, Coker College Business Majors have an average rating which is 5% higher than Senior year Coker College students in general (1.5 vs. 1.43); while in speaking ability, Coker College Business Majors have an average rating which is 15% higher than Senior year Coker College students in general (1.8 vs. 1.57).  The fact that Coker College Business Majors are rated as stronger on average in the four major skills of writing, speaking, creative thinking and analytical thinking than are Coker College students in general, attests to the success of the Business Program in developing these skills.

 

In conclusion, Business Majors show significant improvement in the four core skills during their four years at Coker College and also in comparison with Coker College students in general.  This provides two sources of evidence for the effectiveness of both the Coker College Business faculty and the Business Curriculum in fostering the development of these skills in its students.

 

See 2005 - 2006 BA program FACS raw scores are found in [2323].

 

Actions and Improvements

The department continues to develop methods of improving student writing through the Write-On! initiative (QEP).  Some activites developed and used in 2005-2006 included emphasis on written essays in classwork, exams, and a required essay on the capstone course (Strategy Formation and Implementation) exit exam.

Program: Business Administration

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology identified by the program faculty, including word processing, use of the Internet, and use of the operating system.

 

Assessment

As part of the BA program courses, faculty will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.  The BA faculty will use a technology literacy record form for the purpose of rating student proficiency in technology. See [2711], BA Program Technology Literacy Record.

 

Results

Business courses assume that students will be competent in the use of automated word processing and electronic spreadsheets.  Students who need to learn these skills may choose BA 200 Business Application Software as an elective course.  Before registration appointments, all students have accessed successfully their {iceBox} e-portfolio account on the Internet to print/ retrieve an academic summary.  Students and faculty have communicated on email.  Upper division courses have required students to have basic knowledge of spreadsheets, word processing, and presentations.  Each course syllabus in the BA program logs these requirements and shows the development of the proficiency.  Assessment of these student technology literacy skills has revealed BA students are using the required technology.  The following matrix displays the technology required in each course where demonstrated proficiency is an element in the satisfactory completion of the course. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BA Program Technology Literacy Record - Courses

Annual Review 2005 - 2006

                                                                                   

Technology Literacy

Course    OS   Web  Word Excel PPT DB

 

Business Core Curriculum                                         330     X     X    X        X         

340 X    X    X        X         

341  X    X    X        X         

443  X    X    X    X    X

      

Business Electives                               

200           X    X    X    X    X         

300  X    X    X    X    X    X   

303  X    X    X    X    X         

311  X    X    X    X    X         

314  X    X                        

332  X    X    X        X         

333  X    X    X    X    X    X   

335  X    X    X        X         

342  X    X    X        X         

344  X    X    X    X    X         

345  X    X    X        X         

355                                

440  X    X    X    X    X         

447  X    X    X        X         

 

Business Administration Technology Literacy Record sheets maintained for seniors in the capstone course show that all students achieved the required level of proficiency in the specified literacy skills, including the use of word processing, use of the internet, and use of the operating systems and software packages appropriate for business administration majors. [2711]             

 

Actions and Improvements

Students now have ownership of their academic planning and they are demonstrating increasing proficiency in technology literacy.

Program: Business Administration

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will demonstrate proficiency in financial and managerial accounting, macroeonomic and mircoeconomic concepts, finance, marketing, management, legal aspects of business, and a strategy formulation capstone course.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that all BA program majors will be proficient in the eight core areas listed above and measured in the capstone experience.  Strategy Formation and Implementation is an integrative capstone/assessment course covering the concepts of strategy, tasks, and process of business strategy and policy formulation and implementation.  Results from successful completion of the course and the department exit assessment exam will be evidence of both program and student learning outcomes.

 

Assessment

A requirement of the capstone course will consist of a written exam that tests students in the eight defined core areas.  See [2323] for the exam. The BA program major assessment at Coker College will be the comprehensive assessment test, which evaluates the students’ knowledge in the eight core areas of financial accounting, managerial accounting, macroeconomics, microeconomics, finance, marketing, management, and legal aspects of business.  This test will be given each year to the students in the capstone course, Strategy Formulation and Implementation (BA 443).  A base year 2005-2006 will be established from which future exams can be compared and analyzed.  Scores significantly below the norm that will be continually monitored may require a re-exam to aid in the assessment.

 

Results

Results of the Coker College Department of Business Administration Assessment Test, 2005-2006 will show that the test was developed and administered to 67 (sixty-seven) students. 

 

For the 2005-2006 academic year, the mean score for the 67 students taking the assessment test was 42%.  The standard deviation was 13%, reflecting a large spread in the results.  For purposes of comparison, the results for all the years for which the test has been given are listed below.

Table 1:  Summary of Results

 

ACADEMIC YEAR  CAPSTONE COURSE

(STRAT. FORM./IMPLEMENT.)

                        Mean  StDev N

2005-2006     42%    13%    67

2004-2005     49%    10%    63

2003-2004     51%    10%    36

 

In comparing the results of academic year 2005-2006 with that of 2004-2005, the BA program notes that there are two major changes:

 

            a) a large drop in the mean score and

 

            b) a large increase in the variance of the observations.

 

On examining the data, it was apparent that nearly all of these changes are due to unusually low scores on the assessment test given at one of the off campus sites (Mullins, SC).  The most probable reason for test scores at that one site dropping so much in just one year is that the students, since they knew the results would not affect their performance evaluation, did not take the test seriously. 

 

Failing scores on the capstone exit exam indicate to the BA program faculty: (1) faculty expectations of students, (2) grade inflation improperly indicate course success, (3) poor faculty preparation and minimum credentials, and (4) low program admission criteria all contribute to unsatisfactory exit exam scores.  In addition, a demonstrated failure to monitor and enforce course prerequisites is an invitation to low scores.

 

Actions and Improvements

All exit exam results will be discussed annually with all BA faculty.

 

The business faculty has discussed how we could require the students to take the assessment test more seriously.  Accordingly, the Department has decided to mandate that all instructors of the capstone course have on their syllabus that the results of the assessment test will count towards their successful completion of the course.  This will definitely encourage the students to take this test seriously and increase the validity of the test.

 

The methodology of giving and analyzing exit exams will also change.  In effect, the exam will be administered on a pass/fail basis as measured against a norm that will be monitored on an ongoing basis.

 

Prerequisite monitoring will be implemented.

 

Program: Chemistry

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

[SACS 3.5.1] The chemistry program identifies college-level competencies within the general education core and provides evidence that graduates have attained those competencies.

 

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that chemistry majors will have attained a working proficiency in core skills prior to their graduation from the chemistry program.

 

Assessment

Student attainment of core skills will begin in the freshman chemistry course.  Homework assignments and exams (including a comprehensive final exam), all of which contain questions that test anlaytical and creative thinking skills, are graded by the chemistry faculty.  Except for the final exam, which must be retained by the program (but whose results are available to students if requested), the in-class exams and homeworks are returned to the students with appropriate commentary by faculty indicating to students where they still need to improve these core skills.

 

Similar approaches will be carried out in upper-level courses.  When appropriate, students are asked to come to the blackboard to present their solutions to homework and/or in-class questions.  The faculty member will then critique the student solutions, and will then ask students questions that allows evaluation of thinking, speaking, and, in general, presentation skills.

 

Writing skills will be assessed in a number of the program's laboratory courses, where word-processed lab reports are required and graded.

 

In the chemistry seminar capstone course, students will be asked to present the results of their research or internship activities in the presence of the chemistry faculty (and others who might also attend).  Any attendee can ask questions pertaining to the presentations or any other aspect of chemistry.  The overall effectiveness of the presentations and responses to questions are discussed and evaluated by the chemistry and invited faculty, and a grade is given summarizing the impressions of the chemistry faculty.

 

The chemistry faculty will regularly confer with each other to follow their students' progress in the various courses offered by the program.

 

The faculty also will rely on course completion and its graduates' successes in being admitted to post-graduate schools or being employed by high-value public and/or private organizations or institutions.

 

Quantitative scores of core skills achievements will be provided through the college-wide FACS assessment.

 

Results

 

Innovative attempts to engage students’ use of core skills in the introductory courses seems to be successful.  Students’ oral presentations and  written products reflected improvement during the introductory courses. Anecdotally, “controversial issues” presentations were one of the most productive parts of Gen Chem.  Pairs of students took opposite sides of an issue and presented together.  The presentations were then used to stimulate class discussion.  The presentations were elegant although some were a little limited in the scope of their research. That, too, was a topic of discussion because of the limited quality of internet information on controversial topics.  The research really helped the students to connect their chemistry course to issues that they cared about, and the students demonstrated that they could articulate their analytical thinking in a clear, concise manner.

 

Also, upper-level students’ explanations of solutions to problems presented at the blackboard, as well as their responses to the professors’ questioning of their solutions, provided evidence of improved speaking and thinking skills over the course of the major.  Too, their writing products continued to show maturity, especially in the technical lab reports required in the program’s laboratory courses.

 

Chemistry students’ FACS results over the course of the major provided evidence of improvement in the core skills emphasized by Coker College.

FACS results for chemistry students follow.

