Clinton Community College
GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT PLAN:
SECOND CYCLE
Clinton Community College’s (CCC) plan of General Education Assessment embraces a course-embedded approach to assessing student learning outcomes, with the goal of improving teaching and learning on our campus. The plan was initiated in the Fall 2002 semester and follows a three-year cycle. Except for those courses offered only during the spring semester, assessments will take place during the fall semester, leaving the spring for analysis. The results of learning outcomes assessment of the approved courses within the designated general education knowledge or competency areas will be reported annually to the SUNY Office of the Provost by June 30. The second cycle of the plan will address all twelve areas over three years according to the following timetable:
YEAR 4 (2005-06) / American HistoryBasic Communication
Foreign Language
Information Management
YEAR 5 (2006-07) / The Arts
Mathematics
Social Sciences
Western Civilization
YEAR 6 (2007-08) / Critical Thinking
Humanities
Natural Sciences
Other World Civilizations
The following information outlines CCC’s response to each of the guidelines articulated by SUNY’s GEAR Group.
1. The objectives for student learning in General Education relate directly to the student learning outcomes defined in the Implementation Guidelines of the Provost’s Advisory Task Force on General Education.[1]
Since CCC has adopted the SUNY program of general education as its own, the outcomes from the Guidelines for the Approval of State University General Education Requirement Courses, which include the revised student learning outcomes for mathematics[2], are those being measured in this plan.
2. Programmatic activities intended to accomplish the campus’ objectives for student learning in General Education are described.
All courses selected for assessment are those that have been approved by the Advisory Council for General Education (AC-GE, formerly PAC-GE) as meeting the criteria for general education courses in one or more of the twelve general education areas. Courses not officially approved by the AC-GE are not included in this assessment plan.
For a course to be considered a General Education course of the College, it must first be approved as such by the academic division in which it is housed. A member of the requesting division presents a written proposal, following the format provided by the AC-GE, to the General Education Committee which reviews the request. If the General Education Committee approves the proposal, it is presented to CCC’s Faculty Council for approval. If the Faculty Council approves the proposal, it is forwarded to the Vice President for Academic Affairs and then to the College President for approval. If approved, the office of the VPAA submits the proposal to the AC-GE for SUNY approval. The course is then added to the list of officially approved general education courses of the College.
3. The measures developed to assess student learning are designed to provide credible evidence of the extent to which students have achieved the learning outcomes or skills stated in the objectives.
A. Will it directly measure student learning (i.e. as differentiated from the perception that learning has taken place)?
Student learning will be measured directly using either a pre-test/post-test methodology or a post-test methodology that employs the use of test questions, portfolios, demonstrations, and/or projects/papers. Assessment measures will be selected specifically to address the objectives articulated in the statement of General Education Learning Outcomes.
B. Will it measure the objective it is intended to measure (i.e. will it have reasonable face validity)?
Faculty members teaching within the discipline will determine the face validity of specific indicators. Whenever possible, full-time faculty will collaborate with part-time faculty to develop all assessment instruments. In most cases, an overall score on an exam will not serve as evidence of student learning. Rather, student performance on clusters of questions designed to measure specific knowledge or competency objectives (as they have been articulated by SUNY and operationalized by faculty teaching in the discipline) will be measured and reported.
C. Will the plan provide assurances that the measure is reliable, particularly with respect to the ability of two independent scorers to rate it similarly (i.e. will it have inter-observer reliability)?
Test questions will either use an “objective” approach (i.e. multiple choice, matching, single answer) or, for open-ended test questions, portfolios, demonstrations and papers/projects, a scoring rubric developed by faculty teaching in the discipline will be used. In this latter case, two independent raters will assess the answers. A third rater will be used in cases where the first two disagree on the score. All faculty members using the rubric will be trained in its use and will practice scoring to achieve inter-rater reliability.
D. Does the plan include externally referenced measures of the campus’s choice—either nationally- or SUNY normed – for the learning outcomes in Mathematics, Basic Communication (Written), and Critical Thinking (Reasoning)?
In April 2005, the Faculty Council of Clinton Community College passed a resolution in opposition to Strengthened Campus-Based Assessment[3]. We will continue to use the assessment instruments for measuring the student learning outcomes in Basic Communication (written) and Critical Thinking that were developed and implemented during the first cycle of our approved General Education Assessment Plan. The assessment instruments for measuring student learning outcomes in Mathematics are being revised to address changes in the SUNY student learning outcomes for Mathematics.
