1
Annual Report on Degree Program
Assessment of Student Learning 2007
CONTACT INFO:
Academic Unit: Hotel and Restaurant Management
Date: April 17, 2008
Name: Christine Lynn, Ph.D.
Title: Professor
Email:
Phone: 523-2133
NAU Box: 5638
Degree Program: BS in HRM
Introduction:
The purpose of the Annual Report on Degree Program Assessment of Student Learning is to provide information about progress in assessment efforts for the HRM degree program. A variety of quantitative and qualitative methods were utilized to recognize and measure the efforts of faculty to provide students with meaningful educational experiences and to ascertain the results of those efforts.
The January 2002 HRM Assessment Plan (on file in the NAU Assessment Office) was used as the basis of this assessment. The assessment criteria remain the same as do most of the assessment methods. The HA 490 portfolio analysis is no longer used, however, and an updated Assessment Plan will be filed in the upcoming year.
The faculty and staff of HRM were extremely cooperative and made this assessment process possible and interesting. We have a lot to be proud of. The report will be distributed to the faculty and the administration as well as to the NAU Assessment Office.
ASSESSMENT REPORT:
1. Assessment activities:
Individual course assessment activities
Quantitative and qualitative analysis of Senior Exit Surveys (Spring & Fall 07)
Quantitative and qualitative analysis of Alumni Surveys
Course Evaluations (Spring & Fall 07)
ACPHA Annual Report
Qualitative analysis of Faculty Surveys & Interviews
Recruiter comments
Quantitative analysis of Ethics Surveys
Quantitative and Qualitative analysis of Advisement Surveys
Internship data
2. Assessment findings:
The findings of this assessment were very positive. We care about our students and provide them with excellent education and excellent educational experiences and opportunities.
The assessment findings are related to the Assessment Model and Student Learning Outcomes as stated in the HRM Assessment Plan. Please go to page 3 for the Assessment Model results and to page 6 for the Student Learning Outcomes.
3. Feedback:
The 2006 NAU Assessment Report was given to the Exec. Director of HRM who, in turn,
addressed pertinent issues with the HRM Curriculum Committee and individual faculty members. Corrective actions:
HA 243. Add content on designing banquet menus & international cuisines.
HA 340. Bar & Beverage Management will become a core course.
HA 210. Will include worksheets on Building Cost Room Rate and the Hubbart
Room Rate formulas.
HA 400 & HA 365. Add content on budget categories and average percentages
assigned to budget categories.
HA 220. Community College partners were told to add content on cost-per-room
supplies.
HA 355. Add content on food cost reconciliation.
HA 260. The text was changed to improve understanding of cost-profit-sales
relationships.
4. Used assessment findings:
The HRM Honors Convocation every Spring honors student achievement.
5. Changes in the Assessment process:
The Advisement Survey was found to be less than useful and will be redesigned.
A Recruiters Survey will be designed and administered in the future.
The former Portfolio Analysis has been dropped due to a change in analysts. An
alternative measure of student learning will be determined in the next semester
and the NAU Assessment Plan will be modified.
Assessment Model
(Please see the HRM NAU Assessment Plan in your file)
Area / Assessment Activity / OutcomesLearning Exp./
Environment / Senior exit surveys
Alumni surveys / · Please see Appendices A, B, & C.
· Half of the 146 grads in 2007 were in HRM Clubs and rated the clubs between average and high.
· 32 of the 146 grads took part and had positive experiences studying abroad.
· 56/146 grads rated their positive internship experiences at 4.21 (Sp07) & 4.4 (Fall07) out of 5.0.
· 146 grads rated the Inn lab experience with Chef Carlson at 4.3 & 4.5.
· 146 grads rated the HRM facilities from average to high, but there were many comments that facilities were old and rundown and needed updating and enlarging.
· All of the grads were satisfied with the overall HRM experience with most “extremely satisfied.”
· 23 grads commented and all were positive and similar to, “Great professors…the staff is absolutely wonderful…I loved the HRM program at NAU!”
· All 39 Alumni respondents were positive saying such things as the program was wonderful, gave them so many career opportunities, was great education with amazing teachers, and they “loved” the program and were very grateful to the faculty.
Quality of
Graduates / Recruiter comments
Internship data / · 74% of the grads received offers from recruiters. 15% did not utilize the recruiting process.
· Recruiters find our students to have excellent customer service skills and attitudes and to be hard working and enthusiastic.
· Internship employers agree that our HRM students are excellent and many offer our students management positions upon graduation.
Teaching Quality / Course evaluations
Senior exit surveys
Course learning activities
Alumni surveys / · Please see Appendices A, B, C, D & F.
· Several faculty members employ mastery strategies, so students are forced to do their best work.
· Faculty members employ a variety of teaching strategies.