 

Department

MAJ

Class

N

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

Science

CH

FR

4

1.3

1.3

1.0

1.0

Science

CH

SO

6

1.2

1.0

1.0

1.3

Science

CH

JR

18

1.6

1.3

1.3

1.0

 

The results indicate that the Core Skills of its majors improve in analytical thinking as they proceed through the program's lecture, lab, internship, research, and senior seminar experiences.  There may be room for improvement in the other areas, but the sample sizes are usually small.

 

Actions and Improvements

It will be necessary to design additional course-by-course documentation strategies to meet fully the requirement of a more thorough assessment of Core Skills. The appropriate rubrics and "check sheets" will have to be developed by the two new chemistry faculty who be hired prior to the start of the 2007-2008 academic year.

 

An example of the types of documentation protocols that could serve as a model may be found in [2831].

 

The innovative techniques for engaging students using controversial topics will be recommended to new faculty as a way to engage their students’ thinking and communications abilities.

Program: Chemistry

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The chemistry program's use of technology supports student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have appropriate access to and training in the use of computer technology and in chemical instrumentation.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students in the chemistry program have access to and are proficient in using the aforementioned technology.

 

Assessment

The chemistry faculty will evaluate and grade student-written reports for selected laboratory experiments in which experimental data are recorded and analyzed using computers which have real-time data-logging programs.

 

The chemistry faculty will evaluate and grade student homework exercises which require analysis of data obtained from of graphs generated by graphing programs.

 

The chemistry faculty will evaluate and grade how effectively students use chemical instrumentation in various upper-level laboratory courses offered by the chemistry program.

 

The chemistry faculty will evaluate and grade student use of presentation technologies, such as Power Point, in the capstone Chemistry Seminar course, CHE 380 [2831].

 

Results

In 2005-2006, all first-semester general chemistry laboratory students were required to give short PowerPoint presentations on current topics in chemistry. All PowerPoint presentations were judged to be excellent. During the second semester, many of the general chemistry laboratory experiments required computer-accessed data collection and analysis protocols, for which the students were trained and which they successfully completed.

 

Selected written lab and course reports that required the use of technology were evaluated and judged to be of exceptional quality.  Most of these reports required graphs generated by specific graphing and chemical instrumentation programs.

 

The presentation technologies used in the capstone course, CHE 380, showed that students had mastered the use of the required presentation technologies.

 

Actions and Improvements

Students will be introduced very early in their first semester laboratories (i.e., for their first few laboratory experiences) to computer-based data-acquisition, analysis, and graphing techniques.  For example, in the Fall, 2006 Semester students will use lab tops and the Logger Pro program from Vernier Company. Additional opportunities to master these techniques will be built into future first-semester laboratory experiments.  The department will continue to place emphasis on new and current program technologies that enhance student learning.

Program: Chemistry

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will demonstrate proficiency in each of four major areas of chemistry: inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, analytical chemistry, and physical chemistry.  They will be able to successfully engage in independent or directed research projects and/or internships related to these areas.  They will also be able to successfully prepare and present the results of their internships or research efforts in the chemistry program's capstone senior seminar course.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that by end of their senior year, chemistry majors will be knowledgeable in each of the four major areas of chemistry, and will have successfully participated in independent or directed research projects and/or internships. Prior to graduation, they will have presented an acceptable senior seminar in chemistry.

 

Assessment

Formative measures of proficiency in the four major areas of chemistry (inorganic, organic, analytical, and physical chemistry) will include the chemistry faculty's grading of assigned written work, exams, and laboratory work through the progression of the courses in the chemistry major program.  As a summative method of evaluation, the faculty will, as its initial efforts in this type of assessment, administer the nationally-standardized test in organic chemistry prepared and promulgated by the American Chemical Society.  This test will be administered at the conclusion of the second semester of the organic chemistry course.  While it is important to compare our students' grades in this exam to the national average, it will be up to the faculty administering the exam to determine to what extent will be the weight of this grade as it is factored in to the final grades of students in our organic chemistry course.

 

The chemistry faculty will attend all senior seminar presentations, and a faculty person from outside the department will also be invited to be part of the evaluation team.  A high-pass-low-pass-or-no-pass decision will be reached by consensus of the evaluation team. Of course, the faculty directing undergraduate research is the only one who can evaluate the results of that research and provide a grade for the research course per se.  Likewise, only the supervising scientist can evaluate student performance for an internship assignment off campus.  His or her comments, however, will be taken into account by the faculty who has to give a grade, as appropriate, for the internship course.

 

The faculty also will rely on course completion and its graduates' successes in being admitted to post-graduate schools or being employed by high-value public and/or private organizations or institutions.

 

Results

The chemistry faculty has collected and retained class records of completed exams over many years in the four major areas of chemistry.  The College requires that completed student final exams be kept for a minimum of two years.  These are available in the faculty's files for review as needed.  They show a progressive improvement of student outcomes from their freshman to their senior year.  Laboratory reports are normally returned to the students, so no permanent copies of these reports have been available.

 

Students were administered the ACS exam in Organic Chemistry at the end of the 2005-2006 academic year and scored by the organic chemistry faculty.  As in past years, the average grades were below the national average.

 

All of the students who presented senior seminars passed the course (without whose passing would prevent them from obtaining a degree).  The panel of judges for the senior seminar presentations included chemistryfaculty and an outside chemistry expert.

 

A review of recent graduates shows that all of them are either working professionally as chemists or are in graduate school furthering their study of the subject.  Specifically, our e-mail contacts with the three Spring 2006 graduates reavealed the following: one is attending graduate school, one is teaching chemistry in the Greenville County (SC) Schools, and one is working in a chemistry position in industry.

 

Actions and Improvements

Perhaps the faculty should make copies of representative laboratory reports to keep on file in the future.

 

To better assess our students' proficiency in the  areas of chemistry in addition to organic chemistry, the faculty will consider requring additional appropriate ACS-based exams in these areas in the future, and the will continue to give the ACS organic exam.

 

Additionally, the faculty will rate students' proficiencies in independent/directed research, internships, and/or performance in the senior seminar by using faculty-developed rating scales, check sheets, rubrics, etc., such as outlined in [2831].

 

Once the faculty has met to evaluate the overall results of all of the assessment tools, it will try to come up with a comprehensive framework to help their students improve their performance over the next several years.

 

The bottom line, however, is how well students fare in the "marketplace" following their graduation.  And so far, the results are extremely encouraging.

Program: Communication

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline and show competency in each of the core skills areas.

 

Assessment

Results from the campus-wide assessment of core skills (FACS) will be used to assess the progress communication majors are making in the required core skills.  Scores for commuication majors will be compared to those of all Coker College students.

 

The professor who teaches COM 460, the Senior Seminar capstone class, will evaluate students in that class for their meeting of the core skills. 

 

We will look at internship supervisor’s ratings to see how our students rate for the core skills.

 

Results

Comparison of FACS college averages for the four core skills with FACS averages for communication majors is given below. The average for Communication majors is listed first in the data below, followed by the average for that class rank for the college as a whole.

 

Senior

 

Analytical      1.5/1.47

Creative         1.5/1.51

Writing           1.5/1.43

Speaking       1.6/1.57

 

Analysis: at senior level, communication majors are at or slightly above the skills of the college as a whole.

 

Junior

 

Analytical      1.2/1.31

Creative         1.2/1.27

Writing           1.2/1.23

Speaking       1.3/1.36

 

Analysis:  At the junior level, ratings for communication majors are slightly below those of the college as a whole.

 

Sophomore

           

Analytical      1.2/1.21

Creative         1.3/1.17

Writing           1.3/1.13

Speaking       1.3/1.23

 

Analysis:  At the sophomore level, ratings for communication majors are at or slightly above those of the college as a whole. 

 

This comparison may be dealing with numbers that are too small to be statistically significant, but there appears to be a “junior slump,” whereby our junior majors under-perform compared to the college as a whole after being over the college average for the sophomore year, and before being over the college average for senior year. 

 

This phenomenon will take monitoring to see if there is some peculiarity about the preceding year’s junior class, or whether this is a pattern for classes that follow. 

 

Core skills were measured in COM 460, Communication Seminar, for all senior majors and minors.  The program used a matrix of 26 items (the Communication Senior Seminar Assessment Grid 2007) which were evaluated by the professor teaching the class [2826]. Eight students were measured; of these, two were minors, the rest were majors.  Averages by category are on a 3-point scale, with 3 indicating graduate level, 2 indicating junior/senior level, and 1 indicating freshman/sophomore level. 

 

Analytical Thinking was measured in items one (ability to understand complex arguments) and two (ability to develop complex arguments).  For both, two students ranked at the junior/senior level and six at the graduate level.  This made for an average of 2.75 for both categories.

 

Creative Thinking was measured in items three (inventiveness in developing ideas) and four (creativity in communication-related skills).    For item three, three students ranked at the junior/senior level, and five at the graduate level (average = 2.625).  For item four, two students ranked at the junior/senior level and six at the graduate level (average = 2.75). 

 

 

For Speaking and Writing Skills, measurements were taken for Purpose, Audience, Content, Organization, Expression, and Usage and Mechanics. 

 

Under Speaking Skills, all students ranked at the Junior/Senior or Graduate Levels with the following averages:  Purpose (3.0), Audience (3.0), Content (2.75), Organization (2.75), Expression  (2.875), and Usage and Mechanics (2.875). 