E. Will the data that are reported be representative?
In an effort to obtain representative data, the following assessment data reporting guidelines will be followed for each General Education course being assessed*:
· If there are 150 or more students in the course, then report either:
Ø all students in the course
OR
Ø a simple random sample of 20% of the students in the course
· If there are 149 or fewer students in the course, then report either:
Ø all students in the course
OR
Ø a simple random sample of 30 students in the course
*Since the results of student learning outcomes for a specific knowledge or skill area are reported to SUNY in the aggregate, all general education courses assessed within a single silo must employ the same reporting method.
F. Does the plan include, for campuses opting to attempt to determine the growth in learning achieved by SUNY undergraduates in some or all of general education (“value-added”), an adequate description of when measures will be administered and how problems commonly related to pre- and post-testing will be addressed?
At this time, value-added assessment (pre- and post-testing) is not being used on our campus to assess student learning outcomes for any of our general education courses.
4. The plan proposes standards to which student performance relative to the learning outcomes in the objectives can be compared.
The standards defining what level of student performance the faculty considers as “exceeding,” “meeting,” “approaching,” and “not meeting” standards will be defined by faculty who teach within the discipline, who create the assessment instruments, and who construct any scoring rubrics.
5. The anticipated results of the assessment are able to affirm the degree to which the learning objectives have been achieved and thus make it possible to identify areas that need to be addressed in order to improve learning.
Results of assessment efforts will be shared with faculty teaching in the discipline who will be responsible for interpreting the results. Faculty will meet with their colleagues to discuss implications of assessment results and decide on what actions to take. Actions include, but are not limited to, changes in pedagogy, reorganization of course content/structure, and/or modifications of the assessment instrument. These discussions will take place in the context of divisional meetings as well as special meetings held exclusively to focus on assessment issues.
For each general education course assessed, a report consisting of a) a copy of the assessment instrument(s); b) a “matching” of individual assessment items to the specific learning objectives for that knowledge or competency area; c) aggregate results of student performance relative to the learning outcomes in accordance with the defined standards; and d) corresponding recommendations, will be sent to the Office of Institutional Research and Planning. For courses assessed in the fall semester, the submission of this report will occur no later than February 28; for courses assessed in the spring semester, the submission of this report will occur no later than May 31. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning will compile a summary of the recommendations and will send a copy of this report to the General Education Committee, which will be responsible for tracking progress made by divisions in addressing any needed improvements or changes.
6. Mechanisms for assessing the campus academic environment are described. The Office of Institutional Research and Planning will administer the ACT SUNY Student Opinion Survey and the Community College Survey of Student Engagement during separate academic years. In one three-year cycle of our General Education Assessment Plan, it is anticipated that each of these surveys will be administered once. The results of these surveys, however, will not be correlated to student learning outcomes.
7. The assessment plan has been reviewed and approved through the appropriate curriculum and faculty governance structures.
The General Education Committee-- a standing committee of the faculty governance structure (the Faculty Council) that consists of representatives serving as liaisons to each academic division-- creates and updates this plan. The Assessment Committee of the College, another standing committee of the Faculty Council, reviews the plan and provides feedback. The plan is then presented to the Faculty Council for approval.
The original plan was presented to the Faculty Council on February 7, 2002, and was approved on February 21, 2002. Faculty Council approved modifications to the plan on May 16, 2002. The second cycle of the plan was presented to and approved
by the Faculty Council on October 6, 2005.
8. The plan adheres to the timetable established by the GEAR Group and agreed to by the University Provost.
The assessment of all of the General Education learning objectives in the Knowledge and Skills Areas and Competencies will be completed within a three-year cycle (see timetable on p. 1).
9. The assessment process includes provisions for evaluating the assessment process itself and disseminating assessment results to the appropriate campus community.
In addition to sharing assessment results with faculty involved in that year’s assessment for their own interpretation, reflection, and planning, the Office of Institutional Research and Planning will solicit input from faculty regarding the assessment process. Based on recommendations from faculty involved in the assessments and from wider discussions in Faculty Council, the plan may be amended by the General Education Committee, followed by a review of the Assessment Committee and approval of Faculty Council. At the end of each three-year cycle, review and approval of the process is repeated.
10/05
2
[1] See Appendix D of the Final Report of the Provost’s Advisory Task Force on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes, at http://www.sysadm.suny.edu/provost/asmtfinalreport.pdf.
[2] Revision made 4/13/05, reflecting the content of student learning outcomes approved by state and national mathematical organizations. See revised outcomes at http://www.sysadm.suny.edu/provost/generaleducation/course-guidelines-v2.pdf
[3] See appendix for copy of letter sent to GEAR conveying CCC’s resolution on Strengthened Campus-Based Assessment.