Assessment Implementation Progress Report

ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS REPORT

BACHELOROF SCIENCE DEGREE in COMMUNICATION SCIENCES AND DISORDERS

College of Education and Health Professions

Ann Bain Ph.D., Dean

Audiology and Speech Pathology Department

Nannette Nicholson, Ph.D., Interim Chair

Donna Kelly, Ph.D., Coordinator, Undergraduate Program

Betholyn Gentry, Ph.D., College Assessment Committee

ANNUAL REPORT - APRIL 2016

Faculty Contributors: Donna Kelly, Ph.D., Gregory Robinson, Ph.D., Stacey Mahurin, M.S., Cliff Franklin, Ph.D., Nannette Nicholson, Ph.D., Betholyn Gentry, Ph.D.

Department Mission

The mission of the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology is to provide highly educated professionals to work with persons with communication, swallowing, hearing and balance disorders.

Undergraduate Mission

The primary mission of the undergraduate program in communication disorders is to provide pre-professional, fundamental experiences needed to pursue graduate training in audiology or speech-language pathology as the students obtain a wide range of academic experiences for general enrichment. This mission is compatible with the UALR mission to enhance awareness and knowledge in scientific, technical and cultural areas while developing independence and sensitivity to society and to lifelong learning. The goals and objectives of the program are listed below.

Goals

The goals of the undergraduate program in Audiology and Speech Pathology are to:

provide undergraduate students with a foundation in the physical, psychological, and cognitive-linguistic bases of normal and disordered speech, language, hearing and balance;
increase students’ critical thinking abilities;
prepare undergraduate students as viable candidates for graduate school or other employment.

Learning outcomes/objectives for those goals:

At completion of the undergraduate Audiology and Speech Pathology program, students will:

have increased their knowledge of the physical, psychosocial and cognitive-linguistic bases of normal and disordered speech, language, hearing and balance;
have increased their ability to apply critical thinking skills to clinically relevant scenarios and questions across diverse populations;
acquire appropriate clinical behaviors and demonstrate knowledge and skills related to clinical practice;
continue their education in a graduate program, or be otherwise employed after graduation.

AUSP Five-Year Plan: Undergraduate

TheAudiology and Speech Pathology Department met to discuss the assessment process currently in place. After much discussion the faculty decided to review our assessment process this year pursuant to future assessment reports. We decided to revamp the current assessment plan to make it more efficient and useful for program growth and success. The assessment plan for the undergraduate program in the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology can best be explained in terms of a five-year cycle, as delineated below.

First Year Assessments (2012):The first year of the new five-year cycle involves gathering data related to the overall assessment of the undergraduate program. This assessment process will include the following instruments: Graduation Rates, Retention Rates, Undergraduate Exit Survey, (Appendix A, under revision), Course Evaluations (Appendix B), Diversity of Students Admitted and Student Financial Support. These data will be used to evaluate overall program effectiveness by obtaining input from the primary consumer of our services, students. Results from these instruments will be used to guide decisions regarding program improvement.

Second Year Assessments (2013): During the second year of the five-year cycle, assessment efforts will focus on undergraduate clinical training, looking at the following items: Student Practicum Evaluation (Appendix C), Number of Practicum Hours Earned, Practicum Supervisor Evaluation – Undergraduate (Appendix D), Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (Appendix E; 13 of 19 Questions), Diversity of Clients Served (Appendix F) and Site Evaluation (Appendix G). These data will be used to assess how well the program is meeting the clinical needs of our undergraduate students and to make quality improvement decisions about the undergraduate clinical training program.

Third Year Assessments (2014): During the third year of the five-year cycle assessment efforts will focus on assessment of professional preparation of our undergraduate students. Planned assessment targets included: Undergraduate Capstone Assessment (not completed), Critical Thinking Assessment (instrument not created), Undergraduate Grades/Student Retention, Post Graduation Plans (Appendix A), Student Scholarships and Awards (Appendix C) and Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (no longer applicable). These data will be used to monitor quality improvement efforts and to indicate how well the undergraduate program is meeting the needs of our students.

Fourth Assessment Year (2015): During the fourth year of the five-year cycle, professional community perception will be the focus. Undergraduate students in our program complete their clinical practicum in the UALR Speech and Hearing Clinic, therefore, this goal is not applicable to undergraduate students.