 

Under Writing Skills, all students ranked at the Junior/Senior or Graduate Level with the following averages:  Purpose (2.625), Audience (2.5), Content (2.625), Organization (2.625), Expression (2.5), and Usage and Mechanics (2.5). 

 

Internship supervisors ranked our majors at a 3.75 for their communication skills, which includes both writing and speaking skills.  This was slightly higher than the average of all items on the evaluation sheet and a slight improvement from the cumulative rating for 1999-2004.  A summary of internship evaluators’ ratings for 2005-2006 can be seen at [2817].    

 

Actions and Improvements

We plan to apply at least some of the same ratings to end-of-semester assignments in COM 150 (Introduction to Mass Communication) and COM 330 (Communication Theory) to see if there is improvement over four years in the skills levels for majors and minors.

Program: Communication

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology  identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

Technology skills will be measured in COM 460, Communication Seminar, for all senior majors and minors.  The program uses a matrix of 26 items (the Communication Senior Seminar Assessment Grid 2007) which will be evaluated by the professor teaching the class [2826].  Ratings are on a 3-point scale, with 3 indicating graduate level, 2 indicating junior/senior level, and 1 indicating freshman/sophomore level. 

 

Internship Supervisor's evaluations will also be used to determine whether or not students' technical skills are adequate [2817].

 

Results

Eight students were measured; of these, two were minors, the rest were majors.

 

Technological literacy was measured by three measures on the Communication Seminar Senior Assessment Grid:  ability to use library databases, ability to use Power Point or other presentation software, and awareness of communication technologies [2826].

 

For ability to use library databases, all students ranked on a Junior/Senior level (average = 2.0).

 

For ability to use Power Point or other presentation software and awareness of communication technologies, all students ranked on a graduate level (average = 3.0). 

 

Ratings for Technical Knowledge by internship supervisors were at 3.08 on a four-point scale.  Intership supervisors rated four of our students as excellent, five as above average, and three as average.  Technical Knowledge was the lowest ranking of all items on the internship supervisors’ evaluation sheet [2817].

 

 

Actions and Improvements

The program is currently investigating three possible ways to improve students’ technological literacy outcomes:

 

▪  We may try to offer COM 380 (Video Production) in both fall and spring semesters.  This will allow for more majors to take the class and therefore improve technical skills.  

 

▪  A new video production internship site has been identified and a major will be interning there in spring of 2007.

 

▪  The program is also considering offering a COM 499 class, Video Games, whose purpose will be to sensitize students to the issues involved with interactive media.

 

 

Program: Communication

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

By their senior year, students will formuate and execute a research project that will show their readiness for either the workplace or graduate school.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that in their senior year, students will demonstrate the ability to formulate a research hypothesis related to communication, conduct a search of literature in that field, and design and execute a study that shows sensitivity to the utility, testability, heuristic, and ethical issues involved in such research.

 

Assessment

Evidence for this will be the completion of the capstone class, COM 460, for which demonstration of mastery of the objective is required for a passing grade.  The assessment results will be recorded in a matrix [2826] developed by the department.

 

Results

Skills were measured in COM 460, Communication Seminar, for all senior majors and minors.  The department used a departmentally-developed matrix of 26 items (the Communication Senior Seminar Assessment Grid 2006) which were evaluated by the professor teaching the class [2826].  Eight students were measured; of these, two were minors, the rest were majors.  Averages by category are on a 3-point scale, with 3 indicating graduate level, 2 indicating junior/senior level, and 1 indicating freshman/sophomore level. 

 

Ability to formulate a research hypothesis related to communication and conduct a search of the literature was measured by items 24 (understanding of communication literature and theory), 25 (ability to formulate a research hypothesis), and 26 (can conduct research). Sensitivity to ethical issues was measured by item 20 (Awareness and practice of ethical communication).   Readiness for the workplace was measured by items 17 (understanding of job-hunting process), 18 (professional attitude toward job hunting challenges and opportunities, and 19 (workplace writing skills). 

 

For items 24, 25, and 26, all students ranked at the junior/senior level, which gave an average for all of these of 2.0.  

 

For item 20 item 20, all students ranked at the graduate level, which gave an average for all of these of 3.0.

 

For item 17 and 18, all students ranked at the graduate level.  For item 10, two students ranked at the junior/senior level, and six at the graduate level, giving an average of  2.75. 

 

 

Actions and Improvements

We plan to apply this rating scale to end-of-semester assignments in COM 150 (Introduction to Mass Communication) and COM 330 (Communication Theory) to see if there is improvement over four years in the skills levels for majors and minors.  To date, these studies have not been longitudinal.

 

In 2006, the instructor will add a test question and class discussion about formulating a research hypothesis to COM 150, Introduction to Mass Communication, the entry-level class for the major.   A similar test question will be added to COM 330.

 

In order to raise levels in measurement 24, Understanding of Communication Theory and Literature, we plan to require more readings in COM 399, Persuasion, than for the last time that special topics class was offered.  COM 365, Organizational Communication, is now being taught using a theory-based text to add strength to this measurement.  We also plan to require that each student do a book review for one book related to his or her research in COM  460, as well as in several of the other professional-type courses like Principles of Public Relations, Marketing Communications, and Communication and Leadership for Non-Profit Organizations. 

 

We are planning, in fall of 2007, to offer a COM 499 (Video Games), whose purpose will be to look at video gaming from the point of view of different research methodologies.  Students will be asked to formulate research hypotheses about video games and to follow through with some basic research using different methodologies. 

 

Program: Computer Science

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

 

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline.

 

Assessment

Each course syllabus in computer science includes a rubric for core skills in context of that course.  Each faculty evaluates each student at the end of the course using the rubric which has four categories:  remedial, freshmen-sophomore, junior-senior, and graduate.  All faculty evaluate each student's presentation in the capstone course (MAT/CS 498).  Results are reviewed and discussed and at the end of the semester and a consensus is reached by the faculty for the student's final core skill rating.

 

During the capstone course, faculty observe and evaluate students’ thinking and communication skills.  These are are rated using a rubric, and are discussed.

 

FACS results college-wide will be used also to assess our majors progress in the core skills.

 

Results

The Provost requires that every course syllabus include a rubric for core skills in context of that course and every syllabus must be turned into his office at the beginning of each semester.  In addition, syllabi in computer science are posted in web folders of faculty.  The Program Coordinator verified that each computer science course syllabus for fall 2006 included a rubric for core skills in 05-06, all faculty evaluated each student's presentations in the capstone course (MAT/CS 498) using a rubric [2515].  The ratings were considered in judging each student's final core skill rating.  The evaluations are kept in the office of the Program Coordinator.

 

The college-wide FACS assessment results are used and are shown below.

 

Department

MAJ

Class

N

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

Science

CS

JR

4

1.0

1.3

1.3

1.0

Science

CS

SR

66

1.0

1.4

1.1

1.2

 

After discussing the results of these formal assessments and judging from subjective assessments during the capstone course, the faculty concluded that in some cases the level of work was not showing enough progress.  In particular, some students were not showing sufficient development in all four of the core skills.

 

Actions and Improvements

 

We found that our system of rating students did not capture very well the learning outcomes, so a new guideline for evaluating the capstone course has been developed. The point system measures student progress in each of the core skills and in their discipline knowledge acquisition.

 

In order to encourage students to take their projects more seriously, new grading guidelines for the seminar emphasize the research components more.  We also added a mid-semester first draft of the final written paper.  Finally, we now video-tape student presentations and require them to critique their own work.  We will know in a semester if these changes have the desired effect.

Program: Computer Science

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology  identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.

 

Results

Computer science students are exposed to the state-of-the-art computing facilities, software application packages as well as networking and web development technologies.

 

Syllabi from several majors-level courses indicated that Windows, Linux/UNIX, Microsoft .Net platforms, Apache web servers, and MySQL database systems are used. Students in the capstone course (MAT/CS 498) are required to write a final paper using a scientific word processor and to submit the paper electronically.  Students in the course are rated on their use of technology for their presentations.

 

All students in the capstone course were able to write a paper using word processing and submit it electronically.  All students used some form of technology appropriate to the discipline in completing their research work and presentations.

 

Actions and Improvements

We are exploring the idea of requiring the use of scientific word processing in earlier courses, and also requiring students to buy the student edition of Maple.  These discussions will be part of the budget planning cycle.

 

Program: Computer Science

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will acquire a theoretical and practical background in algorithms, software, and hardware design, and will demonstrate proficiency in applying appropriate mathematical and programming methods in solving problems.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that in their senior year, students can confidently solve fundamental problems in these areas, and that they can work independently on computer science problems. 

 

Assessment

Completion of the capstone course sequence over three semesters is the primary means of assessing quality of majors.  This is done quantitatively, with oral and written tests, with ratings on individual presentations using a standard rubric [2515], and subjectively in discussions with other faculty.  To decide on each student's final grade, faculty who serve as advisors for seminar students meet, compare ratings from the rubrics, evaluate the written paper, discuss students' attendance and level of difficulty of the project.

 

 Each faculty member rates students' abilities in the core curriculum areas, and a student's advisor rates his/her ability to work independently on the research assignment.  These results are compared and discussed by faculty to reach consensus ratings of remedial, fresh/soph, jr/sr, or graduate level.  The latter two levels are considered acceptable for seniors.

 

Successful course completion is also used to determine progress in the program. 

