Academic Program Assessment Annual Report

ACADEMIC PROGRAM ASSESSMENT ANNUAL REPORT

All programs must submit an annual assessment report to their College Dean’s Office by May 15 for posting on the college assessment website. For purposes of demonstrating growth in program assessment practices to HLC, all programs are asked to submit what assessment work they have done, regardless of whether or not this work is captured by the questions in this form. By October 31, the College Assessment Committee will provide the program with feedback on their report and will use the report as basis for an executive summary of all college assessment activity to be submitted to the College Dean and Office of the Provost. If you have any questions, comments or ideas about this form, please consult the GUIDE or email .

Academic Program / Gerontology Graduate Certficate
Data Collection Period / 2016 - 2017
Report Contact / Dr. Rosalie V. Otters
Date Submitted to College Dean’s Office / 4/ 13/18

1. Academic Program Overview

1. Is your program covered by SKIM legislation? Yes No

Refer to the Guide for a list of SKIM-legislated programs.

1. Academic Program Mission

Your program’s student learning goals should tie to your mission. Please state your department’s or program’s mission.

The mission of the program of the School of Social Work in Gerontology is to equip students with the knowledge, values and skills required to work with the burgeoning population of older adults in the 21st Century. The Gerontology Certificate provides participants with the knowledge and appreciation of psychological, sociological and biological changes throughout the life course, as well as the values of inclusiveness and diversity that will be increasingly needed for our society to successfully navigate through the upcoming challenges and opportunities of an aging society. In addition, we educate our students to both lead and respond to policies and services.

1. Student Learning Goals for Academic Program

List all student learning goals (“At the end of this program, students will be able to…”) for the academic program identified above, and—if your program is covered by SKIM—identify any current goals that map to SKIM goals. If you prefer to provide the list asan appendix, type “See appendix” in box below and attach appendix to this report. For guidance in writing measurable student learning goals and for a list of SKIM goals, please see the GUIDE.

Student learning goals are understood by the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) as competencies (6) and practice behaviors (20) related to these competencies. These are further related to five overall dimensions. Two of these dimensions,knowledge and critical thinking, are included in the present grid map.There are three more dimensions which will be asssessed in coming years (values, skills and judgment: cognitive and affective). Assessment criteria have been amended using the Council on Social Work GERO dimensions, competencies and behaviors as the basic template. See PLAN.

1. Reflecting on Last Year’s Improvement Plans and Communication

1. Continuous Improvement Initiatives Based on Results from Last Year’s Report

Describe actions taken based on results from your last assessment report (For example, what aspects of the curriculum or student support were revised, developed, or maintained? Did you adjust assessment methods, change learning objectives or revise target achievement levels?If you received feedback from your college assessment committee, how did you incorporate it?)

Previously, we have expanded the course offerings and made a yearly rotating schedule for classes for better planning of course schedule. The courses are also online.
We have previously submitted yearly reports when requested. and these results have been posted.We have also communicated by a list-serv to faculty, students and community stakeholders. Feedback has been generally positive. However, though many students like the online gerontology courses, some would prefer a face-to-face experience. In response, several courses offer a few voluntary face-to-face classes in some online courses. About half of students in such targeted classes make use of these voluntary classes (1 - 2 per semester, depending on interest).
This year we are planning for a community and student stakeholders meetng, April 20, 2018.

1. Involvement/Communication with Program Stakeholders Based on Results from Last Year’s Report

All program assessment reports are posted on college websites. Beyond posting, did you communicate your results with your program’s stakeholders? If so, how, and what feedback did you receive (if any)? (The Guide includes more information on communicating assessment results and involving stakeholders in assessment analysis and results.)

No, but we have previously submitted yearly reports when requested and these results have been posted.We have also communicated by a list-serv to faculty, students and community stakeholders. Feedback has been generally positive.

1. Current Year’s Assessment Report

1. Student Learning Goal(s) Assessed for This Report

List which specific goals are assessed in this report, including any SKIM goals. If these map to the SKIM goals, please indicate which ones. Refer to the Guide or ualr.edu/assessment/skim/ or the GUIDE for a list of SKIM goals and a schedule of SKIM assessment.

