Fall 2016 Report

 

Title:   LS101US –Ways of Knowing

Author of Report:  Teresa Greenwood and Bridget Kevane

Outcome Being Assessed:   Critical Thinking

Semester and Year:   Fall 2016

Course Enrollment:   90

Number of Course Sections:   5

Number of Assignments Assessed:  12

Assessment Team:   Greenwood, Teresa; Townsend-Mehler, John; Waterton, Nigel

 

Method of Selecting Student Work: 

Teresa Greenwood randomly chose 2 numbers, to represent two students oneach section’s alphabeticalclass roster. Instructor sent papers to director by email, leaving the last name and first initial on each student piece, but removing all other identifying student information. 

 

Method of Ensuring Inter-rater Reliability:

The assessment team gathered prior to assessing student work to review sample work and agree upon levels of achievement. Teams then assessed their work individually. At least two assessors evaluated each assignment. Bridget Kevane, Interim Director of Liberal Studies, reviewed the papers along with Greenwood and Townsend-Mehler’s assessment. Nigel Waterton was the second reader of the papers from Townsend-Mehler’s (JTM) classes.

 

Notes about Scoring:

In no case was there more than a category difference in the score of the two assessors and where there was a difference the student was scored in the lower category. So if one assessor scored a student benchmark and the second scored the same student at milestone (2), the student was coded at benchmark. This allows for a more conservative measure of overall student performance.A couple of papers (CP14B and LL14B) are outliers. CP14B represents an alternative assignment given to the student (reflect on your favorite quotation from one of the course texts). LL14B was submitted by the instructor because the student whose name had been randomly selected withdrew from the course. Students in LS 101 are doing well and 75% of papers met at least the criteria for “Milestone.”

 

Assessments:

CP6AJT: 3, 2,2,2,3 TG: 3,2,2,2,2 Final: 3,2,2,2,2 Overall: 2

CP14AJT: 3,2,2,1,2 TG: 3,2,2,1,2 Final: 3,2,2,1,2 Overall: 2

CP6BJT: 2,2,2,3,2 TG: 3,2,2,2,2 Final: 3,2,2,2,2 Overall: 2

CP14BJT: 0,0,0,1,0 TG: 0,0,0,1,0 Final: 0,0,0,1,0 Overall: 0

JTM14BNW: 4,4,4,3,3 TG: 3,4,4,3,3  Final: 3,4,4,3,3 Overall: 3

JTM6ANW: 3,4,4,3,3 TG: 4,4,4,4,4  Final: 3,4,4,3,3 Overall: 3

JTM14ANW: 2,2,2,2,2 TG: 2,3,2,2,2 Final: 2,2,2,2,2 Overall: 2

JTM6BNW: 4,3,4,4,4 TG: 4,4,4,4,4  Final: 4,3,4,4,4 Overall: 4

LL6AJT: 1,1,1,1,1 TG: 1,1,1,1,1 Final: 1,1,1,1,1  Overall: 1

LL14AJT: 1,1,1,1,1 TG: 1,1,1,1,1 Final: 1,1,1,1,1  Overall: 1

LL6BJT: 1,1,1,1,1 TG: 1,1,1,1,1 Final: 1,1,1,1,1  Overall: 1

LL14BJT: 3,3,3,3,3 TG: 3,3,3,3,3 Final: 3,3,3,3,3 Overall: 3

[Outlier –Instructor selected paper because the student whose paper was randomly selected withdrew from the class.

Results:

Criteria

Capstone

4

Milestone

Benchmark

1

3 2
Explanation of Issues 8% 50% 8% 25%
Evidence 33% 17% 33% 25%
Influence of context and assumptions 25% 8% 33% 25%
Studen's position 25% 25% 25% 25%
Implications & Consequences 8% 25% 33% 25%
Overall 8% 25% 33% 25%

 

Recommendations for LS101: All of the “Benchmark” papers are from courses taught by one instructor whose final assignment is a reflection essay rather than a paper that calls for the student to state a thesis and develop an argument. Bridget Kevane, Tami Eitle (former Director of Liberal Studies) and the future director (Summer 2017) will discuss the direction the course should take in the future and whether a common syllabus or common final assignment is warranted.

Spring 2017 Report

 

Course Title:   LS401–Senior Project

Author of Report:   Bridget Kevane and Teresa Greenwood

Outcome Being Assessed:   Undergraduate Research

Semester and Year:   Spring 2017

Course Enrollment:   17

Number of Course Sections:   2

Number of Assignments Assessed:   10

 

Assessment Team:  

Kevane, Bridget; Greenwood, Teresa; Jennifer Storment (third reader)

 

Method of Selecting Student Work:  

Teresa Greenwood randomly chose 10 numbers, to represent five students on each section’s alphabeticalclass roster. Instructors sent papers to Ms. Greenwood by email after removing all identifying student information.

 

Method of Ensuring Inter-rater Reliability:

Student work was sent to Professor Kevane who, along with Ms. Greenwood, assessed the students’ work individually. At least two assessors evaluated each assignment. Jennifer Storment was available to read papers that required a third reader.  Notes about Scoring:  In no case was there more than a category difference in the score of the two assessors and where there was a difference the student was scored in the lower category. So if one assessor scored a student Good (3)and the second scored the same student at Acceptable(2), the student was coded at Acceptable. This allows for a more conservative measure of overall student performance.  Students in LS 401 are doing well and 100% of papers met at least the criteria for “Acceptable” while 30% met the criteria for “Good” to “Exemplary”.

 

Assessments (Rubric attached):

Paper #

One   TG: 4,4, 3, 3, 4///BK:4,4,4,4,4///Result:4,4, 3,3, 4–Good/Exemplary

Two   TG: 2,2,3,3,2/// BK:2,2,3,3,1///Result:2,2,3,3,1-Acceptable

Three   TG: 2,2,3,3,2/// BK:2,2,3,3,1///Result:2,2,3,3,1-Acceptable

Four   TG: 3,2, 3, 3, 2/// BK:3,3,2,3,2//Result:3,2, 2, 3, 2–Acceptable/Good

Five   TG: 3, 2, 3, 2, 2/// BK:4,3,3,3,2//Result:3, 2, 3, 2, 2–Acceptable/Good

Six   TG: 4, 3, 4, 4, 3/// BK:3,3,4,4,3//Result:3,3,4,4,3–Good/Exemplary

Seven   TG: 4, 4, 3, 4, 4/// BK:4,4,4,4,3// Result:4,4,3,4,3–Good/Exemplary

Eight   TG: 3, 2, 2, 3, 2/// BK:4,2,3,4,2//Result:3, 2, 2, 3, 2-Acceptable

Nine   TG: 3, 3, 3, 3, 3/// BK:3,2,3,3,2// Result:3,2,3,3,2–Good

Ten   TG: 3, 3, 3, ,4, 4/// BK:3,3,3,4,3// Result:3,3,3,4,3-Good

 

Criteria Exemplary Good Acceptable Unacceptable
Well-Defined research question/ purpose 2 6 2 0
Context 2 2 6 0
Use of references 1 7 2 0
Quality of references 3 6 1 0
Consideration of alternative perspectives 1 3 4 2

 

Recommendations for LS 401 and the Liberal Studies Program:

Students who take LS 401 have demonstrated their ability to define a research question and to formulate a clear thesis. The students’use of references is good overall; however, future capstones should devote more time to source selection and evaluation, and instructors should encourage students to use more peer-reviewed materials in their final papers. In addition, instructors should help students move beyond description and reporting to analysis and explication. Focusing on these skills should help more students demonstrate that they have considered alternate perspectives.