 

Results

 

Results from the prior year had led us to believe that students were not being adequately prepared for the upper level courses.  Part of the problem seems to be that many new students don’t really understand what a CS major is--in particular that it is heavy in mathematics.  Based on the changes we made last year to the seminar’s format, this year’s results are much better.  Subjectively, the quality of work demonstrates more thoughtfulness and knowledge of the discipline.  The ratings on the rubric still show a need for improvement in communication skills (see Core Skills objective).

 

The test results reinforced our perception that students were not uniformly prepared for the upper level classes.

 

Actions and Improvements

 

Although the testing was somewhat useful, we found that it distraced significantly from the seminar experience.  Students felt that it was unfair, and that they didn’t have enough time to prepare for it.  After some deliberation we decided to instead focus on better assessment of the seminar projects themselves, and increase the writing component.  There is now a formal written paper required, and we are devising a more comprehensive rubric for evaluating projects.

 

Because both testing and our subjective evaluations showed that some students were inadequately prepared for upper level classes, we have submitted a proposal to set C as the minimum grade a CS student may get in certain majors courses like programming.  This is intended to prevent weak students from progressing.  In particular, a grade of C or better in CS110 (computer science I), will be required for new computer science majors, to continue taking the next level computer sciences courses such as CS111. The course Computer Organization (CS340) has also been added to the core curriculum for the major with the intention of increasing depth of understanding of computing theory.

 

Program: Criminology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

[SACS 3.5.1] The criminology program identifies college-level competencies within the general education core curriculum and provides evidence graduates attain those competencies.

 

Specifically, students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills; analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writting in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase core skills in context of the discipline over their college career.

 

Assessment

Faculty will develop and use the Behavioral Science Assessment Form [2785] to guide their assessment of core skills development within the discipline.  Criminology students will achieve 2.25 or better on relevant core skills criteria used to assess students' senior research project in SOC 408.  The core skills addressed in the context of the discipline will include evaluation items 1) Clear Hypothesis, 5) Statistical Method, 6) Writting, and 7) Speaking.  These criteria will indicate students' mastery of analytical and creative thinking, writing, and speaking.

 

Also, the faculty will use Coker College's Faculty Assessment of Core Skills (FACS) data which will be obtained from Institutional Research for all criminology majors.  Scores of criminology students will be compared to those of students college-wide to assess the level of core skills development of criminology majors.

 

Results

Criminology students for 2005-2006 attained the following average scores on the Behavioral Scence Assessment Form in SOC 408 (evaluation of core skills that assess analytical and creative thinking, effective writting and public speaking):

1) Clear Hypothesis: 3.0; 2) Statistical Method: 2.7; 6) Writing 3.0; 7) Speaking 2.6.  As stated above, the standard set by the Criminology faculty is 2.25, and this standard was met by Criminlogy majors, indicating that the students are progressing satisfactorily in acquiring the core skills within the discipline as emphasized by Coker College

 

In addition to these internal measurements, there are college-wide assessment results, shown below.

 

FACS data for criminology students for 2005 -2006

      Think  Creat   Write   Speak

FR     1.3     1.0      1.0     1.0

SO    1.2      1.0     1.1      1.4

JR     1.4      1.4     1.2      1.5

SN     1.3      1.3     1.2     1.4

 

FACS data for all Coker College Students for 2005-2006

       Think   Creat    Write   Speak

FR    0.87     0.88     0.82     0.92

SO   1.21     1.17     1.13     1.23

JR    1.31     1.27     1.23     1.36

SR    1.47     1.73    1.68     1.78

 

These FACS results indicate that overall most criminology majors scored better than the Coker College average.  Senior criminology majors scored much better than average Coker College students.

 

Actions and Improvements

Data for 2005-2006 indicate that juniors who are next year's seniors need help with analytical and creative writing.  Since they will be in SOC 308 to prepare them for the capstone course SOC 408, essential core skills will be emphasized.  In addition, all faculty will pay attention to this need and assist when possible with appropriate course assignments.

 

FACS data indicate significant differences in classes by FACS scores on the four assessed areas.  The faculty will emphasize assignments in appropriate classes to improve scores.  FACS data have been obtained for each student, and advisors of students with low scores will discuss the scores with the students and advise them to select appropriate courses in areas where they need improvment in core skills.

       


Program: Criminology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The criminology program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting program objectives, and ensures students have access to and training in appropriate technology.  Criminology students will demonstrate proficiency in computer use, use of the Internet, use of data spread sheets, word processing, and SPSS.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show students have access to and are proficient in necessary technology identified by the program faculty, which includes computer use, the Internet, data spread sheets, word processing, and SPSS.  In addition, students will submit their work through the College writing archive {iceBox}.

 

Assessment

Using a technology literacy record sheet during the capstone course, faculty will evaluate each student's technology literacy, including computer use, use of the Internet, use of data spread sheets, word processing, and SPSS.

 

Results

All students demonstrated in their SOC 408 presentations of their senior research project that they can use computers, the Internet, data spread sheets and SPSS as recorded on the technology literacy record sheet.  In addition, each presented his/her project as a PowerPoint presentation.

 

Actions and Improvements

Students are currently performing at an acceptable level in terms of technology literacy. We will montor use of technology to be sure it is maintained at current levels of basic techological proficiency.

Program: Criminology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

 

Criminology students will demonstrate proficiency in understanding theoretical issues and conducting research by completing an original research project in their senior year in preparation for graduate study or entry-level criminal justice positions.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show senior criminology majors understand theoretical issues and the research process by conducting orginal research.  Evidence will include the evaluation of an original research project in SOC 408, the capstone course, with students scoring a minimum of 2.25 in all assessment categories.

 

Also, results will show program graduates will be successful entering graduate school or entry-level positions in criminal justice oriented careers.

 

Assessment

The criminology and sociology faculty will attend all student presentations of student research and will fill out the Behavioral Science Assessment Evaluation Form [2785] for each student's work in SOC 408.  Items assessed will be: 1) Clear hypothesis, 2) Concept relationships, 3) Data collection methods, 4) Relevant theory, 5) Appropriate statistical methods, 6) Project well written, and 7) Student speaks articulately.  Each item will be assessed using the following scale: Excellent, Very Good, Adequate, Fair, and Poor and will be assigned a numerical value, Excellent=4, Very Good=3, Adequate=2, Fair=1, and Poor=0. 

As stated above, the acceptable standard for performance in each category will be 2.25.

 

The number of students entering graduate school or criminal justice agency employment will be reported.

 

Results

Original research projects and presentations were evaluated according to the method stated above.  Item scores were arrived at by averaging the scores for each item by all evaluators for all criminology students in the capstone course SOC 408.  The results were as follows for 2005-2006:

1) Clear Hypothesis    3.0,

2) Understands Relationships 2.1,

3) Data Collection Appropriate 3.2,

4) Understands Theory 3.2,

5) Appropriate Statistical Method  2.7,

 6) Well Written 3.0,

7) Speaks Articulately 2.6.

 

All students met the 2.25 minimal performance requirement in each category except for concept relationships.

 

There was a single criminology major for 2004-2005 so any comparison of results for the 2005-2006 year would not be meaningful.

 

Results of placement of graduate criminology majors for 2005-2006 were as follows: 1 in graduate school;1 in criminal justice employment as a police officer.

 

Actions and Improvements

More emphasis has to be placed on relationships between concepts and their indicators and statistical methods.  This emphasis will be included in capstone course experiences as well as in other appropriate criminology and sociology courses prior to students selecting a topic and beginning their research.  Students also need more practice in public speaking.  This need will be addressed in course work throughout the major.  To enhance the assessment of student learning outcomes in the major, the faculty will discuss the possibility of developing and adding an exit examination during the senior capstone experience.

 

 

Program: Dance

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills

The program identifies college-level competencies within the general education core and provides evidence that graduates have attained those competencies.  Specifically, students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline, as measured by the Core Skills Assessment rubric included in dance syllbi and by the FACS assessment given in each semester.  Students in 100-200 level courses will show a freshman/sophomore or higher level and students in 300-400 level courses will show a junior/senior or higher level.

 

Assessment

Each course syllabus in Dance will include a rubric for assessing core skills in context of that course [2961], as required by the Provost.  Every syllabus will be submitted to the Provost’s office at the beginning o each semester. The Program coordinator will verify that each Dance course syllabus included the required rubric for the applicable core skills.  In addition, syllabi for Dance will be posted in faculty web folders.

 

Program faculty will evaluate each student’s core skill performance at the end of the course using the applicable rubric which has four categories:  remedial, freshman/sophomore, junior/senior, graduate.  Program Faculty and invited Department and/or outside faculty will evaluate each student's presentation for core skills development as well core curriculum content development in the capstone course (DNC 480).  On occasion, the student's performance will be part of a formal Program production (the fall dance concert), and the student's performance will be adjudicated or responded to by an outside professional adjudicator/responder to the production [2955], [2950], [2949].  Results will be reviewed and discussed at the end of the semester, and a consensus will be reached by the faculty for the student's core skill rating.  Additionally, FACS will be administered and used to assess the development on core skills within the context of the Dance program.

