academic program: assessment report 2012-2013 · academic program: assessment report 2012 ......

Academic Program: Assessment Report 2012-2013 Unit/Department: Biology Division: Natural Sciences & Engineering

P&OD 2.11.10 1

Component Description

Program Mission Statement

From your Program Assessment Plan (Statement should articulate the unit/ program mission in support of the institutional mission and include a clearly defined purpose appropriate to collegiate education.)

The mission of the USC Upstate biology program is to provide a biological sciences education in the framework of an undergraduate liberal arts curriculum. As a metropolitan institution, we furnish our students with the knowledge, technical skills, and expertise to contribute to society in the Upstate region of South Carolina and beyond. The biology curriculum prepares students by promoting an understanding of scientific methodologies, concepts, and applications, preparing students for successful careers in research, healthcare, and industry in a global environment.

Goal 1

From your Program Assessment Plan (Describe broad learning outcomes and concepts (what you want students to learn) expressed in general terms (clear communication, problem-solving skills, etc). Goals should focus on discipline-specific outcomes relevant to the program.)

Students graduating with the Bachelor of Science in Biology at USC Upstate will demonstrate: 1. an understanding of the design and conduct of scientific experiments.

Objectives SLO’s (student learning outcomes)

From your Program Assessment Plan (Describes the specific skills, values and attitudes students should be able to exhibit that reflect the broader goals. Objectives (student learning outcomes) transform the general program goals into specific student performance/behaviors that demonstrate student learning and skill development along these goals.

1.1 The student will be able to apply the scientific method when testing hypotheses, designing and conducting experiments.

Assessment Methods

From your Program Assessment Plan (Describes the measure(s) by which the department will know the students are meeting the departmental learning objectives. Includes both direct and indirect assessment. Each SLO should have at least one assessment method.)

1.1. Bio 350 -Scientific method assessment. From the last lab report, students will design and write appropriate hypotheses, methodology/experimental design, results, and conclusions about the hypotheses. Assessed with a grading rubric

1.1. Bio 599 Scientific Method- Assessed using a required oral and written presentation rubric. The rubric for the written presentation is the same as the Bio 350 rubric, and the oral presentation rubric is slightly modified from the written presentation rubric.

Assessment Criteria

Level of achievement you are targeting (Indicate benchmarks, scores on assessment instruments, etc… that would indicate acceptable achievement under your plan)

Acceptable performance will be 70% of students demonstrating success in meeting the SLO's.


P&OD 2.11.10 2

Assessment Results

Actual results and data collected (Make sure to break down data by subgroups (e.g. other campuses or emphases). As appropriate, also include item or category analysis.)

Each biology faculty member evaluated one paper from each course. Oral presentations were scored based on the average score awarded by the Bio 599 instructor and all other faculty in attendance. For Bio 350, 14 of 31 lab reports were randomly selected and assessed; for Bio 599, 14 of 34 papers were randomly selected and evaluated, and all 34 oral presentations were evaluated. Figure 1.1 shows that student performance for this year and four previous years consistently exceeded the 70% success criterion, with scores ranging from 85 to 100 percent of papers or oral presentations deemed acceptable (acceptable = satisfactory or excellent). The percentage of acceptable papers for Bio 350 decreased somewhat, perhaps due to increased numbers of transfer students who may not have experienced similar emphasis on the scientific methods in the courses they had previously taken. The strong performance in Bio 599 may reflect the strong performance of the cohort, many of whom would have taken Bio 350 as part of the high scoring 2010-11 cohort.

Action Plan What actions or modifications have been or will be made based on this assessment?

No actions or modification are necessary, as all three substantially exceeded the success criterion.

0102030405060708090

100

Bio 350 Written Bio 599 Oral Bio 599 WrittenPe

rcen

tage

s

Figure 1.1. Student acceptable performance on scientific methods using grading rubrics. Line

indicates 70% acceptable criterion.