Two dimensions assessed: knowledge and critical thinking, related to class grades See PLAN. For the next assessment (year 2) rubrics for these two dimensions will be developed. in terms of the Gerontology GC rather than individual gerontology classes
Gerontology Graduate Certificate Assessment Summary 2016-2017
The Gerontology Graduate Certificate (GC) requires 18 graduate courses in gerontology or gerontology-related disciplines. Three courses are required core courses. Students come from throughout the College of Education and Health Professions, though many come from the School of Social Work, and seek to add the certificate to a master’s degree. Some students also come directly from the community. This assessment is based on the three required core graduate gerontology courses:
GERO/SOWK 7321 Aging and Social Policy (Fall 2016), 15 students
GERO/ SOWK 7325 Health and Biology of Aging (Spring 2017), 19 students
GERO/SOWK 5310 Social Gerontology (Summer 2017), 17 students
For the 2016-2017 year three students graduated with the Gerontology Graduate Certificate.
In addition, students working toward the Gerontology Graduate Certificate took three other courses as electives, for a total of 18 credits. During the 2016-2017 year about 125 student seats were filled by students taking one or more gerontology courses. Some were undergraduate as well as graduate students; some students took gerontology courses were taken as electives for other programs.
During this school year, 2016-2017, one undergraduate earned a minor in gerontology, which is not figured in this report. However, it is also important to note that UA Little Rock is the most comprehensive state university teaching gerontology. UA offers few gerontology courses. Pine Bluff has not been able to continue to have a viable gerontology undergraduate major and now offers gerontology courses as part of another major.
The three required core courses have been assessed, adapting the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) assessment guidelines for 6 competencies that are related to 20 practice behaviors (now called behaviors). While the 2008 Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS) measured competencies directly through practice behaviors, the 2015 EPAS now measures a broader criteria set, called dimensions (knowledge, critical thinking, values, skills, judgment: cognitive and affective). The competencies and behaviorsare under these overall student learning dimensions.
For this year the benchmarks have been connected to the grades for each type of assignment. Though this is an imperfect process, there were several instances where the benchmark (90 to 95%) and grades differed with benchmark being higher than the grade:
Aging and Social Policy: Service Learning assignment, 85% (benchmark 90%)
Quizzes: 85% average (benchmark 90%)
This year’s students for the Aging and Social Policy class were often coming from other departments, outside the School of Social Work. In the future this may need to be taken into consideration since they had less previous experience than social work students in policy issues.
This first year the knowledge and critical thinking dimensions have been plotted in the grids. Next year these two dimensions will have a specific rubric that will measure some of the assignments more closely. The present plan is to cover all five dimensions by the end of the cycle.

1. Assessment Methods and Results for Student Learning Goals Assessed This Year

Identify and briefly describe method or methods used for each learning goal assessed and identify the location where the data are stored. Identify the target achievement level for each learning outcome and describe the assessment results. See list of common assessment methods in the Guide for reference.

