Horticulture Brent Chapman 2007-09 Assessment Report
Outcome 1 / MeasurableCriteria / Measurement
Tool / Time Frame
1) Students will understand the scientific method and how it can be used to make plant production management decisions. / Students in HORT 133 will achieve a grade of a B or higher on their soils experiment report / Analysis of soils experiment grades from HORT 133 / Review the end of each winter quarter.
Results:
2008: The average score for 17 students on their soils experiment report was 94.8. 2 out of 17 students (11.8%) received a score lower than a B.
2009: The average score for 20 students on their soils experiment report was 91.0. 3 out of 20 students (15.0%) received a score lower than a B.
Combined2008/2009: The average score for 37 students was 92.8. 5 out of 27 students (13.5%) received a score lower than a B.
Analysis and Action:
The average score for combined 2008/2009 is very impressive, well above the B or higher criteria.
Future work in this area should focus on helping more students in the course achieve a B grade or higher by doing the following:
1) making sure that students in technical programs are aware that they can receive free tutoring
2)providing examples of high quality reports from previous years
Outcome 2 / Measurable
Criteria / Measurement
Tool / Time Frame
2) Students will recognize the ornamental features, cultural requirements and landscape uses of native and non-native plants. / Students in HORT 106,108,109 will achieve an average grade of B or higher on their midterm and final plant ID exams. / Analysis of midterm and final plant ID exams in HORT 106, 108 & 109 / End of each quarter
Results:
2007/08: The average score for 17 students on their midterm ID exam was 81.0. 5 out of 17 students (29%) received a score lower than a B.
The average score for 13 students on their final ID exam was 86.0. 4 out of 13 students (31%) received a score lower than a B.
76% of the students taking the midterm took the final exam.
2008/09: The average score for 33 students on their midterm ID exam was 83.0. 9 out of 33 students (27%) received a score lower than a B.
The average score for 30 students on their final ID exam was 90.0. 8 out of 30 students (27%) received a score lower than a B.
91% of the students taking the midterm took the final exam.
Analysis and Action:
When considering the overall class average, students met the criteria for both midterm and final ID exams both years. However, for this same time period an average of 28.5% of the students did not achieve scores higher than a B on either the midterm or final exams. An interesting observation is that even though the class size was larger for 2008/09 there was a higher percentage of students both taking the final and achieving a score higher than a B when compared to 2007/08.
Future work in this area should focus on helping more students in the course get to the final exam and achieve a B grade or higher by doing the following:
1)making sure that students in technical programs are aware that they can receive free tutoring
2)helping students form study groups
3)offer a mock midterm and/or final before the official test to help students see where there might be gaps in their knowledge/understanding
Outcome 3 / Measurable
Criteria / Measurement
Tool / Time Frame
Students will be able to communicate effectively in oral, written and graphic form. / Students in HORT 235 & 236 will show a 25% improvement in their landscape design presentations, which include oral, written and graphic formats. / Analysis of landscape design presentation scores throughout HORT 235 & 236. / Beginning of fall quarter through winter quarter.
Results:
2007/08 and 2008/09 combined: These courses were taught by an adjunct professor both years and even though directions were provided in person on how to obtain quantitative data to measure this outcome, only subjective data was provided. A summary of professor observations is provided below:
Oral– A dramatic improvement in overall verbal communication skills including: fluency in design concepts and terminology, ability to relay complex ideas, use of visual aid and composure under pressure was noted.
Written - Scores based upon comprehension of the assignment and basic English skills such as sentence structure increased slightly. A more marked improvement was noted in creative writing as each student developed their own unique writing style.
Graphic – Students made steady and significant improvement in drawing and hand writing. By the end of the course, all students were using graphic communication skills that adequately represented the designer’s intent and that would be understood by an industry professional.
Analysis and Action:
Students seemed to make greater progress in verbal and graphic communication skills as opposed to written communication skills.
1)Develop and implement a scoring matrix/rubric to track progress in above areas from the beginning of fall quarter to the end of winter quarter in order to make the analysis more objective and less subjective
2)Continue to encourage the use of the College’s writing lab to improve writing skills
3)Invite both a landscape client and a professional landscape designer to review landscape designs and provide feedback on the student presentations in the areas of oral, written and graphic communication
Outcome 4 / Measurable
Criteria / Measurement
Tool / Time Frame
Students will think logically and critically / A baseline critical thinking rubric score will be established Spring, 2008. Improvement will be measured in subsequent spring quarters. / College Wide Rubric
Analysis of marketing summary paper for the Mother’s Day plant sale / End of HORT 251, spring quarter.
Results:
HORT 251 was taught by different adjunct faculty during 2008 and 2009. Unfortunately, the faculty member teaching in 2008 did not assign the marketing summary paper upon which critical thinking data could be gathered.
2009: The average critical thinking score (scale of 1-4) for the nine students that finished HORT 251 is 3.11. Six of nine students scored above a “2”.
Analysis and Action:
The overall College average for critical thinking for this time period is 2.88 . The overall College average for classes at the 241 level or above is 3.47.
A benchmark score of 3.11 for HORT 251 seems like a respectable score.
Continue the marketing summary paper in the future and compare those results to this benchmark.
Provide a few examples to students at the beginning of HORT 251 of marketing summary papers that scored a “4” on the college-wide rubric in previous years.
Outcome 5 / Measurable
Criteria / Measurement
Tool / Time Frame
Students will gain satisfactory skills for entry level positions within the horticulture industry. / 75% of employee survey responses will be answered as
“satisfactory skills for entry level” or higher / Employer survey / Survey sent out 12 weeks after student enters work in the horticulture industry
Results:
Two employer surveys were received.
78% of employee survey responses (excluding those items marked “not applicable to this job”) were scored as “satisfactory skills for entry level” or higher.
Analysis and Action:
Continue working to obtain employer surveys from a greater percentage of employers. The College, through the Institutional Research office, will be coordinating a unified employer survey effort for all technical programs beginning in 2010 that should improve the number of surveys received.
Applied Technology Division1