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 3

Implementation and Evaluation of Previous Years’ “Action Plan”

How was the action plan identified in the previous year’s report implemented this y ear, and what was the impact?

No action plan identified in last year’s report.


P&OD 2.11.10 4


Goal 2


Students graduating with the Bachelor of Science in Biology at USC Upstate will demonstrate: 2. an understanding of important concepts and methods in the biological sciences.



2.1 The student will be able to describe the structure and function of cellular components.

2.2 The student will be able to discuss and give examples of macro and micro evolution. 2.3 The student will be able to explain and recognize interrelationships and dependencies between abiotic and biotic

components of ecosystems

Assessment Methods


2.1 Bio 302- Structural and cellular components: Exam questions will assess students’ knowledge of these concepts. They will appear on a regular in-class test and their scores will be compared to a pre-test given at the beginning of the semester which tests their knowledge of the basic concepts covered in BIO 101 and 102 that relate to BIO 302.

2.2 Bio 301-Macroevolution assessment methods:

1. A set of Lecture exam questions will assess the student learning outcome.

Bio 301 - Microevolution assessment methods:

1. A set of Lecture exam questions on this topic will assess this SLO

2.3 Bio 301 will be assessed using 1. a set of Lecture exam questions

2.1 – 2.3 Bio 599 The standardized national Major Field Test (MFT) will be used to assess the SLO content/concept knowledge for biology seniors. Results will be used to adjust course and curricular content offerings as required.


P&OD 2.11.10 5

Assessment Criteria


Acceptable performance will be 70% of students demonstrating success in meeting the SLO's related to Bio 301 and 302. For the MFT, acceptable performance will be class summary data at or above the 50th national percentile.


P&OD 2.11.10 6

Assessment Results


Bio 302 results on structural and cellular components this year, as in previous years, exceeded expectations (Figure 2.1). Eight questions were used on the pre- and post-tests. For all seven years, scores on the pre-test were below the 70% success criterion level, but post-test scores increased to about 80% correct, above the 70% success criterion level. Students’ understanding of this material likely further improves in subsequent elective courses.

0102030405060708090

100

Spring2007

Spring2008

Spring2009

Spring2010

Spr/Su2011

Spr/Su2012

Spring2013

Perc

enta

ges

Figure 2.1 Percentage correct answers on pre and post test questions, Bio 302. Line indicates 70% success

criterion.

Pre-test

Final Exam


P&OD 2.11.10 7

Assessment Results


Bio 301 showed reasonable results for understanding of macroevolution (Figure 2.2). Both lecture and lab macroevolution scores averaged across the two course offerings in the 2012-13 academic year as well as the previous six years nearly met or exceeded the 70% success criterion level. We note that we assess understanding of macroevolution, microevolution and abiotic/biotic factors in a sophomore-level course because it is a relevant course required of all students; however, understanding of this material likely further improves in subsequent elective courses they take. Strong understanding of these materials by the students’ senior year is evident in the students’ performance in questions relating to evolution on the MFT exam (see Fig 2.5 below).

0102030405060708090

100

Perc

enta

ge

Figure 2.2. Percentage correct answers to macroevolution questions. Line indicates 70% success

criterion.

Lecture

Lab


P&OD 2.11.10 8

Both lecture and lab microevolution scores averaged across the two course offerings this past year as well as the previous five years all met or exceeded the 70% success criterion level (Figure 2.3).

0102030405060708090

100

Perc

enta

ge

Figure 2.3. Percentage correct answers to microevolution questions. Line indicates 70% success

criterion.

Lecture

Lab


P&OD 2.11.10 9

Lecture scores for the 2012-13 academic year nearly reached the 70% success criterion level, and laboratory scores reached this criterion (Figure 2.4). Results were similar over the previous three years, with somewhat higher scores previous to that.