 

Results

Dance students core skills were assessed using the required course rubric, and the results indicated generally a steady progression in the development of core skills within the context of the discipline, as was our goal.  In 2005-06, all faculty evaluated each students' presentations in DNC 480 (the capstone course) using applicable rubrics [2961].  Ratings were considered in judging each student's final core skills rating.  Faculty determined that Dance majors demonstrated capability in analytical and creative thinking.  Three out of four graduating dance majors demonstrated a high level of competency in dance technique, composition, analysis and oral and written communication about the creative process and technical needs. 

 

Results from Coker College’s FACS assessment system for 2005-06 were analyzed for Dance students, as well as for all Coker College students.  Data are shown below.

 

Department

MAJ

Class

N

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

Performance

DNC

FR

12

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.6

Performance

DNC

SO

54

0.9

0.9

1.0

0.9

Performance

DNC

JR

73

1.3

1.4

1.0

1.5

Performance

DNC

SR

72

1.6

1.6

1.3

1.6

 

A comparison of data from FACS  [2925] indicated that Dance students were performing at, below, or slightly higher than their class levels, relative to college averages, except for the freshmen class.  The sample size of that group is too small to make any firm conclusions, however.

 

Actions and Improvements

 

As a result of students' presentations in the capstone course, the faculty have re-evaluated the curriculum and have determined that we will provide specific feedback to the students about their overall performance in the core skills areas.  We also asked students to complete and submit an annual self-evaluation, detailing their personal goals and objectives, describing their strengths and weaknesses and discussing both what they can do to maximize progress and what they feel the Dance Program can do to maximize their progress in the core skills areas.   The evaluation included questions and solicited comments from students about effective speaking and writing and analytical thinking skills.  We will propose that faculty who teach DNC480 incorporate additional guidelines for the timely written and oral communication of thesis concepts and technical and financial needs.  Further, Dance Program faculty will adopt a more rigorous assessment instrument for assessing students’ ability to develop problem-solving, critical thinking, analytical, synthesis, and decision- making skills.   DNC 451 and DNC480 are the courses in which the assessment instruments will be most appropriate.

Program: Dance

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program. Students will demonstrate proficiency in word processing, in the use of the internet, in the use of appropriate software, and in other areas as deemed appropriate for competency in the Dance Program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results, as measured by course assignments and a technology rubric, will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of internet, and use of applicable software) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.  Also, technology assignments/requirements listed in course syllabi will be used to assess technology literacy.

 

The Dance Program faculty will adapt a rubric to be used to assess each Dance major’s [2960] technology skills.

 

Majors will be required to write all papers using a word processing program.  Students will be required to submit papers to {iceBox}.  Also, they will be required to submit papers electronically to Dance Program faculty.  Production meetings, involving technology, will be scheduled on a weekly basis to prepare students for thesis performances by requiring them to address program technology issues with technical staff. Two technical components of productions to be checked will be theater lighting and sound, as students will be required to assist with both lighting and sound design for their productions.

 

Results

Course instructors found that the technology requirement listed in each course syllabus was successfully achieved.

 

Results of the use of the Dance Program assessment rubric designed to check each student’s proficiency in technology indicated students had acquired the required proficiencies.

Specifically, all students in the capstone course (DNC 480) created and submitted an acceptable proposal and an electronic thesis journal in which they detailed the entire dance production process, from concept to final curtain.  (To decide on each student's final grade, the Dance Program Coordinator, who served as course instructor and advisor for the thesis students, compared the ratings from the rubrics, evaluated the written papers (proposal and thesis journal), and discussed the level of difficulty of each project with faculty members of the Department of Dance, Music and Theater.)  Two students passed the course with ratings of "4" or were assessed at the senior level.  One student was rated at 5.  One student received the lowest passing grade possible to complete the degree requirements.  Because of the importance of the technical theatrical aspects of production, the rubric will be amended to include assessment of the student’s level of mastery of lighting and sound design.

 

Actions and Improvements

As noted above, the rubric will be amended to include an assessment of the student’s level of mastery of lighting and sound design, important technology requirements in the Dance Program.  Additionally, the faculty will continue to check technology assignments listed in each course syllabus, and such assignments will be modified as needed based on departmental discussions of students’ proficiencies in technology. We will continue to focus attention on the use of the internet for research, the use of {iceBox}, the use of new and appropriate software for dance productions,  and the electronic submission of papers.

Program: Dance

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will demonstrate proficiency in dance history, performance, choreography, production, and movement and will be able to complete a senior seminar.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that in their senior year, students will perform stylistic versatility, demonstrate a high level of technical achievement, create and produce substantive choreographic work and direct students in the performance of that work, and possess above average communication, technological and collaborative skills.  Evidence will consist of successful completion of DNC 480 (Senior Thesis) which is the capstone experience.

 

Assessment

The assessment for DNC480 will consist of an initial written and oral proposal, a demonstration of skills during pre-production (through two showings), and a formal exhibition of the student's knowledge and mastery of technique and requisite performance skills during the spring senior thesis production.  Students will complete the capstone experience in choreography and/or research by means of a thesis dance performance or thesis oral presentation, accompanied by a thesis journal.  Each component will include a formal presentation in front of a faculty panel.  The panel will rate students' abilities in the general areas.  Program faculty will assess the student's abilities in both the general Dance areas and the core curriculum.  The results will be compared and discussed by Program faculty to reach a consensus of the core curriculum ratings (remedial, freshman, sophomore, junior, senior, graduate).

 

Assessment tools to measure mastery of excellence in dance include the following:

  1. Carefully and specifically designed course evaluation rubrics [2951, 2952].  These have been developed by the faculty for comprehensive assessment and have been successfully.
  2. Immediate verbal and written faculty assessment of in-class performances:  During each of the two showings, evaluators filled out adjudication sheets [2949], providing direct feedback to students regarding their choreographic work.  Students are told about strengths and weaknesses of their work, and are given suggestions regarding what to revisit and revise.
  3. Student assessment of in-class performances:  Students in composition classes perform regularly for their peers, who give oral and written feedback regarding their compositional studies.
  4. On-campus public performances with feedback from faculty, students and invited adjudicators:  When students perform in dance concerts on campus, they are evaluated by other dance students in formal critiques, by faculty, and by invited adjudicators, who provide both oral and written feedback. [2950], [2955]
  5. Faculty assessment of off-campus performances:  When members of the Coker College Repertory Dance Company perform off-campus, they turn in a self-evaluation essay about the performances, and faculty assess students’ performances.
  6. Faculty adjudicated performance proficiencies at the end of each semester [2955].
  7. Professionally engaged faculty offering a knowledgeable industry perspective to student:    Both full-time dance faculty hold terminal degrees in dance performance and choreography, both hold office in the South Carolina Dance Association, and each one directs her own contemporary dance company.

 

Results

During 2005-06, four students were evaluated for their presentations in DNC 480.  No students elected to write a formal research paper.  In Dance, ??, ??, ??, and ?? completed this capstone course by choreographing a thesis project.  Dance faculty rated students in the capstone course using an applicable rubric [2950] and outside adjudicators gave oral and written feedback [2955].  Students also submitted a thesis journal in which they detailed the entire process, from concept to final curtain.  To decide on each student's final grade, the Dance Program Coordinator, who served as course instructor and advisor for the thesis students, reviewed the comments from the faculty panels, compared the ratings from the rubrics, evaluated the written papers (proposal and thesis journal), and discussed the level of difficulty of each project with faculty members of the Department of Dance, Music and Theater.  Two students passed the course with ratings of "4" or were assessed at the senior level.  One student was rated at 5.  One student received the lowest passing grade possible to complete the degree requirements.

 

Actions and Improvements

Dance Program faculty determined that the syllabus for the course required additional and more specific/detailed learning outcomes and objectives for passing the course.  We agreed that a pre-thesis course should be developed to assist students’ preparation for DNC480.  Production meetings have been scheduled on a weekly basis, to prepare students for thesis performances by requiring them to speak effectively with technical staff. Also because students must successfully complete introductory courses in modern, ballet, production, tap and jazz technique, a general rubric [2957], [2958], [2959] will be used as assessment instruments.  While we provide feedback to the students about their overall performance, we have not shared the core curriculum rating with the students.  We will do so.  We also asked students to complete and submit an annual self-evaluation, detailing their personal goals and objectives, describing their strengths and weaknesses and discussing both what they can do to maximize progress and what they feel the Dance Program can do to maximize their progress. 


Program: Education

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

 

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that teacher candidates increase their core skills in the context of the discipline as measured by their performance in professional and specialization courses.

 

Assessment

Instructors will evaluate core skills each semester by assessing the candidate's performances in terms of oral and written communications and analytical and creative thinking.  Examples include class presentations using technology; in- class writing assignments, and out-of-class papers, unit projects, and reports; and classroom discussions whereby candidates are challenged to demonstrate their skills in analytical and critical thinking.

 

FACS results will also be used to assess candidates’ performance in core skills.

 

Results

Teacher Education Program candidates have demonstrated increased proficiency in core skills as measured by class work in the various courses in the  the program.  Writing samples, papers, unit projects, and both oral and written reports assessed by the professors provide evidence of student improvement in the core skills over the course of the Teacher Education Program.