· Results of course evaluations done by students currently in the course, graduating seniors, and alumni are much the same with the same 3 or 4 courses at the top and the bottom of the rankings.
· Professors Hill, Carlson, & Urdang are mentioned as particularly good teachers.
· Mean scores on course evaluations ranged from 2.9 to 4.8 with overall averages at 4.1 for Sp 07 and 4.0 for Fall 07.
· Good teaching is valued by HRM faculty and students.
Course Quality/
Relevancy / Senior exit surveys
Alumni surveys
Recruiter comments
Internship data / · Please see Appendices A, B, & C.
· 100% of grads felt well prepared for hospitality careers.
· 81% of the 71 alumni respondents said the HRM program prepared them well for a career in hospitality management.
· 93% of the alumni would choose the same degree program again.
· Several of the alumni respondents said they had left the industry but their HRM degree was very helpful in their new careers.
Advisement
Quality / Advisement surveys / · Please see Appendix E.
· Results from the 2007 Advisement Survey were not useful, and a new survey instrument will be developed for Fall 2008.
· HRM Advisement Office under Kim Knowles (recipient of the President’s Achievement Award in 2006) provides students with excellent advisement.
· Faculty advisors run from excellent to not interested in doing advisement. (C. Lynn is a past recipient of the NAU Faculty Advisor Award.)
Student Writing
Skills / Faculty interviews
Faculty surveys
HA 315 (Jr. level
writing course)
Course learning activities / · Please see “Communication Skills” on the Student Learning Outcomes table.
· There are rigorously graded writing assignments in 9 of the core HRM courses.
Cognitive
Abilities / Faculty surveys
Faculty interviews
Internship data
Course assessment
activities
HRM Ethics Curric. / · Please see Appendices F & G.
· Students are able to successfully analyze case studies in the HRM Ethics Curriculum. A mastery approach is utilized which enables all students to succeed.
· Case studies are utilized in at least 4 HRM courses and students are able to successfully complete analyses.
· The quality of projects and the ability of students to work together improve as students progress through the program.
Student Learning Outcomes
(Please see the specific skill breakdowns in the HRM Assessment Plan in your file.)
Objectives / Assessment Activities / OutcomesCommunication
Skills / Faculty surveys
Course learning activities
Faculty interviews / · 75% of upper division presentations are extremely professional and of very high quality. The remaining 25% are still very good. “Night and day difference between freshmen & senior communication skills.”
· Students in HA 315 are required to rewrite papers until they are perfect. Grammar errors significantly decrease by the end of the semester.
· Lack of proof reading is more of a problem than poor writing skills.
Technical Skills / Faculty surveys
Course learning activities
Recruiter comments
Faculty interviews / · 90% are competent in technology/software systems.
· 85% have a high proficiency in front office operations procedures.
· 90-100% have proficiency in food operations procedures.
· 90-100% are aware of generally accepted business practices in the hospitality industry.
· Recruiters prefer and hire our grads.
Analytical/Problem
Solving Skills / Faculty surveys
Course learning activities
Faculty interviews / · 30% have a complete ability to interpret financial information, 50% have a solid ability, & 20% have no ability.
· 70-80% are able to apply basic legal principles to novel fact situations.
· 98-100% demonstrate personal application of leadership theories.
· 90% are able to complete weekly room and restaurant revenue forecasts and wage scheduling for housekeeping & front office.
Professional
Responsibility / HRM Ethics Curriculum
Faculty Surveys / · 100% are able to relate ethical material to their personal lives.
Critical Thinking / Course learning activities
HRM Ethics Curriculum / · Case studies are utilized in at least 4 HRM courses.
· 90-95% are able to successfully analyze case studies in the HRMEC.
Appendices
A Spring 2007 Senior Exit Survey Analysis 8
B Fall 2007 Senior Exit Survey Analysis 11
C 2007 Alumni Survey Analysis 14
D Course Student Evaluations Spring 07 & Fall 07 16
E 2007 Advisement Survey Analysis 17
F Course Learning Activities 18
(From Faculty Surveys & Interviews)
G HRM Ethics Curriculum 19
Appendix A
C. Lynn 9/10/07
Spring 2007 Senior Exit Survey
Analysis
Sixty-one out of 85 graduating students completed the Spring 2007 Senior Exit Survey. Sixty-one percent were female, and 92% were Caucasian. Short-term international students were not included in the survey as per last year’s recommendations.
Thirty-nine percent of the respondents were involved in HRM Clubs. They rated the various clubs between “average” and “high” (except FEWH which is now defunct) with the following mean scores:
Club Managers Association of America (8 students) 4.3
Convention Marketing & Services Association (3 students) 4.3
Eta Sigma Delta (6 students) 3.2
Future Executive Women in Hospitality (6 students) 3.2
The HRM Mentors Program (9 students) 3.1
National Society of Minorities in Hospitality (3 students) 4.0
NAU Wine Club (6 students) 4.3
(Students can belong to more than one club.)