Performance was weaker in 2012-13 than in previous academic years for percentage of correct answers to macroevolution, microevolution and biotic/abiotic factors. We hypothesize this decreased performance is attributable to an increased proportion of Bio 301 students who took the prerequisite courses (Bio 101 and Bio 102) at other institutions. Data for percentage of correct answers for 2012-13 in these three categories is only available in aggregate, so we cannot directly test this hypothesis; however, we can indirectly test it by comparing final course grades for Bio 301 for students who took Introductory Biology at USC Upstate compared to other institutions. For three recent course offerings (Fall 2011, Fall 2012, and Spring 2013), 46% of students who enrolled in Bio 301 completed the Introductory Biology sequence at USC Upstate. Of these students, two-thirds (66%) completed Bio 301 and received a C or higher. In contrast, among students who took Introductory Biology at other institutions, only 41% received a C or better in Bio 301. Three additional students did not take Introductory Biology in college because they had AP credit, and all three received a C or higher in Bio 301. These data suggest that our Introductory Biology sequence prepares our students to learn the material about macroevolution, microevolution and biotic/abiotic factors better than Introductory Biology sequences at most institutions from where our transfer students arrive.

Perc

enta

ges


P&OD 2.11.10 10

In the 2012-13 academic year, our students’ performance on the Major Field Test (MFT) was exceptional – our average score was higher than 86% of other institutions (Figure 2.5). To put this in context, we created a randomized sample of average SAT scores (or ACT scores converted into SAT score equivalents) for incoming freshman for 50 of the 488 other institutions that also administered the MFT in biology since 2010. Out of this sample, USC Upstate only had an average SAT score for incoming students higher than 22% of other institutions. This difference in the relative ranking of incoming first year students and graduating seniors indicates that the above-average performance of our students on the MFT is not attributable to them arriving at college better prepared than their peers at other institutions. No change in the MFT test was announced in the last year, so the result is apparently not due to changes in the test itself. Instead, the result suggests that our program tends to outperform other programs in increasing students’ knowledge of biology and analytical reasoning.

In the 2012-13 academic year, our students’ performance also far exceeded the national average in all four sub-areas (cell biology, molecular biology and genetics, organismal biology, and evolution and ecology), with our average score higher than at least 80% of other schools in every category. We note that this cohort of seniors was anomalously strong, and we anticipate some regression toward our long term mean in subsequent years.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Overall Cell Bio MolecBio/Genetics

Organismal Evol/Ecol

Perc

entil

e

Figure 2.5 Percentile ranking for summary class data for the five most recent academic years. Horizontal line indicates 50

percentile success criterion

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 11

Results from the MFT may be further divided into nine assessment indicators (Figure 2.6), including eight content areas and analytical skills. In the 2012-13 academic year, our students scored exceptionally well in all subject areas (biochemistry, cell biology, molecular biology and genetics, population genetics and evolution, and ecology) and in analytical skills. Students outperformed 74% of other institutions in knowledge of animals and outperformed at least 80% of other institutions for all other measures. We think that this across-the-board improvement in performance of our seniors likely relates to our modifications to our Introductory Biology sequence in 2008-09, and possibly also to greater enforcement of prerequisites, such that students in Senior Seminar should have had the appropriate background for material covered on this exam. This class was an anomalously strong group of students, and we anticipate some regression towards our long-term mean in future semesters.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

entil

e

Figure 2.6. Percentile rankings for Assessment Indicators. Horizontal line represents 50 percentile success criterion

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 12


Our analysis of final grades in Bio 301 showed that students who completed the prerequisite courses (Bio 101 and Bio 102) at USC Upstate were more likely to complete the course and score a C or higher. We would, however, like to link this more directly to SLO 2.2 (understanding of microevolution and macroevolution) and 2.3 (understanding of interrelationships and dependencies between abiotic and biotic components of ecosystems). To accomplish this, we will ask faculty teaching Bio 301 in 2013-14 to survey students with regard to where they completed Bio 102, and then to record the percentage of correct answers to relevant questions separately for these two student groups. This analysis will allow us to determine whether modifications to our Introductory Biology sequence would be likely to improve performance on SLO 2.2 and 2.3.