 

 Coker College FACS results show that teacher candidates tend to perform below the institution's average as freshmen/sophomores. An example as follows:

Analytical: -.14

Creative:   -.06

Writing:     -.15

Speaking:   -.30

 

However, candidates, as members of the Teacher Education Program, perform at or above the institution's average as juniors/seniors:

Analytical:   .06

Creative:    .05

Writing:      .14

Speaking:    .12

 

Candidates, through the Teacher Education Program application process, must demonstrate proficiency in the core skills in order to be admitted to the program and to successfully complete teacher education.

 

Actions and Improvements

Unit faculty have identified the need for improvement in the writing skills of teacher candidates.  Therefore, concerted efforts are being made to increase the number of writing opportunities for candidates and to achieve greater faculty consistency in the assessment of writing.

 

 

Program: Education

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Candidate Proficiencies

Teacher candidates will reflect a thorough understanding of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills as identified on the unit outcomes and performance expectations [2741], and satisfy all NCATE requirements.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will indicate that teacher candidates are proficient in content and pedagogical knowledge and skills related to institutional, state, and national standards as measured by the ETS Praxis II examination and the South Carolina teacher evaluation for student teachers/interns.

 

Assessment

Program completers will demonstrate content and pedagogical knowledge by passing the Praxis II content area exam, administered by Educational Testing Service, in each of their respective areas and by successfully meeting standards in the South Carolina teacher evaluation instrument Assisting, Developing, and Evaluating Professional Teaching (ADEPT) which is used for the assessment of teaching effectiveness.  The use of ADEPT is mandated by the SC Department of Education.

 

Results

Program completers demonstrate their content and pedagogical skills through the successful evaluation of their student teaching using the Assisting, Developing, and Evaluating ProfessionalTeaching (ADEPT) instrument.  100 % of candidates have been successful as a result of this assessment [2739], 2005-2006 Assessment and Diversity Report.  Evidence of the success of candidates on Praxis II is also found in [2739], Annual Assessment and Diversity Report submitted to the SC Department of Education.

 

Actions and Improvements

Unit faculty, during Unit Assessment Reiviews, have been concerned about candidates' performance on Praxis II tests.  Therefore, concerted efforts are being made to collect from candidates an item analysis sheet (provided by Eductional Testing Services).  Faulty will collect and examine these data to determine areas for individual course and program improvement. 

 

Notation:  Unit Assessment Reviews are conducted once each semester in order for faculty to review candidates' performance and to make subsequent program adjustments and improvements.  Reference is made to [2824] which documents the first UAR meeting held by the Deparment of Education faculty on 1-13-06.   Subsequent UAR sessions are held at the beginning of each semester.

Program: Education

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that teacher candidates have access to and are proficient in the types of technology  identified by the program faculty.  Examples include proficiency in word processing, e-mail with attachments, downloading files. Internet research, and media presentations.

 

Assessment

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of Internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty. These assessments are sequential as candidates progress through the program.  A culminating experience takes place with seniors in EDU 415 (Senior Seminar).

 

Candidates are assessed in EDU 415 (Senior Seminar).  Each candidate submits a technology skills checklist which is verified by individual professors.  Consequently, all program completers provide unit faculty with evidence of their proficiencies in technology. cf. Computer Technology Checklist [2743].

 

Results

In EDU 415 (Senior Seminar), all candidates completed the skills identified in the Education Program technology skills checklist with a 100 percent success rate, based on the schedule on the checklist.  The assessment program for technology skills/proficiencies for Teacher Education Program students seems to work as desired.

 

Actions and Improvements

 

Presently, a paper file for the technology skills checklist is maintained which documents the candidates’ proficiencies.  Ideally, improvements can be made in this area through the use of a data base system whereby the technology skills of candidates can be confirmed and maintained.  This is an area for future development and improvement, to reduce the amount of bookkeeping involved, and make it easier to analyze the assessment results.

Program: English

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of Internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.  Successful completion of the capstone experience will depend on use of such skills.  In addition, exit interviews will allow students to assess themselves.

 

Results

David McCracken, who taught English 400: Senior Seminar during the fall of 2005, observed that all students provided source material gained from the library databases to support their points in their major projects.  Besides accessing the Literature Resource Center and the Modern Language Association International Bibliography online, English 400 students also used a variety of other Coker College Library databases.  These students also used online sources to locate titles of primary and secondary texts, which they then acquired through interlibrary loan.  In exit interviews, students said that they had appropriate access to technology. 

 

Faculty members have confirmed student technology profiencies through courses they teach.

 

Actions and Improvements

English faculty agree that a more effective assessment method is needed to track the progress of English majors' use of technology.  A check sheet to track this progress is necessary in upper-level English classes besides English 400.  A proposed version of this check sheet is [2865].

Program: English

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

English majors will demonstrate knowledge of selected authors, works, genres, and themes important to British, American, and world literature, including literary criticism and research.  Proficiency in conducting research, analyzing and synthesizing material from a variety of sources, and writing and speaking appropriately for an academic audience will be demonstrated.

 

Outcomes

Assessment will show that students have the following abilities:  application of critical/scholarly approaches to literature, analysis and synthesis of material from a variety of sources, command of written and spoken Standard Written English, presentation of creative ideas, demonstration of critical thinking, and application of research and documentation strategies.  In addition, assessment results will show that students demonstrate knowledge of British, American, and world literature. 

 

Assessment

English faculty will use the following strategies to assess students' abilities:  evaluation through the English Course Knowledge Assessment Survey, performance in English 400: Senior Seminar, quality of the English 400 seminar paper, and responses to the English Exit Interview Survey.  After each class in the major is completed, faculty will complete the English Course Knowledge Assessment Survey to evaluate each student's particular and general knowledge concerning the authors, works, genres, and themes presented in the course.  Students in English 400, the English capstone class, must pass the course with a C or higher to graduate with an English degree.  Each faculty member in the English program assesses English 400 seminar essays by using the Senior Seminar Essay Check Sheet [2509].  After graduation, each English major graduate meets with his or her advisor and completes the English Exit Interview Survey [2508].

 

Results

A summary of the English Course Knowledge Assessment Survey results is available in [2861].  Out of twenty-two, almost half of the English majors demonstrated knowledge of particular and general course content beyond their academic classifications.  They also demonstrated that they could express this knowledge effectively in writing and speaking.  Almost half of the English majors performed at a level consistent with their classification, and only two performed at a level just below their classification.  A summary of the English majors' performances in English 400 is found in [2530].  The students in that course performed at an exemplary level.  In particular, their capstone papers were excellent.  Out  of seven students, two received High Pass, four received Pass, and two received Low Pass.  Two of the Pass papers were borderline High Pass.  A summary of the exit interview responses is found in [2832].  In exit interviews, several of the English major seniors praised the diversity of classes offered in the major, and they commended the faculty.  Of the six respondents, three recommended that English 400: Senior Seminar be split into two separate classes, and although they said English program classes were diverse, they requested more diversity.  Concerning author identifications, respondents could not identify writers that were not addressed in the classes they completed.  This was particularly the case for students who only completed one upper-level American literature course.  

 

Actions and Improvements

English faculty will make four major actions to improve the quality of the program.  First, English faculty plan to improve the English Course Knowledge Assessment survey to more effectively reflect the English majors' knowledge of British, American, and world literature, as well as content offered in upper-level writing classes.  The survey might be revised to numerically as well as holistically assess student performance.  Second, English faculty plan to improve English 400.  English faculty plan to revise the Senior Seminar Essay Check Sheet so that it includes numerical as well as holistic assessment results.  This proposed revision is in [2833].  English faculty also plan to offer a one or two-hour course devoted to critical theory in the revised English curriculum.  This class will essentially make English 400 a course devoted exclusively to the capstone project.  Because English 400 is the primary strategy to assess English majors, English faculty plan to include the study of world literature in addition to American and British literature in the English 400 course description.  Because effective speaking is assessed in the English 400, English faculty plan to include a course presentation in the class.  A proposed rubric to evaluate these presentations is in  [2510].  Third, English faculty plan to improve the English Exit Interview Survey.  In particular, the list of authors in the identification will be revised to reflect texts studied in English program courses.  English faculty agree that another level of assessment might be needed after the English Exit Interview Survey to verify the self-reporting inherent in the process.  English faculty propose another layer of assessment that would complement student self-reporting.  Fourth, English faculty plan to improve the English program curriculum.  In response to comments gathered from the English Exit Interview Survey, English faculty plan to improve the depth and breadth of the English major.  Specific descriptions of courses proposed to be added are in [2860].  These changes (especially requiring survey classes) will improve students' knowledge of British, American, and world literature as well as provide needed diversity to the English curriculum.  English faculty also plan to discuss a "Recommended Reading" list including texts currently taught in English courses in addition to texts English majors should read on their own.   


Program: English

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline.

 

Assessment

Faculty will assess exams, papers, and presentations based upon a rubric that lists specific learning goals.  Faculty may individualize rubrics for particular classes, but these will be variations of the departmental rubric.  An example of an instructor's research assignment is in [2511], and an example of an instructor's sample evaluation rubric is in [2510].  At the end of each semester, faculty will complete the FACS assessment for students in their courses.  Additionally, submissions to the Write On! Contest will be used as evidence of achievement.

 

 

Results

English majors' FACS scores were higher than the Coker College averages in every class category.  This information is illustrated in [2862].  In the Dean's Write On! Award essay competitions for 2005-2006, three of the six winners were either English majors or minors, and seven of the winning papers were composed in English courses.  ??, ??, and ?? won in their class categories.  The Dean's Write On! Award contest results demonstrate that several of the English majors have superior writing abilites. 

