2013-2014 Annual Program Assessment Report

2013-2014 Annual Program Assessment Report

Please submit report to your department chair or program coordinator, the Associate Dean of your College and the assessment office by Tuesday, September 30, 2014. You may submit a separate report for each program which conducted assessment activities.

College: HHD

Department: FCS

Program: All five of our FCS Graduate Programs (Apparel Design and Merchandising, Consumer Affairs, Family Studies, Interior Design, and Nutrition and Food Science) were included in the assessment.

Assessment liaison: Angie Giordano

1. Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s). Provide a brief overview of this year’s assessment plan and process.

The focus of our assessment efforts this year were put toward our FCS Graduate Program. The following Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) were developed for the graduate program in Family and Consumer Sciences (FCS) during the 2012-2013 academic year. These SLOs were approved by the FCS Graduate Committee and FCS faculty, as well as the College of HHD Assessment, Accreditation, and Program Review Committee.

In an effort to support the well-being of individuals, families and communities through their professional area of interest in FCS, students will be able to:

1. Apply the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences (AAFCS) Code of Ethics in scholarship as FCS professionals.

2. Demonstrate ongoing synthesis and application of relevant literature, current trends, and emerging issues within their professional area of interest within FCS.

3. Design a research study/creative project investigating topics within their professional area of interest including diverse populations.

4. Apply sound evidence -based practices and applications within their professional area of interest in FCS.

Our FCS graduate students complete six units of required core courses, 24 elective/area-required units in their selected areas (Apparel Design and Merchandising, Consumer Affairs, Family Studies, Interior Design, and Nutrition, Dietetics and Food Science) and a capstone course designated either for a thesis/project or a comprehensive examination. The core requirements for all graduate students in the FCS Graduate Program include two research-related courses: FCS 681, Research Methods and FCS 682, Research Applications. Thus, part of our assessment efforts focused on student work completed in these two core classes.

During the 2012-2013 academic year, student data were collected from two course sections of FCS 681 Research Methods in the Fall semester taught by the same instructor (n=25 students and n=22 students in the two FCS 681 Fall sections) and then two FCS 682 Research Applications course sections in the Spring semester by two separate instructors (n=23 students and n=22 students in the two FCS 682 Spring sections). These data were analyzed this 2013-2014 year and will be presented as they align with our Department SLOs.

In addition, the Graduate Student Exit Survey was developed during the Fall semester of 2013. The initial instrument was drafted by the Department Assessment Coordinator, feedback was elicited from the full faculty, and edits were made that resulted in the final instrument (See Appendix 1). The survey is intending to gather student information pertaining to three foci: (1) students’ classification data, (2) the FCS Graduate Program’s four SLOs, and (3) the College of Health and Human Development (HHD) SLOs that are currently being developed by the HHD College Assessment Committee.

Student classification data were captured in questions asking about students’ major area of study within the Department, undergraduate degree majors, beginning and ending years/semesters in the graduate program, and current plans after graduation. A set of questions were also included to assess students’ evaluation of support levels from the following sources: professors, major advisor, committee members, other students in the program, and family, friends and employers outside of the CSUN community.

Each of the questions on the Graduate Student Exit Survey that pertain to one of the FCS or HHD SLOs is scored on a five-point scale by the students, with 5 reflecting Strongly Agree, 4 reflecting Agree, 3 reflecting Neither Agree nor Disagree, 2 reflecting Disagree, and 1 reflecting Strongly Disagree.

The instrument was developed and implemented this 2013-2014 academic year, at the conclusion of both fall and spring semesters, using the web-based program Survey Monkey. Graduate students enrolled in the FCS 697C class, which is the class students take during their final semester in the program during which they are taking their comprehensive examination, were used to pilot the instrument and assess the ease and efficiency of the data collection process in the Fall of 2013 and in the Spring of 2014. The FCS Graduate Coordinator included a link to the survey in the 697C Moodle class website and sent out several announcements to the students to notify them to complete the exit survey both semesters.