The content covered by SLO 2.2 and 2.3 is most directly taught in Bio 302 (Introduction to Cell and Molecular Biology) and Bio 301 (Introduction to Ecology and Evolutionary Biology), respectively, but both courses rely on foundational materials taught in the Introductory Biology sequence. We have documented that students who arrive at USC Upstate with less strong backgrounds in quantitative skills tend to achieve lower grades in Introductory Biology I, and those students with a weaker grasp on Introductory Biology materials who go on to Bio 301 and Bio 302 are likely to have more trouble mastering the content of those courses. To address this problem, we made two substantial changes to Introductory Biology I. First, we have instituted a requirement that takes effect in Fall 2013 that students must either place into Math 121 or complete Math 120 prior to enrolling in Introductory Biology I. Additionally, a requirement was instituted that students placing into Math 121 must take an augmented version of Introductory Biology I that includes an hour of mandatory supplemental instruction. For both groups of students, we hope that when they reach Bio 301 and Bio 302, their stronger quantitative backgrounds and additional content and skills that they lean in the augmented sections of Bio 101 will lead to stronger performance. Students affected by these new requirements would first reach Bio 301 and Bio 302 in the 2014-2015 academic year, so we will monitor then whether overall performance on SLO 2.2 and 2.3 improves.


P&OD 2.11.10 13



1. The continued improved performance across the board this year may be attributable to changes we instituted in our introductory biology sequence in Spring 2009, such that then first-year students who took 5 years to finish would most likely have taken the MFT exam in the 2012-13 academic year.

2. Our action plan in 2010-2011 stated that we would enforce prerequisites for senior seminar, the course in which students take the MFT exam. Previously, students enrolled in the course despite being inadequately prepared, and this harmed their performance in both the course and their MFT exam. Starting in 2011-12, we asked all faculty to rigorously check prerequisites for all students in senior seminar, such that seats would go to the qualified students. We do not have direct data on the impact of this change because we do not know the identities of students lacking adequate prerequisites who were deterred from signing up for senior seminar, but we have seen continued improvement since then.

3. In 2011-12, we recognized continued weak performance in plant and animal biology that we potentially attributed to a reduced focus on these topics in the Introductory Biology sequence. To address this perceived problem, we changed the requirement for a field course to a requirement for a field or organismal course. Previously, the only two regularly offered field courses during spring or fall semester were Field Ecology or Plant Taxonomy, both senior level courses, with Plant Taxonomy taught in the spring semester. To fulfill this field-course requirement, many students either took Principles of Ecology instead of Plant Taxonomy or took Plant Taxonomy the semester after taking the MFT. Consequently, the requirement that students take a field course reduced the likelihood that they would take a course related to plants or animals in a time frame that would impact their MFT scores. The revised requirement should boost our enrollment in organismal courses, including those related more directly to plant biology and animal diversity The new requirement is in place for students matriculating in the 2012-13 academic year, so it will take a few years to determine whether it further boosts students’ performance in the plant and animal subsections of the MFT.

4. Although we are meeting or nearly meeting our criterion of 70% success for students showing understanding of aspects of cell biology, evolution and ecology (Figures 2.2 – 2.4 above), we are working towards the goal of all students showing competency in these areas. One change across our curriculum that we instituted in the 2012-13 catalog is that students must earn a grade of C or better by their second attempt at any major’s biology course in order for the course to fulfill a requirement for the major (this policy had been in place for one year, but withdrawals had not previously counted as an attempt, so the policy had limited effect). In the 2010-11 assessment report, we documented a trend that students who retook courses typically scored similarly in each repetition. Because the students are assessed each semester they take the course, these underachieving students are disproportionately represented in our sample. The presence of multiple repeaters in a course also has the potential to detract from a productive learning environment, resulting in lower outcomes for classmates. Finally, student awareness of the new retake should have motivated students to work toward a stronger performance during their first course attempt. However, in 2012-13, we did not detect any increase in performance in understanding of aspects of cell biology, evolution or ecology. This may be because nearly half of the students in Bio 301 (and likely a similar proportion of students in Bio 302) were transfer students, typically in their first two semesters at USC Upstate. Consequently, during these courses, they may not have had enough experience with the level of performance expected to recognize that they were in danger of failing to earn a C or higher.