 

Summaries of results by student is found in [2514].

 

Actions and Improvements

Faculty will continue to compare English major FACS scores to the Coker College average to determine how proficient English majors are in the core skills.  Moreover, faculty plan to construct more detailed rubrics to determine representative exams, papers, and presentations for the English program.  This additional information will provide significant numerical data to assess how proficient English majors are in the core skills.

Program: French

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

 

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors demonstrate proficiency in writing, speaking, and analytical thinking in the context of the French language.  Creative thinking is not currently one of the learning objectives.

 

Assessment

The senior seminar requires both written and oral presentations.  The presentations and their content are judged subjectively for their merit in writing and speaking skills.  The final written paper is used as evidence of analytical thinking skills.

 

Results

During the senior seminar, the sole student demonstrated graduate-level skills in effectively speaking French with near-native fluency.  Her final paper demonstrated graduate-level skills in effective writing. 

 

Based on the student's interpretive work of many texts, and her discussions and completed assignments, she demonstrated graduate-level skill in analytical thinking.

 

Actions and Improvements

Better documentation of the objectives is needed for assessing the core skills.  Next time the seminar is taught, a rubric with specific criteria for achievement will serve as a template for assessment.

Program: French

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology  identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.

 

Results

The student demonstrated proficiency in basic information literacy by routinely using email to send assignments as file attachments (of word-processed documents).  She also relied on Internet resources for gathering research material.

 

Actions and Improvements

We will develop a rubric for technology skills to better track progress in these.

Program: French

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the French language and knowledge of French and Francophone culture.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students are fluent in written and spoken French, and have an understanding of diverse Franophone cultures.

 

Assessment

Students will write papers to demonstrate knowledge of culture.  They will demonstrate proficiency in speaking and listening comprehension through conversation.  Students will demonstrate proficiency in reading comprehension by completing assignments related to written French.

 

Results

The senior seminar capstone experience showed that the student graduating could carry on conversations in French and understand texts taken from French literature.  She wrote a seminar paper that was judged very good by the course instructor.  The paper compared Shakespeare's Tempest to Cesaire's version of the play, demonstrating a significant grasp of Franophone culture.

 

Actions and Improvements

The seminar class was customized to the student's interest.  This approach worked very well, and will be used when possible.

Program: History

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline.

 

Assessment

All of the college's required core skills--analytical thinking, creative thinking, effective speaking, and effective writing--will be stressed and assessed in History courses, especially the two-tier (HIS 391 and HIS 491) capstone experience.  All the key aspects of developing the senior thesis will be stressed and evaluated, including proposing a project, amassing and evaluating evidence, composing the thesis and then defending it orally.  All of these activities inherently require proficiency in core skills, the attainment of which are a required element of passing the capstone classes.

 

FACS results for history majors will be used to assess the development of the required core skills.   Results for history majors will be compared with the results for all Coker College students.

Results

The goals of the History program remain congruent with the college's overall mission of promoting improved analytical and creative thinking and more effective speaking and writing.  The assessment of class assignments and other course work in the two-tier capstone experience referenced above indicate that history students are making progress in the development of core skills. The History faculty remain confident that our majors greatly improve these core skills as they progress through the program, as is indicated by the steady improvement in the quality of senior theses. The addition of a new required course, HIS 391, The Historian's Craft, will hopefully advance crtical-thinking and writing skills even further.

 

FACS results for history majors follow and are compared with the FACS results of all Coker College students by class identification:  freshmen, sophomores, juniors, seniors.

Department

MAJ

Class

N

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

History

HI

SO

26

1.5

1.4

1.4

1.3

History

HI

JR

82

1.7

1.5

1.6

1.7

History

HI

SR

166

1.7

1.4

1.6

1.6

 

 Of these, Analytical thinking and effective writing are the most important for the major program.  Seniors show healthy gains in both of these, but there is room for improvement.

 

Actions and Improvements

The History department needs to continue to stress the importance of core skills in History offerings, offer more writing assignments in particular, and ensure that core skills have been acquired by graduating majors. This will be best accomplished by careful examination of the senior theses and a consistent compliation and review of the results History Capstone Course Evaluation Form.

Program: History

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology  identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

In all History courses students will be required to use word-processing, the internet, e-mail, and the library's electronic resources.  The use of these will be particularly extensive in the capstone course HIS 491, in which the student will compose a lengthy senior thesis based on work with primary sources. The capstone course will be the “gate-keeper” for using and assessing technology skillls.  During this course the thesis advisor will  provide guidance in regard to word-processing and conducting research in electronic databases.  Student performance will be tracked by advisors, and successful course completion will require demonstration of these technology skills.

 

Results

Student performance in the capstone course, HIS 491, indicates that students are proficient in word-processing and e-mail and in the utilization of electronic databases. History majors are generally proficient in terms of essential technological skills as noted in the History Capstone Evaluation Form that is competed for each senior.

 

Actions and Improvements

We will continue to look for ways to improve student technology skills.

Program: History

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will demonstrate proficiency in basic historical literacy, will write and speak well, will be aware of basic historiographical trends and developments, and can do research in the field.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that by their senior year students will be historically literate,  will be able to express themselves well in writing and orally, will be acquainted with historical research methods, and will be prepared to work independently on a senior thesis research project that employs primary sources.  Evidence of this will be provided by the student's performance in the two-tier--HIS 391 and HIS 491--capstone experience as noted in the written History Capstone Course Evaluation Form.

 

Assessment

The History capstone experience will culminate in a senior thesis that will require the student to demonstrate historical literacy, historiographical awareness, effective communication skills, and the ability to conduct research.  The thesis will be composed in close association with a History faculty member who will assess the student's abilities on a History Capstone Course Evaluation Form [2814].  The thesis advisor's evaluation will then be shared with other faculty members in the department.

 

Results

Each student in the program who took HIS 391 and HIS 491 (the two-course capstone sequence) over the last academic year was assessed using the History Capstone Course Evaluation Form [2815]. It is the consensus of the History faculty that our majors, judged by this procedure, have improved somewhat in terms of their writing, oral expression, critical thinking, and general historical research skills since the implementation of the HIS 391 requirement.

 

Actions and Improvements

Continue to carefully monitor the impact of HIS 391 on our majors' critical thinking and writing skills using the History Capstone Evaluation Form [2814]. The department also intends to devise an objective exam in European and United States history that will be given to all incoming majors and graduating majors to better gague changes in students' historical literacy.

 

Program: Mathematics

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline.

 

Assessment

Each course syllabus in mathematics will include a rubric for core skills in context of that course.  Each faculty will evaluate each student at the end of the course using the rubric which has four categories:  remedial, freshmen-sophomore, junior-senior, and graduate. 

 

All faculty will evaluate each student's presentation in the capstone course (MAT/CS 498) using a rubric [2515].  Results will be reviewed and discussed and at the end of the semester and a consensus will be reached by the faculty for the student's final core skill rating.

 

FACS results will be used also to assess the development of core skills in mathematics.

 

Results

The Provost requires that every course syllabus include a rubric for core skills in context of that course and every syllabus must be turned into his office at the beginning of each semester.  In addition, syllabi in mathematics are posted in web folders of faculty.  The Program Coordinator verified that each mathematics course syllabus for fall 2006 included a rubric for core skills.

 

 Current averages for FACS scores for mathematics are shown below.

Department

MAJ

Class

N

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

Science

MA

SO

12

1.2

1.1

1.1

1.1

Science

MA

JR

39

1.2

1.2

1.0

1.2

Science

MA

SR

93

1.3

1.3

1.5

1.4

 

 

 

 

 

 

Data from FACS shows that senior mathematics majors receive higher ratings than sophomore majors in the core skills areas.  The largest increase in ratings are found in the effective writing and speaking skills.  This can be attributed to the writing and speaking requirements of the three semesters of the capstone course majors take in the junior and senior years.  The FACS scores also validated the program faculty's assessment of majors.  Students who consistently receive excellent grades in their majors courses are rated highest in the core skills areas by all faculty.  The seniors have the best ratings overall, but the scores for thinking skills are disappointing, since this is the primary focus of the math curriculum. Upon further investigation, however, it is clear that a minority of the students are scoring low, bringing down the average.  Further provisions for the development of thinking skills through the math curriculum are necessary and will be addressed by the faculty.

 

In 05-06, all faculty evaluated each student's presentations in the capstone course (MAT/CS 498) using a rubric [2515].  The ratings were considered in judging each student's final core skill rating.  The evaluations are kept in the office of the Program Coordinator.  Presentation skills were observed to have some obvious deficiencies.  

Actions and Improvements

 

As a result of students' presentations in the capstone course, faculty concluded that students are improving their presentation skills as well as their writing skills.  Last year students were provided a writing guide for their final seminar paper.  This resulted in much improved papers with a more formal format.  To further improve presentation skills, we elected to change to a more appropriate classroom and to start video taping the presentations, so that students can evaluate their own work.

 

We continue to try to guide students who are taking their final capstone course into research projects that require a high level of content knowledge and more independent and creative work, which should improve thinking skills.  We are in the process of revising the grading rubric for the seminar to emphasize these.  We have also proposed changes to the curriculum that would require better passing grades in the lower classes, to encourage weak students to either work harder or find another major.