Fifth Year Assessment (2016): During the fifth year of the five-year cycle the focus of assessment will be on the third major group of consumers, clinic clients. Clinical services and consumers thereof will be assessed using the following information: Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (Appendix E; 13 of 19 Questions), Diversity of Clients Served (UALR clinic; Appendix H) and Diversity of Services Provided (UALR clinic). The data collected from these measures will be used to assess the quality of services provided to clients in our clinic and will be used when making decisions regarding marketing and quality improvement initiatives.

Audiology and Speech Pathology

Undergraduate Speech Pathology Program

Five-Year Assessment Plan (2012 - 2016)

Assessment Tools UG Objective(s) Cycle Year

Assessment of Overall Program 1 & 2Annually2012

Undergraduate Exit Survey

Undergraduate Course Evaluation

Town Hall Meeting

Diversity of Students Admitted

Graduation Completion Rates

Student Financial Support

Assessment of Student Clinical Training1 & 2Year 22013

Undergraduate Student Practicum Evaluation

Practicum Supervisor Evaluation - Undergraduate

Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (13 Questions)

Assessment of Undergraduate Students1 & 2Year 32014

Undergraduate Capstone Examination

Critical Thinking Assessment

Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (no longer applicable)

Undergraduate Grades

Undergraduate Retention Rate

Undergraduate Post Graduation Plans

Student Scholarships and Awards

Assessment of Off-Campus Practicum Sites 1 & 2Year 42015

Site Evaluations

Assessment of Consumers of Clinical Services 1 & 2Year 52016

Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (13 Questions)

Diversity of Clients Served (UALR clinic)

Type of Services Provided to Consumers (UALR clinic)

Areas Scheduled for Assessment

Areas scheduled in year four of our five year plan were: 1) Undergraduate exit survey;

2) Undergraduate course evaluations; 3) Town Hall Meeting; 4) Diversity of students admitted; 5) Graduation completion rates; 6) Student financial support.

Undergraduate Exit Survey

There are no student exit surveys from our graduating seniors from 2015. This survey was discontinued a few years ago because the survey results aligned with whether or not students had been accepted to an M.S. or AuD. program at the time of the survey. In other words, students who had been accepted to a graduate program (in March) were “pleased” with their undergraduate education in our Department; while those who were waitlisted or unlikely to gain entry to graduate school in communication sciences and disorders were “less pleased”. Currently we have been using our AUSP course evaluations to learn how the undergraduate students assess their educational experience. An undergraduate exit survey would be helpful for program planning, and we plan to discuss designing a survey which is not biased by acceptance into graduate programs.

Undergraduate Course Evaluations

Students in the B.S. program in Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD) complete 41 hours of didactic coursework in the major, 38 of which are upper division. Students typically complete the UALR course evaluation form during the last week of class; the evaluations are completed by an AUSP staff member and the respective faculty member is not present. The UALR form includes 10 items; students are asked to select from Strongly Agree (5), Agree (4), Neither Agree nor Disagree (3), Disagree (2), Strongly Disagree (1) or Not Applicable (N/A). The average ratings for 10 of the didactic courses are show in the table as the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values. Mean ratings range from 0.92 to 0.96. which reflect that students “strongly agree”on the items in the course evaluation.

Mean B.S. Course Evaluations (N=10)
Evaluation Item / Mean / SD / Min / Max
1. Audible and clear / 0.93 / 0.09 / 0.71 / 1.00
2. Fluent in English / 0.96 / 0.05 / 0.82 / 1.00
3. Organized Presentations / 0.92 / 0.06 / 0.81 / 0.99
4. Objectives/Goals / 0.93 / 0.06 / 0.82 / 1.00
5. Current developments / 0.92 / 0.07 / 0.77 / 0.99
6. Critical thinking / 0.92 / 0.05 / 0.81 / 0.99
7. Keeps scheduled appointments / 0.92 / 0.07 / 0.77 / 1.00
8. Respectful of students / 0.95 / 0.07 / 0.77 / 1.00
9. Enthusiasm / 0.94 / 0.07 / 0.78 / 0.99
10. Tests cover course objectives / 0.92 / 0.07 / 0.76 / 0.99

Town Hall Meeting.

Student concerns are typically addressed to their course instructors, their academic advisors or the undergraduate student coordinator. The “town hall meeting” exists as a forum for multiple students to express department concerns which were not resolved after seeking assistance from AUSP faculty. No undergraduate “town hall meetings” have been requested or held.

Diversity of Students Admitted to the B.S. Program

Background

Diversity may pertain to a variety of different traits. For the purposes of this assessment, we chose the following: Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, Nation of Birth, Native Language, and Disability Status. The field of Speech-Language Pathology is a remarkably and regrettably homogenous field. To contextualize the data in this report, the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA) reported in 2011 the graduate student population in Speech-Language Pathology was 87% White and 95% Female.