P&OD 2.11.10 14


P&OD 2.11.10 15


Goal 3


Students graduating with the Bachelor of Science in Biology at USC Upstate will demonstrate: 3. knowledge of and skill utilizing appropriate laboratory techniques in the biological sciences.



3.1 The student will demonstrate certain laboratory techniques (such as light microscopy, gel electrophoresis, population sampling, aseptic techniques, micro and macro pipetting).

Assessment Methods


3.1 Bio 350 - Laboratory Techniques Assessment: Laboratory technique pertinent to genetics experimentation will be graded. Lab book will also be assessed.

Assessment Criteria



Assessment Results


In the 2012-13 academic year, students were successful in demonstrating laboratory techniques. Of the 30 students evaluated in the 2012-13 academic year, success was 100% for all techniques except gel electrophoresis, which had a 93% success rate. These values are in line with or better than results from previous years (Figure 3.1). The technique with the lowest success rate (but exceeding the success criterion level) was DNA digestion and electrophoresis. The lower success rate for this exercise results from it being a multistep process, such that even low error rates in individual steps are compounded, resulting in a higher error rate overall. Many students gain further competency in electrophoresis in Molecular Cell Biology (Bio 550) after completing this course.


P&OD 2.11.10 16


No action plan is needed at this time.

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

enta

ges

Figure 3.1. Percentage of students with appropriate lab technique over the five most recent years. Line indicates 70%

success criterion.

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 17



In our 2011-12 report, we included an action plan of investigating whether students in 2012-13 who did not successfully perform gel electrophoresis lacked the most relevant prerequisite course, Bio 302 (Introduction to Cell and Molecular Biology). Students perform gel electrophoresis in Bio 302, so students with this prerequisite should already be skilled in this technique. Our analysis turned out to be weak because only two students failed to succeed in this technique. Of these two students, one had had previously taken Bio 302 but the other lacked this prerequisite. In a sample of 12 students from the course who succeeded in performing gel electrophoresis, 10 students (83%) had met the Bio 302 prerequisite while 2 students had not. These data suggest that students who meet the Bio 302 prerequisite are more likely to succeed in performing gel electrophoresis, but we can not rule out that different success rates between students with or without this prerequisite are due to chance alone.


P&OD 2.11.10 18


Goal 4


Students graduating with the Bachelor of Science in Biology at USC Upstate will demonstrate: 4. an ability to critically analyze, evaluate and interpret scientific information.



4.1 The student will be able to access, recognize, summarize and critically analyze primary literature.

4.2 The student will be able to apply and interpret descriptive and inferential statistics

Assessment Methods


4.1 Bio 599 - This SLO will be assessed using a required research paper and an oral presentation that will be evaluated by a rubric.

4.2 Bio 350 – This SLO will be assessed using a required research paper that will be evaluated

by a rubric.

Assessment Criteria



Assessment Results


In Bio 599, the goal on scientific information was evaluated with both written and oral presentations. The rubric for written reports contained a section on Critical Analysis of Primary Literature (Figure 4.1). All of the 14 papers evaluated in 2012-13 were judged acceptable or excellent. This 100% success rate continues the trend of an increasing percentage of students meeting this criterion over the previous four years.