Program: Mathematics

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.

 

Assessment

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy:

 

  • Presentation software—each student makes multiple presentations using PowerPoint or similar technology

 

  • word processing – students must submit a typeset paper using proper mathematical notation

 

  • use of internet for basic research and for using the e-portfolio system

 

  • and use of the operating system for saving and retrieving files.

 

In addition, use of special software may be required, depending on the seminar topic.  Assessment is done subjectively by faculty and recorded on a rubric.  Succssful completion of the seminar class depends heavily on demonstration of these skills.

 

Results

All mathematics majors are required to take Computer Science 110.  In this course, students become computer literate and learn to write programs using the C++ programming language.  All students achieved mastery in the required skills.

 

Students in the capstone course (MAT/CS 498) are required to write a final paper using a scientific word processor and to submit the paper electronically.  Students in the course are rated on their use of technology for their presentations.  All students successfully completed the capstone course and demonstrated proficiency in using a scientific word processor, in submitting their papers electronically, and in using the required technology to present their research papers.

 

Syllabi from several majors-level courses indicate that the computer-algebra system MAPLE is used.   Students demonstrated proficiency in the use of MAPLE in those classes, for example, by taking an exam in the computer lab using the software.

 

Actions and Improvements

Faculty  need to encourage students who use transparencies and the overhead projector to explore other means of technology for presentation.

 

We are considering making TeX or Maple required.  The student editions of these are not expensive, and some textbooks incorporate exercises from Maple.Faculty need training in the use of MAPLE software in the 300-400 level mathematics courses.  We will explore available resources such as conferences and workshops.

 

Program: Mathematics

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core curriculum

Students will demonstrate proficiency in differential and integral calculus, probability and statistics, and linear algebra, and be able to complete a research seminar.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that in their senior year, students can confidently solve fundamental problems in these areas, and that they can work independently on mathematics problems.  Evidence will consist of a rating of jr/sr or graduate for each student, completing the curriculum and successful completion of the capstone sequence.

 

Assessment

Faculty will meet to review as a group course syllabi, exams, and results.  This ensures that the courses align with course objectives and that the courses do not omit key material. 

 

Part of the capstone course will consist of an oral and written exam that tests students in differential and integral calculus, probability and statistics, and linear algebra.  This will be followed by an interview with the faculty to discuss strengths and weaknesses.  Each faculty member will rate students' abilities in the core curriculum areas, and a student's advisor will rate his/her ability to work independently on the research assignment (see rubric [2515]).  These results are compared and discussed by faculty to reach consensus ratings of remedial, fresh/soph, jr/sr, or graduate level.

 

Results

The written exam requirement in the capstone course has been eliminated.  This was a result from the 04-05 assessment.  During the 05-06 year, each faculty member rated students in the seminar capstone course using a rubric [2515].  In addition, students completed papers on their research projects.  To decide on each student's final grade, faculty who served as advisors for seminar students met, compared ratings from the rubrics, evaluated the written paper, discussed students' attendance, and level of difficulty of the project.  The rating showed increases in all skill levels longitudinally (each student participates for three semesters).  Some papers were not written in the prescribed format.

 

Actions and Improvements

Faculty agreed that the rubrics were cumbersome and tedious to complete for each student during each seminar meeting.  We agreed to develop an more user-friendly evaluation instrument to be used at midterm and at the end of the semester for fall 2006.  We intend to meet with students individually to give them oral feedback on their progress at midterm and to meet with them again at the end of the semester after their final paper has been turned in.  We also decided to require a first draft of the papers at midterm, so we have time to suggest improvements before the final draft is due.

Program: Medical Technology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

 

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that program majors increase their core skills in the context of the discipline.

 

Assessment

Biology faculty will evaluate the core skills of students enrolled in the biology core courses taken by medical technology majors in the Spring semester (BIO 111, 112, 211). Using a rubric of achievement for each of the core skills in the context of biology, the biology faculty will determine if majors achieve an appropriate level in each of the core skills at the end of the first and second year of the biology core curriculum.

 

Results

No majors were enrolled in the medical technology program over the assessment interval.

 

Actions and Improvements

 

The assessment program will be implemented as planned if new majors enroll.

 

 

 

Program: Medical Technology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Technology literacy 

[SACS 3.4.14] The program's use of technology enhances student learning, is appropriate for meeting the objectives of the program, and ensures that students have access to and training in technology appropriate to the program.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have access to and are proficient in the types of technology  identified by the program faculty.

 

Assessment

As part of the capstone experience, faculty advisors will evaluate their students' abilities in basic technology literacy (word processing, use of internet, and use of the operating system) as well as other skills deemed necessary by the faculty.

 

Results

No majors were enrolled in the medical technology program during this assessment period.

 

Actions and Improvements

The assessment program will implemented as planned if new majors enroll.

 

Program: Medical Technology

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes. ________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

Students will demonstrate a broad background in biology and a specific knowledge base required for a career in medical technology and successful post-baccalarureate employment in the field.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that students have 1) mastered the fundamental concepts in each of the major areas of biological knowledge; i.e., in molecular, subcellular, cellular, organismal, and population biology, and 2) the fundamental concepts in each of the major areas of medical technology training. Assessment results will also show that graduates of the program are capable of employment in the medical technology field.

 

Assessment

 

The following assessment methods will be used to judge student performance:

1. A written entrance/exit exam will be administered to students in their first semester and in their last semester at Coker College (prior to entering their cliinical training at McLeod Regional Medical Center).  The exam, developed by the current biology faculty, will consist of two sections: Section I tests student proficiency in molecular, subcellular, and cellular biology, and Section II tests student proficiency in organismal and population biology.         

 

2. Systematic records of student scores on the national medical technology board exam will be kept.

 

3. Systematic records on the job placements of graduates will be kept.  Surveys of alumni to determine their perceptions of their  preparation to enter a career in medical technology will be administered.  Systematic records of information voluntarily provided by employers concerning the preparation of graduates will be maintained.

 

Results

Although there have been no students enrolled in the medical technology over the assessment interval, the McLeod medical technology program has had over the last five years a 100% rate of their graduates passing the national board exam on the first attempt and a 100% rate of graduates employed in the field [1794].

 

Actions and Improvements

The assessment program will implemented as planned if new majors enroll.

 

Program: Music

 

Goal 3. Student Learning Outcomes

The program establishes and evaluates learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________

 

Objective Core Skills  

Students will demonstrate proficiency in the core skills: analytical and creative thinking, and effective speaking and writing, in the context of the discipline.

 

Outcomes

Assessment results will show that all Music majors who successfully complete the Program possess the ability to think creatively, to analyze and interpret problems and concepts in pedagogy, to conduct research and to perform, and to express complex ideas clearly, coherently and logically both verbally and in writing.  Assessment results also show that program completers meet the passing standard for the Senior Recital (the Music Program Capstone Project), which also addresses core skills development.

 

Assessment

The Music Program faculty will measure student learning outcomes as listed below.

1.  Course curriculum rubrics [1963, 2802] will be used for each course offered in the Music curriculum and will be used to guide faculty in judging a student’s skills in creative and analytical thinking and his/her ability to present a response to literature and history materials in both oral and written forms.  This assessment tool will be used in each Music course and results will be reported in the Program’s FACS report [2801] and in each student’s progress file.  The results will be compared to the college-wide FACS scores.

 

2.  A faculty check sheet [2782] and student check sheet [2780] will be used to guide the faculty in assessing each student’s ability to successfully complete the Music Program’s core skills and the college-wide core skills.  These tools will serve as Music Program content competency evaluations and will be developed to guide the faculty in evaluating the knowledge gained over the course of the semester and the major in the following areas:  historical awareness, oral presentation skills, writing skills, critical/analytical thinking, problem-solving skills, creative thinking and independent thinking.  The assessment will be conducted during the Sophomore Review, reviews of ensemble performances, and the Senior recital.  A summary of the results for all graduating seniors will be completed.

 

3.  The faculty will employ best practices to research appropriate assessment instruments for evaluating the core skills.  The information obtained will be evaluated at the end of each academic year, and suggestions will be forwarded to the Department Chair.

 

 

Results

1.  Course curriculum rubrics [2802] were developed for each course offered in the Music curriculum.  Rubrics (addenda to course syllabi) were distributed to each student at the beginning of each course and are posted in each faculty member’s web folder.   At the end of each semester faculty were asked to evaluate students on the general college-wide core skills (analytical and creative thinking; effective writing and speaking), and the results are posted in the FACS report [2801].  Fourteen music majors were assessed during 2005-06.  The results of the assessment follow.

 

 

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

College Freshmen

0.87

0.88

0.82

0.92

Music Program

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

 

 

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

College Sophomores

1.21

1.17

1.13

1.23

Music Program

1.1

1.1

0.8

0.8

 

 

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

College Juniors

1.3

1.27

1.23

1.36

Music Program

1.5

1.4

1.5

1.3

 

 

Analytical

Creative

Writing

Speaking

College Seniors

1.47

1.51

1.43

1.57

Music Program

1.2

1.3

1.2

1.2

 

 

*           Analytical Thinking:  12 students scored at or above the target level for analytical thinking.  Two students scored below the target level.  Those two students were freshmen; their skill levels are considered average for first semester college students.