Several questions were included in the exit survey specifically to be aligned with the four FCS Department SLOs and data that was collected in the Fall 2013 and Spring 2014 will be presented (see Appendix 2).

2. Assessment Buy-In. Describe how your chair and faculty were involved in assessment related activities. Did department meetings include discussion of student learning assessment in a manner that included the department faculty as a whole?

Our FCS Department was required to complete the Graduate Program Self Study this academic year, so faculty were aware of this assignment and were willing to help out with responsibilities when asked. In addition, our Department nominates an Assessment Subcommittee at our first faculty meeting in the fall, so this committee assisted when needed.

3. Student Learning Outcome Assessment Project. Answer items a-f for each SLO assessed this year. If you assessed an additional SLO, copy and paste items a-f below, BEFORE you answer them here, to provide additional reporting space.

3a1. Which Student Learning Outcome was measured this year?

SLO #1: Apply the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences (AAFCS) Code of Ethics in scholarship as FCS professionals.

3b1. Does this learning outcome align with one or more of the university’s Big 5 Competencies? (Delete any which do not apply)

None

3c1. What direct and/or indirect instrument(s) were used to measure this SLO?

See above description pertaining to the Graduate Program SLOs assessment and Graduate Program Exit Survey in the “Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)” section.

3d1. Describe the assessment design methodology: For example, was this SLO assessed longitudinally (same students at different points) or was a cross-sectional comparison used (Comparing freshmen with seniors)? If so, describe the assessment points used.

See above description pertaining to the Graduate Program SLOs assessment and Graduate Program Exit Survey in the “Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)” section.

3e1. Assessment Results & Analysis of this SLO: Provide a summary of how the results were analyzed and highlight findings from the collected evidence.

SLO #1: Apply the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences (AAFCS) Code of Ethics in scholarship as FCS professionals.

For one exam question in FCS 681, students were asked to list one of the ethical obligations by which researchers must abide regarding human subjects and then briefly explain their response. This exam question is a short answer question. Students’ complete answers received full credit (2), while students’ partially correct answers received half credit (1). An example of the latter would be listing a correct obligation, such as “do not harm,” without fully explaining it. Of the 47 students who took the exam in Fall 2012 for FCS 681, 8.5% (n=4) received zero credit, another 8.5% received a half credit, and the remaining 83.0% received a full credit.

In addition, one question was included in the Graduate Student Exit Survey specifically to be aligned with the FCS Department SLO #1:

· The courses I took provided an understanding of the accepted ethical and professional practice standards in my field.

Results of the Graduate Student Exit Survey pertaining to each of the FCS Department SLOs can be reviewed in the appended Tables for Fall 2013 and Spring 2014.

3f1. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Describe how assessment results were used to improve student learning. Were assessment results from previous years or from this year used to make program changes in this reporting year? (Possible changes include: changes to course content/topics covered, changes to course sequence, additions/deletions of courses in program, changes in pedagogy, changes to student advisement, changes to student support services, revisions to program SLOs, new or revised assessment instruments, other academic programmatic changes, and changes to the assessment plan.)

As this is our Department’s first Self Study of our Graduate Program, we have no previous changes or improvements to discuss for this reporting year. However, we will be addressing issues raised and feedback received in the Self Study of our Graduate Program in the upcoming academic year.

3a2. Which Student Learning Outcome was measured this year?

SLO #2: Demonstrate ongoing synthesis and application of relevant literature, current trends, and emerging issues within their professional area of interest within FCS.

3b2. Does this learning outcome align with one or more of the university’s Big 5 Competencies? (Delete any which do not apply)

· Critical Thinking

· Written Communication

· Information Literacy

3c2. What direct and/or indirect instrument(s) were used to measure this SLO?

See above description pertaining to the Graduate Program SLOs assessment and Graduate Program Exit Survey in the “Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)” section.