P&OD 2.11.10 19

0

20

40

60

80

100

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Perc

enta

ges

Figure 4.1. Percentages of senior seminar papers that acceptably summarize and provide critical analysis of

primary literature. Line indicates 70% success criterion.


P&OD 2.11.10 20

We assessed the oral presentation skills of 34 students in senior seminar (Bio 599). Previously, the rubric had contained two relevant items: Scientific Methods and Understanding of Data Analysis. We note that we report the students’ success in demonstrating an understanding of scientific methods during their oral presentations in SLO 1.1 (see Figure 1.1), so we are ceasing to report it here to avoid redundancy. Additionally, the department decided that the latter category (Understanding of Data Analysis) was conflating two different skill sets, data analysis specifically and comprehension of research more generally. There was concern that overall comprehension was good, but understanding of data analysis weaker. To investigate these skills independently, the category of Understanding of Data Analysis was spit into two: Data Analysis and Comprehension (overall). For the past five years, in all items, students were rated as acceptable over 80% of the time, well above the 70% success criterion (Figure 4.2). We note that data analysis skills, though acceptable, are indeed somewhat weaker than overall comprehension.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

ScientificMethods

Understandingof Data Analysis

Data analysis Comprehension

Perc

enta

ges

Figure 4.2. Percentages of senior seminar oral presentations that were satisfactory or excellent in scientific information

areas. Line indicates 70% success criterion.

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 21

Students evaluated in Bio 350 showed reasonably strong student performance with regard to usage of descriptive and inferential statistics (Figure 4.3). Over 80 percent of papers the past five years were judged to be satisfactory or excellent, well above the 70 percent success criterion.


All success criteria for Goal 4 are being met at this time. Nevertheless, as we strive for continual improvement, we have identified as a long-term goal finding a way to offer a biology-specific statistics course for students to take in lieu of, or in addition to, Math 102. Our students tend to have a stronger quantitative background than the general population of undergraduates at USC Upstate, so we think they would benefit from a course that covers some additional material related to common inferential statistics in biology (e.g. ANOVA, chi-square). We are not currently staffed to teach this course, but we will continue to consider possible ways to bring a course like this into our curriculum.

0102030405060708090

100

Descriptive & Inferential Statistics

Perc

enta

ges

Figure 4.3. Percentages of genetics lab reports that were satisfactory or excellent in use of statistics. Line

indicates 70% success criterion.

2008-082009-102010-112011-12


P&OD 2.11.10 22



No action plan last year for this goal.


P&OD 2.11.10 23


Goal 5


Students graduating with the Bachelor of Science in Biology at USC Upstate will demonstrate: 5. effective communication skills.



5.1 The student will prepare oral and written reports in a standard scientific format. succ

Assessment Methods


5.1 Bio 350 - Written reports in scientific format: The last lab report, structure of paper and appropriate use of the different sections of paper will be evaluated. 5.1 Bio 599- This SLO will be assessed using a required research paper and an oral presentation

that will be evaluated by a rubric. 5.1 Bio 599- This SLO will be assessed using a required research paper and an oral

presentation that will be evaluated by a rubric.

Assessment Criteria



Assessment Results


The evaluation of the lab report in Bio 350 assessed three aspects: organization, mechanics, and references (Figure 5.1). In 2012-13, for both organization and references, performance was perfect. Performance on mechanics was lower but did meet the 70% success criterion. All three measures show similar results to previous years. We think that performance for organization and references are stronger than for mechanics because the student needs to follower a smaller set of clear rules to succeed in the prior categories, while mechanics requires applying many rules, which are both more nebulous and require substantially longer time periods to master.


P&OD 2.11.10 24

0102030405060708090

100

Organization Mechanics References

Perc

enta

ges

Figure 5.1. Percentages of genetics lab reports that were satisfactory or excellent. Line indicates 70%

success criterion.