Method

An 8 question, paper survey was given to undergraduate students for completion. All who were asked to participate did. Students did not write their names on the form. A total of 47 students were surveyed. The results were as follows:

Class Rank

All of the students surveyed had been accepted into the program. A total of 40 out of 47 (85%) were undergraduate students (juniors and seniors) and 7 out of 47 (15%) were post-baccalaureate. Out of those surveyed, Seniors accounted for 53% of the respondents. Juniors accounted for 30%, and Sophomores accounted for 2% of the respondents.

Gender

The respondents to this survey were 87% female and 13% male. Notably, this proportion of male students is almost 3 times their representation nationally (5%). The underrepresentation of males in the field of communication sciences and disorders has been an ongoing issue (Maier, 2013). Our program is representing males at a significantly higher rate than the field as a whole.

Age

The average age of the respondents was 24 years old. However, the distribution was positively skewed, with almost 4 out 5 respondents between 20 and 25 (79%). The oldest respondent was 39 years of age.

Race/Ethnicity

A total of 68% of the respondents reported their race/ethnicity to be “White/Caucasian.” Nine respondents (19%) identified as Black/African American, four (8.5%) identified as Hispanic/Latino and two (4.3%) identified as Asian/Pacific Islander.

These percentages are somewhat more diverse than the proportions reported during the 2000 Census in Arkansas (c.f., White = 77%, Black = 15%, Latino = 6.4%, and Asian = 6%). However, they represent much greater diversity than that reported by ASHA for the fields of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology and for the Arkansas graduate programs in Speech-Language Pathology. Recall that the graduate student population in the US for Speech-Language Pathology in 2011 was only 13% non-White compared to almost 32% non-White students in the UALR Undergraduate student population. It appears that our program is doing a good job recruiting students from minority backgrounds into the undergraduate program.

US Born/Native Language

One of the respondents reported that they were born outside of the US (Columbia). Two respondents indicated that their native language was something other than English (Spanish and Vietnamese).

Disability

Two respondents (4.3%) indicated that they had a disability.

Discussion

The undergraduate program in Communication Sciences and Disorders appears to be recruiting students from diverse backgrounds at a higher rate than reflected across other programs in the US. Our students reflect a higher proportion of males than other programs across the country and higher proportion of students who identify as Black/African American, Latino, and Asian. Efforts should continue in this area. Although the proportion of male students in our undergraduate program was almost three times higher than the national average, it was still considerably lower than the roughly 50% of the population at large. Furthermore, efforts need to continue to ensure racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity in our programs. One aspect that may be the most effective in recruiting students from racial and ethnically diverse backgrounds is ensuring that the faculty is racially and ethnically diverse. Our department includes 14 full-time faculty members, with 2 African American and 2 Asian faculty members. These individuals account for almost 30% of the faculty members in our department, which places us at about twice the number of minority faculty members compared to the national representation of speech-language pathologists and audiologists. Furthermore, our faculty includes four male faculty members (30%). Students may see this diversity and conclude that they, too, may be successful as a speech-language pathologist or audiologist.

While the diversity in our undergraduate population was relatively high, the comparison was made to the graduate school population in the country because there are currently no surveys of undergraduate majors in the field. A comparison between undergraduate diversity and graduate diversity may reveal additional information regarding how successful these minority students are in being admitted into a graduate program.

References

American Speech-Language-Hearing Association.(2011). 2009– 2010 academic year state-by-state data on graduate education in communication sciences and disorders. Available from

Maier, K. (2013) Why the scarcity of male SLPs and what can be done? The ASHA Leader Blog.Retrieved March 18, 2016 from

Graduation Completion Rates

In order to gain entry into our B.S. program, prospective students must present with a minimum cumulative GPA of 3.0. To practice as a speech-language pathologist or audiologist students must complete an M.S. or AuD.;in recent years students accepted to graduate schools in communication sciences and disorders typically have cumulative GPAs ranging from 4.0 to 3.4. This past year we had a retention rate for majors in AUSP of 92%.

In order to determine graduation completion rates for the B.S. in Communication Sciences and Disorders for 2016, we compared the number of seniors enrolled in course work in August to the number of seniors who are scheduled to complete their B.S. degrees by summer 2016. Our records indicate there were 26 seniors enrolled in CSD coursework in August of 2015, and 24/26are scheduled to complete their B.S. by the end of August 2016. The remaining two students are scheduled to complete their B.S. degrees in December of 2016.