Lack of time was cited by numerous students as reason for not joining and belonging to
clubs.
Eighteen students (31%) took part in international studies programs and ranked them “above average” to “high” with the following mean scores:
Summer Studies in Europe (9 students) 4.8
The Groningen Polytechnic (Netherlands) (1 student) 5.0
The Netherlands Institute of Tourism (Breda) (5 students) 4.8
The University of Newcastle (Australia) (1) 5.0
(18 students said they took part but only 16 students are accounted for above.)
Students who took part in international study programs overall had positive experiences. Lack of time and/or money were cited by numerous students as reasons for not taking part. Others said they either weren’t interested or had already had international experiences.
Fifty-one percent of the respondents (31 students) took internships worth 1-12 credits. Only one student rated his/her experience as “below average.” The mean score for internship experiences was 4.21 out of 5.0.
Overall students’ internships were considered worthwhile with a few exceptions. Those that did not do internships cited adequate work experience without the internship.
Fifty-eight percent of the respondents rated the quality of their Inn lab experiences “low” or “below average” with the following means:
Kitchen 4.3
Dining Room 3.9
Housekeeping 3.7
Front Desk 3.0
Bar 2.6
Students overall found the lab with Chef Carlson worthwhile but were less satisfied with the other lab experiences. Some thought the labs should be waived for those with job experience in the particular lab area.
Respondents rated the quality of the HRM facilities “average” to “high” except for the computer lab where 35% gave ratings of “below average” and “low” with the following mean scores:
Classrooms 4.0
Computer Lab 3.1
Lobby/Public Areas 4.2
Inn at NAU 4.4
Many students were very critical of the quality of the computers in the computer lab. All of the computers have since been replaced. Students also felt that all of the HRM facilities needed updating and enlarged. Many commented that everything is old and run down.
Core course mean scores and ranking remained consistent with the previous years with the same three or four courses at the top and bottom. The biggest difference was with HA 490 (Senior Seminar) which went from 9th place with a mean score of 3.71 in Fall 06 to 3rd place with a mean score of 4.45 in Spring 07. The following chart ranks and compares HRM core courses from Fall 06 and Spring 07.
Fall 06Rank, Class & Mean Score / Spring 07
Rank, Class & Mean Score / Comparison of Ranks & (Mean Scores)
Fall 06 Sp 07
1 240 4.31 / 1 315 4.79 / 100 7 (4.13) 6 (4.24)
2 315 4.30 / 2 243 4.50 / 170 13 (3.50) 15 (3.30)
3 243 4.29 / 3 490 4.45 / 210 15 (3.46) 14 (3.59)
4 260 4.28 / 4 240 4.36 / 220 10 (3.68) 9 (3.84)
5 242 4.27 / 5 242 4.32 / 240 1 (4.31) 4 (4.36)
6 335 4.16 / 6 100 4.24 / 242 5 (4.27) 5 (4.32)
7 100 4.13 / 7 335 4.16 / 243 3 (4.29) 2 (4.50)
8 365 3.74 / 8 260 3.96 / 260 4 (4.28) 8 (3.96)
9 490 3.71 / 9* 220 3.84 / 270 18 (2.96) 16(3.18)
10 220 3.68 / 9* 345 3.84 / 315 2 (4.30) 1 (4.79)
11 355 3.63 / 10* 355 3.77 / 335 6 (4.16) 7 (4.16)
12 400 3.51 / 10* 365 3.77 / 345 14 (3.47) 9 (3.84)
13 170 3.50 / 11 351 3.70 / 351 16 (3.42) 11 (3.70)
14 345 3.47 / 12 400 3.69 / 355 11 (3.63) 10 (3.77)
15 210 3.46 / 13 390 3.63 / 365 8 (3.74) 10 (3.77)
16 351 3.42 / 14 210 3.59 / 390 17 (3.30) 13 (3.63)
17 390 3.30 / 15 170 3.30 / 400 12 (3.51) 12 (3.69)
18 270 2.96 / 16 270 3.18 / 490 9 (3.71) 3 (4.45)
Advisor Approved Electives were rated for quality and given the following mean scores by the respondents:
HA 284 (Int’l Travel & Tourism) 3.6
HA 340 (Bar & Bev) 4.1
HA 384 (Destination Dev.) 3.0*
HA 401 (Resort) 4.0
HA 411 (Club) 4.0
HA 435 (Litigation) 4.0
HA 477 (Gaming) 4.5
(40% rated HA 384 as “low” quality.)
Students’ comments were overall positive for the faculty, courses, and materials presented.