3d2. Describe the assessment design methodology: For example, was this SLO assessed longitudinally (same students at different points) or was a cross-sectional comparison used (Comparing freshmen with seniors)? If so, describe the assessment points used.

See above description pertaining to the Graduate Program SLOs assessment and Graduate Program Exit Survey in the “Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)” section.

3e2. Assessment Results & Analysis of this SLO: Provide a summary of how the results were analyzed and highlight findings from the collected evidence.

SLO #2: Demonstrate ongoing synthesis and application of relevant literature, current trends, and emerging issues within their professional area of interest within FCS.

Information provided for SLO #2 pertains to the literature review that students prepared in both FCS 681 and FCS 682 as a part of a research proposal. FCS 681 and 682 are designed to provide students an opportunity to complete a comprehensive research proposal. The ability to conduct a quality literature review plays an important role in the project. Course instruction pertaining to the topic and process of conducting a literature review was specifically covered in FCS 681, but not in FCS 682, as 682 students are expected to utilize and build from their learning of conducting research literature reviews from 681.

Two sections of FCS 681 were offered in the Fall semester of 2012, taught by the same instructor, with 25 students enrolled in one section, and 22 students in the second section. Data from these two classes showed that the grade distribution for the literature review portion of the students’ final research proposals submitted ranged from 0% to 100%, with a mean of 96% and a median of 90%. More than half of the students earned 90% or 100% on the literature review portion of their final research proposals.

Two different instructors, who shared a very similar grading rubric to evaluate students’ final course papers, taught two sections of FCS 682 in the Spring semester of 2013. The grade distribution of the literature review portions of the students’ final research proposals submitted ranged from 44% to 100%, with a mean of 90% and a median of 100%. Specifically, all of the students in one of the sections of FCS 682 (n=23) scored 100% for their literature review, while the students in the other section (n=22) had an average grade of 63% and a median grade of 61%. This grading discrepancy between the two class sections might not be solely due to the assessment method itself but partially due to the differences in the students who were enrolled in two sections offered on different days and time.

In addition, several questions were included in the Graduate Student Exit Survey specifically to be aligned with the FCS Department SLO #2:

· I am aware of major theories in my discipline.

· I am proficient in conducting bibliographic searches on various topics in my discipline.

· I can assess the validity of information and information sources in my discipline.

· I am able to synthesize information from a variety of sources toward making informed conclusions and decisions.

· I am aware of and can discuss existing trends and emerging issues within my field of study.

Results of the Graduate Student Exit Survey pertaining to each of the FCS Department SLOs can be reviewed in the appended Tables for Fall 2013 and Spring 2014.

3f2. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Describe how assessment results were used to improve student learning. Were assessment results from previous years or from this year used to make program changes in this reporting year? (Possible changes include: changes to course content/topics covered, changes to course sequence, additions/deletions of courses in program, changes in pedagogy, changes to student advisement, changes to student support services, revisions to program SLOs, new or revised assessment instruments, other academic programmatic changes, and changes to the assessment plan.)

3a3. Which Student Learning Outcome was measured this year?

SLO #3: Design a research study/creative project investigating topics within their professional area of interest including diverse populations.

3b3. Does this learning outcome align with one or more of the university’s Big 5 Competencies? (Delete any which do not apply)

· Critical Thinking

· Written Communication

· Quantitative Literacy

· Information Literacy

3c3. What direct and/or indirect instrument(s) were used to measure this SLO?

See above description pertaining to the Graduate Program SLOs assessment and Graduate Program Exit Survey in the “Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)” section.

3d3. Describe the assessment design methodology: For example, was this SLO assessed longitudinally (same students at different points) or was a cross-sectional comparison used (Comparing freshmen with seniors)? If so, describe the assessment points used.

See above description pertaining to the Graduate Program SLOs assessment and Graduate Program Exit Survey in the “Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)” section.