2008-08

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 25

The evaluation of Bio 599 written papers also assessed the same three aspects as Bio 350: organization, mechanics, and references (Figure 5.2). Remarkably, all papers met our criteria for being acceptable in all three categories. For organization, the same outcome was observed over the previous three years, and for references, all papers were also deemed acceptable in 2011-12, representing an improvement from the three years prior to that. As we have noted above, our cohort of seniors in 2012-13 anecdotally seemed to be the strongest in memory in our program. The strength of this cohort may be anomalous or may relate to curricular changes and increased enforcement of prerequisites over the past three years, resulting in our students experiencing increased rigor prior to reaching senior seminar.

0102030405060708090

100


Perc

enta

ges

Figure 5.2. Percentages of senior seminar papers that were satisfactory or excellent. Line indicates 70%

success criterion

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 26

In previous years, the department had evaluated the references in senior seminar oral presentations. In 2012, it was decided that the fleeting nature of oral presentations made this evaluation unreasonable, and that references were more reasonably evaluated in written form (see Fig 5.2). Thus, references are no longer evaluated for senior seminar oral presentations. Thirty-four presentations were evaluated for organization and mechanics. The Bio 599 oral presentations showed a high level of performance in both categories, with at least 85% in each group judged satisfactory or excellent (Figure 5.3). This continues the strong performance over the previous four years, and we note that presentations falling short of the criterion were very close to meeting it (usually scoring a 6 on a rubric for which a score of 7 was deemed acceptable).

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


Perc

enta

ges

Figure 5.3. Percentages of senior seminar oral presentations that were satisfactory or excellent.

Line is 70% success criterion.

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13


P&OD 2.11.10 27


For senior seminar (Bio 599), we had focused over the 2010-11 and 2011-12 academic years on spending more time teaching grammar and mechanics, as well as on providing faculty materials to aid in this endeavor. Distribution of pedagogical materials was, however, uneven and not systematic (see below). To remedy this situation, we have made the files available on a university server available to all departmental faculty (the Biology folder on the ‘P drive’). We have also assigned a faculty member (the assessment coordinator) to be responsible for emailing all senior seminar instructors at the beginning of each semester to remind them that these files are available. We will assess success by surveying faculty members teaching senior seminar at the end of each semester in order to determine whether they were aware these resources were available and whether they used them or other materials in order to teach grammar and mechanics.



In the 2010-2011 assessment report, our action plan included devoting more time to grammar and mechanics in Senior Seminar. This change was implemented by multiple instructors during the 2011-12 academic year and may have accounted for the improvement in mechanics in Senior Seminar that year. In 2011-12, our action plan included providing materials to faculty teaching Senior Seminar in order to help them teach grammar and mechanics. Material developed by one faculty member as well as material provided by the Writing Center was used for this purpose. We observed that mechanics improved dramatically. The emphasis placed on writing in senior seminar sections likely helped students learn some material that they had not known or had forgotten. Additionally, the emphasis helped students recognize that they would be assessed based on writing, as well as content, such that they placed greater emphasis on mechanics in their writing. Longer term success in maintaining a high success rate for mechanics requires a system to disseminate the teaching materials to Senior Seminar faculty, particularly as new faculty rotate into the course. Files were emailed to faculty during Fall 2012, but some additional faculty teaching the course in Spring 2013 may not have received the files.

In the 2011-12 assessment report, we included an action plan of adding an exercise to Genetics (Bio 350) in which students write several portions of lab reports and receive feedback prior to writing a complete lab report at the end of the semester. This change would be most likely to immediately affect the percentage of Genetics lab reports that were at least satisfactory in organization, mechanics and references. Of these three categories, performance had previously been lowest in mechanics, so there was the most potential to see improvement in that category. We observed that the percentage of reports with at least acceptable mechanics did improve, though it is too early to discern whether this represents an upward trend or simply a regression effect from the lower success of the previous year.

academic program: assessment report 2012-2013 · academic program: assessment report 2012 ......

Documents