Student Learning Goal: See PLAN
If this goal maps to SKIM, indicate which SKIM goal: Click to Select GoalOral CommunicationWritten CommunicationCritical ThinkingInformation Technology (Research + Technology)Ethical Reasoning
Methods / Benchmarks had to be related to specific grades this time. Next cycle will be related to the dimensions/competenceis/ behaviors.
Data Repository
Target Achievement / Benchmark / Health & Biology of Aging Core Course
Benchmark & Average Grades for 2017 Class
•Service Learning Paper 95% (benchmark 90%)
•4 Case Studies 93% (benchmark 90%)
•4 Quizzes 92% (benchmark 90%)
•6 Discussions 97% (benchmark 95%)
•Average grade 93% (benchmark 90%)
•Extra credit (3% grade increase for 3 students)
Social Gerontology Core Course
Benchmark & Average Grades for 2017 Class
•Experiential Research Paper 88% (benchmark 90%)
•Graduate Critical Research Paper 92% (benchmark 90%)
•4 Quizzes 94% (benchmark 90%)
•Average grade 92%
•Extra credit average .67% (4 points added to possible 600 points)
Aging and Social Policy Core Course
Benchmark & Average Grades for 2017 Class
•Service Learning Assignment 85% (benchmark 90%)
•Portfolio Assignment 91% (benchmark 90%)
•6 Quizzes 85% (benchmark 90%)
•4 Discussions 96% (benchmark 95%)
•Average grade 91% (benchmark 90%)
•Extra credit average 1.67% (8 points added to possible 600 points)
Results
Student Learning Goal: see PLAN
If this goal maps to SKIM, indicate which SKIM goal: Click to Select GoalOral CommunicationWritten CommunicationCritical ThinkingInformation Technology (Research + Technology)Ethical Reasoning
Methods
Data Repository
Target Achievement / Benchmark
Results
Student Learning Goal:
If this goal maps to SKIM, indicate which SKIM goal: Click to Select GoalOral CommunicationWritten CommunicationCritical ThinkingInformation Technology (Research + Technology)Ethical Reasoning
Methods
Data Repository
Target Achievement / Benchmark
Results

1. Action Plan Based on Assessment Results for This Year’s Report

Describe conclusions drawn from assessment results and any plans for improvement. For example, what aspects of the curriculum will be revised, developed, or maintained? Will assessment methods be adjusted? Will learning objectives or benchmarks be revised?

1. A four year assessment cycle has been created, using the five CSWE dimensions as overall goals, anchored by specific competencies and behaviors for each competency. These are specified for each of the three core required GERO courses.
2. Rubrics will be created for each dimension, based on specific learning tools embedded in each course.
Thenext year review will center on the first two dimensions (knowledge and critical thinking). Student and community feedback will be integrated into this dimension review. A rubric embedded assessment will target assignments and will seek a third party to review the process.The remaining dimensions will be assessed on a yearly basis.
Dimension Assessment Cycle:
Year 1: Knowledge and Critical Thinking
Year 2: Values
Year 3: Skills
Year 4: Judgment (Affective, Cognitive)
3. Benchmarks will be more closely anchored to each competency/ behaviors for that dimension.

1. Communication to Stakeholders

All program assessment reports are posted on college websites. Beyond posting, will you communicate or have you communicated your results with your program’s stakeholders? If so, how, and what feedback did you receive (if any)? (The Guide includes more information on communicating assessment results and involving stakeholders in assessment analysis and results.)

Not last year, but we have previously submitted yearly reports when requested, and these results have been posted.We have also communicated by a list-serv to faculty, students and community stakeholders. Feedback has been generally positive. However, though many students like the mostly online gerontology courses, some would prefer the face-to-face experience. In response, several courses now offer a few voluntary face-to-face classes in three of the online courses. About half of students make use of these voluntary classes (1 -2 per semester, depending on interest). We are also considering using either Adobe Connect or Blackboard Collaborate to have synchronous online classes which may also be recorded for later viewing (Adobe Connect)
We will be meeting with community and student/faculty stakeholders this April 20, 2018 at UA Little Rock..

1. Faculty Involvement

For the assessment roles and activities listed below, indicate what percentage of the program’s faculty members were involved in the roles listed below. (This information is requested for reporting to HLC and will not be used for purposes of evaluating faculty workload.)

Creating assessment planClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Learning activity designClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Rubric designClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Rubric normingClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Evaluating learning activitiesClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Analyzing dataClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Developing improvement plansClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Communication with stakeholdersClick to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Other (please describe below)Click to select Tier0-15%16-30%31-45%46-60%61-75%76-90%91-100%

Click or tap here to enter text.

1. Future Professional Development

Are there any areas of assessment, continuous improvement and/or communication with stakeholders in which you would like to have professional development in the coming year?

specific rubrics for knowledge, critical thinking, values, skills, judgement which are the 5 dimensions used as overall goals in CSWE

AVC-CI 13nov171