Student Financial Support/ Undergraduate Financial Aid

This report focuses on undergraduate access to financial aid. Juniors and seniors completed the “Undergraduate Financial Aid Data Questionnaire” in November of 2015. A copy of this form is included in Appendix B. A total of 28 Juniors and 22 Seniors completed the form. Our students are recipients of several types of scholarships, most frequently the Arkansas Lottery Scholarship. All but three of the participating Juniors received some form of financial aid and all but two seniors received some form of aid. The majority of students from both classes received financial aid from more than one source. As noted in the tables below this past year our students received financial aid from the Arkansas Lottery Scholarships, PELL Grants, Chancellor’s Leadership Core, GI Bill, “UALR” Scholarships, Arkansas Rehabilitation, Dean’s Academic Merit, the Air Force Aid Society, Single Parent and UALR Athletics.

Number of students receiving financial aid - March 2015

Class / No. of students
completing survey / No. of students
receiving financial aid
Junior / 28 / 25
Senior / 22 / 20

Types of financial aid accessed by each class

Class / AR Lottery Scholarship / Scholarships / Grants / Loans and other forms of aid
Junior / 12 / 8 / 5 / 18
Senior / 14 / 14 / 2 / 8

Additional financial aid breakdowns

Source of Financial Aid / Number (Percentage)
Junior (N=17) Senior (N=32)
Arkansas Lottery Scholarship / 12 (43) / 14 (63)
Ronald E. McNair Scholarship / 0 (0) / 1 (5)
Donaghey Scholarship / 0 (0) / 0 (0)
Aid provided by your church / 0 (0) / 0 (0)
Other / 13 (46) / 18 (82)
Loan / 17 (61) / 2 (9)

Plans for the Future

Concluding Statement. While aspects of this report contained beneficial information which will help guide our plans for the future (e.g., undergraduate course evaluations, student diversity, graduation completion rates, and student financial support), our faculty will need to revisit the creation of a senior exit survey which is not biased by their admission “status” to M.S. and AuD.graduate programs.

Stakeholder Involvement.Student stakeholders participated in this assessment via course evaluations and questionnaires. The focus of next years’ assessment plan is on meeting the needs of our students and our clients in the UALR Speech and Hearing Clinic.

Appendix A

Curriculum Assessment Map: Degree Program Assessment

Audiology and Speech Pathology B.S. Degree

Emphasis:ExtensiveSomewhatLittleNone

Assessed:ExamPaperProjectOtherNot Assessed

Goal # 1 - To provide undergraduate students in audiology and speech pathology with a foundation in the physical, psychological, and linguistic bases of normal speech language, and hearing.
Courses and Activities / How Outcomes are Addressed and Assessed / Outcome # 1
Students will demonstrate knowledge of the
physical, psychosocial, and linguistic bases of
normal speech, language and hearing. / Core Competencies
Addressed
AUSP 2360
Introduction to Speech and Hearing Disorders / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Somewhat
Exam
Other / 2, 3, 10
AUSP 3350
Phonetics / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam / 2, 9, 10
AUSP 3360
Language and Speech Acquisition / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam
Project / 2, 9, 10
AUSP 3361
Speech Anatomy and Physiology / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam / 2, 10
AUSP 3362
Hearing Science / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam / 2, 7, 10
AUSP 3364
Speech Science / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam / 2, 7, 10
Goal #2 - To introduce students to speech, language, and hearing disorders in preparation for clinical practicum.
Courses and Activities / How Outcomes are Addressed and Assessed / Outcome # 1
Students will demonstrate knowledge and skills related to clinical practicum and appropriate clinical behaviors. / Core Competencies
Address
AUSP 3363
Disorders in Articulation / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam
Project / 2, 9 , 10
AUSP 3365
Clinical Management / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam / 2, 3, 10
AUSP 4162
Practicum I / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Other / 2, 9, 10
AUSP 4163
Practicum II / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Other / 2, 9, 10
AUSP 4363
Voice and Stuttering / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam / 2, 9, 10
AUSP 4364
Differential Diagnosis / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam
Project / 2, 9, 10
AUSP 4366
Language Disorders / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam
Project / 2, 9, 10
AUSP 4368
Audiology / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Extensive
Exam / 2, 7, 10
AUSP 4369
Audiologic Rehabilitation / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Somewhat
Exam / 2, 7, 10
AUSP 4101, 4201, 4301
Independent Study / Emphasis:
Assessed: / Somewhat
Exam / 2, 10

Key: Core Competencies Addressed: