CASSC Research and Testing Committee

M I N U T E S

Meeting: Monday, April 07, 2014

Building 5 (Bonnie McCabe Hall), Wolfson Campus, Room 5620

1-min_04_14.docx; 05-16-2014 1

Present: Ana Maria Bradley-Hess, Ian Cobham Regina Johnson, David Kaiser (Co-Chairperson), Rulx Jean-Bart,

Juan Carlos Meza, Dora Mejia-Montoya, Mayte Pino, Silvio Rodriguez (Co-Chairperson), Cynthia Schuemann, Susan Thomas, Marc Webb

Not Present: Julio Fernandez de Cueto, Christine Dundas, David Heredia, Ivonne Lamazares, Marisel Madrigal, Leighton Spence,

Ivo Rokovich, Carol Tulikangas I. Review of Minutes

Minutes of the meeting of February 24, 2014 were approved.

II. Standing Item(s)

A. Research – No report was given

B. Placement Criteria document 2014-2015

Silvio Rodriguez reminded the discipline/area representatives of their role in the annual review process and that next year’s

document will include more information than in the past due to the implementation of SB 1720 and EAP curriculum changes

at MDC. He then went over Draft #3 (03/10/2014) of the 2014-2015 Placement Criteria Document, discussed the suggested

changes with the Committee, and informed them that since the last meeting, the Student Deans Council, Academic

Leadership Council, and Campus CASSCs supported the document and the next steps in the review process would be by

College CASSC and the Executive Committee. The most recent version Draft #3 (05/06/2014) includes the latest changes

that were recommended by Committee on 04/07/2014 and subsequent minor changes. It is available via the Placement

Criteria website at http://www.mdc.edu/main/testing/criteria/placement_criteria.aspx.

C. Testing Fees effective July 1, 2014

Silvio Rodriguez reported that the Testing Directors are recommending changes to the testing fees as explained below. The

changes were supported by the Committee at today’s meeting. The next steps in the review process would be by the

Student Deans Council, Academic Leadership Council, and College Provost for Operations. The 2013-2014 Testing Fees

are available at: http://www.mdc.edu/main/testing/gentesting/fees.aspx.

Testing Director’s recommended changes for 2014-2015

DSST (DANTES) = $35.00 flat fee – same as CLEP

(this is a decrease from an average fee of $60.00 due to the current $30.00 per hour fee with an average test time of

90 minutes)

Note:

The DANTES administrations used to be paper-based and un-timed. The established rate was based upon the Distance

Learning fee. The current format is computer-based similar to CLEP and most institutions in Florida have the same fee for

both exams.

DANTES = Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support DSST = DANTES Subject Standardized Tests

CASAS/TABE Post-Test retesting fee from free to $10

Note: Subsequent to this meeting Silvio Rodriguez and Sherry Joseph, Adult Education Director agreed that this

change would not move forward because additional discussion was needed.

CASSC Research and Testing Committee

M I N U T E S

Meeting: Monday, April 07, 2014

Building 5 (Bonnie McCabe Hall), Wolfson Campus, Room 5620

1-min_04_14.docx; 05-16-2014 2

III. New Business

A. Research Requests

The Committee reviewed, discussed and voted on the following requests:

Proposal title: A Phenomenological Investigation of the Beliefs, Expectations, and Epistemology of College Freshmen Primary Researcher: Warren Dittmar / Walden University (2014-03-03) Adjunct professor Warren Dittmar is resubmitting his research proposal to study 20 students enrolled in their first year of Mi-ami Dade College using face-to-face interviews and a survey to discover freshmen college students’ beliefs, and expecta-tions. He plans to interview 10 students and ask the other 10 to fill out a survey. Professor Dittmar has made some chang-es to the application to address two concerns indicated by the committee - how the research would benefit MDC and the ex-tensive amount of time required for students participating. (Approved)

Proposal title: A Narrative Inquiry of Successful Black Male Students Primary Researcher: Malou C. Harrison / Walden University (2014-03-18) Malou Harrison would like to study 16 black male to understand the experiences of successful Black male college students. She proposes to conduct a focus group meeting of 8 participants and individual interviews with the other 8 participants. (Approved – the committee would like to see the results)

Proposal title: Gonsalves Instructional Vocabulary Experience (G.I.V.E) Primary Researcher: David M. Gonsalves / Barry University (2014-03-20)

As part of his Master’s work, professor Gonsalves, adjunct at West, would like to implement a new teaching strategy in his remedial writing class, and survey the students on their experience. (Approved – the committee would like to see the results)

--- Follow-up ---

Proposal title: Army ROTC On-Campus Market Potential Study Primary Researcher: Dr. Bert Huggins / US Army Cadet Command (2014-03-20b)

Cadet Command is conducting an Army ROTC On-Campus Market Potential Study to review attitudes and perceptions of students at colleges and universities across the United States. If approved they will send one of their researchers during the week of April 7th to conduct the survey in an indoor area where freshmen and sophomores congregate. (approved via email 04/04/2014)

B. FOCUS 2 Presentation of 2013-1 Pilot and Findings (Marc Webb)

Marc Webb’s presentation included information FOCUS 2, an online career assessment and exploration software and that pilot data produced favorable results which led to a recommendation for a Fall 2014-1 implementation (see attached).

C. Committee membership

Silvio Rodriguez informed the Committee that membership representation from the Adult Education area would be invalua-ble considering they have one section of the Placement Criteria Document and that many research projects are related to their area. The Committee voted to include the member TBA effective with the 2014-2015 academic year meeting schedule.

IV. Information Item(s)

A. College Procedure 4055: Services Provided For Students With Disabilities (Revised 1/14/2014)

Silvio Rodriguez informed the Committee that this procedure was recently revised and approved by the

Executive Committee and that they should share it with their colleagues.

B. Postsecondary Industry Certification Funding List

Silvio Rodriguez informed the Committee that MDC testing agreements are being pursued with multiple vendors that offer

eligible certification exam which supports the College’s efforts in receiving State funds. A recent agreement was for the ad-

dition of the IT exams offered with Pearson VUE.

CASSC Research and Testing Committee

M I N U T E S

Meeting: Monday, April 07, 2014

Building 5 (Bonnie McCabe Hall), Wolfson Campus, Room 5620

1-min_04_14.docx; 05-16-2014 3

Vl. Reports

A. Testing Directors – Marc Webb reported on the following:

NCTA Test Center Certification status, Testing’s interest in developing an online QEP assessment at would ‘certify’ MDC employees, implementation of RegisterBlast’s online appointment system beginning with Wolfson Campus, and ensuring that remote testing at MDC is being conducted only through the campus test centers. , .

B. Deans – Anna Maria Bradley-Hess reported that registration for Fall 2014 begins June 16, 2014 and that legislation to allow

a local option (HB 113) is moving through the legislature.

C. Mathematics - Ian Cobham reported that the Math discipline would be holding a retreat at the Wolfson Campus on

March 14, 2014. Topics include the use of modular instruction and strategies for supplemental instruction.

D. Advisement and Career Services - Susan Thomas reported that Advisement and Career Services is working on their

annual effectiveness report.

Next Meeting:

The next meeting of the Research & Testing Committee will be Monday, May 19, 2014 at 2:00pm in building 5000 (Bonnie McCabe Hall), Wolfson Campus Room 5620.

Distribution:

CASSC Research & Testing Committee Rolando Montoya, Provost for Operations Lenore Rodicio, Provost for Academic and Student Affairs

Career Planning Readiness Self Assessment

academic pathway and Career Exploration

Action Planning, Decision Making

SAI Testing & Assessment Workgroup

Fall 2013-1 Pilot Results and Recommendations Fall 2013-1 Pilot Results and Recommendations

Medical Campus Marina Hernandez Paola Document

Rebeca Garcia

Kendall Campus Jose Rodriguez

InterAmerican Campus Dr. Julio Fernandez de Cueto

Dr. Victor Okafor

Wolfson Campus Marc Webb, Project Lead

Lourdes Delgado Isabel Martinez

District at Wolfson Campus Rene Garcia

Silvio Rodriguez Marisa Yates Adam Porro

What is FOCUS 2?

FOCUS 2 is an online, interactive, self-guided career, academic pathway and education planning system.

2

Comparison with Choices Planner and Career Coach:

FOCUS 2 • combines the features of both • Is more user friendly • Is more directed with MDC pathways • Allows for robust reporting • Is capable of a using Single Sign On (SSO)

What does FOCUS 2 Offer MDC Students? For students who are: • unsure of their academic

pathway • unaware of their academic

pathway offered at the College and related occupations

• wondering what to do with their academic pathway

• unsure of which careers best suit them

• interested in developing a career plan that works for them

• ready to make informed career decisions

Students can: • select an academic

pathway based on interests and aspirations

• discover occupations by matching personal preferences and attributes

• map out a career plan, present and future

• make informed career decisions

3

Ready

• Career Planning Readiness: Orientation to FOCUS 2 & the Career Planning Process

Assess

• Assessment: Interests, Personality, Skills, Values, Needs

Explore

• Explore Options: Identify and explore academic pathways & Occupations matching personal attributes

Decide

• Decision Making: Select academic pathway & explore Career Paths • Action Plan: Map out steps to achieve goals

FOCUS 2’s Rigorous Decision Making Model

4

FOCUS 2 Pilot at MDC

Results from Fall Term

2013-1

Cross Functional College-wide Pilot Conducted in Fall 2013

• Based on recommendations of the Testing & Assessment team, MDC has a one year contract to pilot use (July 2013 – August 2014)

• 537 students at 7 campuses utilized FOCUS 2

• 5 Faculty, 9 staff, and 5 administrators participated – With advising caseloads

– As part of a course

– With undecided and prospective students

Student Findings

Survey Results Show Positive Impact of FOCUS 2 Assessment

• About 40% of students used FOCUS 2 more than once • 70% use the Career Readiness and Self Assessments

sections of FOCUS 2 (required sections)

• Occupations section was not as well used – Benefits need to be better explained to students

• 16% increase in students who were ‘Certain’ or ‘Very Certain’ of their program of study after using FOCUS 2

• 11% decrease in the number of students who were ‘Undecided’ after using FOCUS 2

Notes: 537 (100%) of 537 Students Completed the Pre-Assessment Survey 248 (46%) of 537 Students Completed the Post Assessment Survey

Post Assessment Survey Findings FOCUS 2 Attributes % of Students Responding

Positively

Ease of Use 90%

Usefulness 77%

Benefited from using FOCUS 2 75%

Understand career goals/choices 73%

Identifying interests 72%

Identifying appealing career choices 67%

Faculty, Staff, and Administrator Findings

FOCUS 2 Used in a Variety of Ways with Students

• As part of a course – Courses

• CLP 1006

• HSC 0003

• SLS 1505

• SLS 1125

• EAP Level 6

– Used as course assignment in conjunction with textbook chapter

– Results reviewed

• As part of holistic advising – Students instructed to

complete • Via email

• In person or part of a group

• By phone

– Results reviewed

Faculty, Staff, and Administrator Also Gave FOCUS 2 Positive Ratings

Rated on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the highest

• The FOCUS 2 platform was easy for me to navigate and utilize

• It was easy for me to generate FOCUS 2 reports

• The FOCUS 2 results were easy for me to interpret

• Overall experience using FOCUS 2 with your students

• Overall reaction to FOCUS 2 by your students

4.2

3.8

4.1

4.1

3.9

Proposed Next Steps Plan

Senior Advisor Caseloads • Require completion of FOCUS 2 prior to mandatory

advisement session in Fall 2014-1 for FTIC DE 14902 (pre-bachelor of arts) students. Strongly recommend for any other student. – Students will bring their FOCUS 2 report with them to their

mandatory advisement session during 2014-1

Career Exploration Referrals • Recommend FOCUS 2 for students needing career

advisement – Students will complete FOCUS 2 on or off campus, bring

results to career advisement follow-up session, and advisor will review results with student

Proposed Next Steps Plan Continued

Faculty use in courses

• Promote FOCUS 2 to SLS faculty for optional use in courses

– Use in new FYE SLS 1106 course

• Available for use with SLS 1505, SLS 1510, and SLS 1125

– Provide training and support for faculty who use FOCUS 2

– Available to any faculty member wishing to use FOCUS 2

Next Steps • Present FOCUS 2 Pilot findings to:

– Advisement and Career Services Directors (3/25/14) – Student Services Directors - 18’s (TBA) – CASSC Research and Testing Committee (4/7/14) – Student Deans Council (4/10/14) – SLS Faculty (4/3/14) – Academic Leadership Council (TBA)

• To be done before scaled implementation (2015-1)

– Advisement and Career Services Directors will work on updating each academic pathway in the FOCUS 2 system with its appropriate MDC Communities of Interest (COI) • Using the Sub-Titles feature • Assigning degrees to academic pathways specific to MDC

– Add FOCUS 2 user access to faculty, staff, and administrators – Work with IT to develop SSO and Odyssey Integration

Testing & Assessment Workgroup Contact Information

Marc Webb, Project Lead mwebb@mdc.edu

(305) 237-3188

Silvio Rodriguez silvio.rodriguez@mdc.edu

(305) 237-7492

Adam Porro aporro@mdc.edu

(305) 237-3611

Dr. Julio Fernandez de Cueto jferna13@mdc.edu

(305) 237-6175

Rebeca Garcia rgarcia2@mdc.edu

(305) 237-4310

Marisa Yates myates@mdc.edu

(305) 237-7498

Marisa Yates jrodrodri28@mdc.edu

(305) 237-2339

Marina Hernandez mhernan1@mdc.edu

(305) 237-4477

Rene Garcia rgarcia@mdc.edu

(305) 237-3012

Lourdes Delgado ldelgado@mdc.edu

(305) 237-3565

Dr. Victor Okafor vokafor@mdc.edu

(305) 237-6717

Isabel Martinez imartine@mdc.edu

(305) 237-3730

Paola Documet pdocumet@mdc.edu

(305) 237-4048

http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=Thank You!&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=SCjuM-r1x7eKWM&tbnid=2X3O7AwZPd8nVM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=https://bigjoeonthego.com/thank-you/&ei=nhMJUoauDcmiyAH4noEI&bvm=bv.50500085,d.b2I&psig=AFQjCNFsK-U-UWsvLnCBnT8Y-bQh_wELPg&ust=1376412944839089

1 | P a g e

MDC 2013 1 FOCUS 2 Pilot Results for Students Data Source: FOCUS 2 Platform

Data as of: January 14, 2014

537 Students utilized FOCUS 2 in 2013-1

Utilization by Campus: o Hialeah 61 11.3% o Homestead 13 2.4% o InterAmerican 93 17.3% o Kendall 41 7.6% o Medical 15 2.8% o North 88 16.4% o West 0 0% o Wolfson 226 42.1%

FOCUS 2 Section Completion Percentages:

Section Order

Section Title

% of Students

Completing Section

Career Readiness

1 Educational Plans & Career Goals 73.0%

2 Academic Strengths & Weaknesses 73.7%

3 Career & Educational Accomplishments 68.9%

4 Career Planning Status 71.3%

5 Personal Development Needs 69.5%

Self Assessments

6 Work Interest Assessment 77.7%

7 Personality Assessment 73.0%

8 Leisure Interest Assessment 66.1%

9 Skills Assessment 69.6%

10 Values Assessment 68.3%

Explore the Possibilities

11 Search for Occupations by Name 8.4%

12 Search for Occupations by Industry 0.6%

13 What You Can Do With a Major In … 3.4%

14 Compare 2 Occupations Side by Side 1.5%

FOCUS 2 System Logins:

Logins to

FOCUS 2 System

# of Logins by Student

% of Logins by Student

1 329 61.3%

2 81 15.1%

3 51 9.5%

4 27 5.0%

5 26 4.8%

6 9 1.7%

7 4 0.7%

8 3 0.6%

2 | P a g e

9 2 0.4%

10 3 0.6%

13 1 0.2%

14 1 0.2%

Pre-Assessment Survey vs. Post-Assessment Survey Comparison: o 70% of students reported they were Certain or Very Certain of their program of study after

using FOCUS 2 compared to 54% prior to using FOCUS 2. o Only 4% of students reported they were Undecided about their program of study after using

FOCUS 2 compared to 15% prior to using FOCUS 2.

Post-Assessment Survey Responses: o Post-Assessment Survey Link

( https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/NBDWFFJ ) o 72% of respondents reported FOCUS 2 was Accurate or Very Accurate at identifying their

interests. o 75% of respondents reported FOCUS 2 was Accurate or Very Accurate at identifying their

abilities and skills. o 67% of respondents reported FOCUS 2 was Accurate or Very Accurate at identifying appealing

career choices.

o 66% of respondents reported they were Likely or Very Likely to discuss their FOCUS 2 results with their advisor.

o 69% of respondents reported they were Likely or Very Likely to discuss their FOCUS 2 results with someone other than their advisor.

o 71% of respondents reported they were Likely or Very Likely to further research a career/pathway suggested by FOCUS 2.

o 63% of respondents reported they were Likely or Very Likely to take a course to explore a career/pathway suggested by FOCUS 2.

o 77% of respondents found FOCUS 2 to be useful. o 67% of respondents will refer back to their FOCUS 2 results in the future. o 73% of respondents felt FOCUS 2 helped them better understand their career goals/choices. o 68% of respondents reported FOCUS 2 will help them plan their career/educational goals. o 90% of respondents found FOCUS 2 easy to use. o 35% of respondents reported FOCUS 2 was too long. o 65% of respondents will recommend FOCUS 2 to a friend. o 75% of respondents reported they benefited from using FOCUS 2.

New FOCUS 2 User Activations by Month:

3 | P a g e

Student Holland Code Data: o Holland Code Legend

R = Realistic (Doers) I = Investigative (Thinkers) A = Artistic (Creators) S = Social (Helpers) E = Enterprising (Persuaders) C = Conventional (Organizers)

o The top 13 Holland codes all share one thing in common; they reveal that our students are Social.

Student's Holland

Coded # of Students w/each code

Student's Holland

Coded # of Students w/each code

ASE 20 SRE 3

SIC 19 AEI 2

SIE 16 AIS 2

SCE 15 CAE 2

SCI 14 CAI 2

ASR 13 CAR 2

SAE 13 CIR 2

SAI 13 CRI 2

SEC 11 IAS 2

SIA 11 ICS 2

SIR 11 ISA 2

AES 10 ISR 2

ASI 8 RAC 2

AER 7 RES 2

ARI 7 RSI 2

CEI 7 SAR 2

EAS 7 SRC 2

SAC 7 ACE 1

SRI 7 ACI 1

AEC 6 ACS 1

ARS 6 AIE 1

CES 6 ARC 1

ECS 6 ASC 1

4 | P a g e

SEA 6 CIS 1

ARE 5 CSA 1

CSI 5 CSE 1

EAC 5 CSR 1

ECA 5 EIA 1

ECI 5 EIC 1

IRS 5 ERC 1

REI 5 ERI 1

SEI 5 ERS 1

AIR 4 ESR 1

ISC 4 IAC 1

RAS 4 IAE 1

RIC 4 IAR 1

RIS 4 ICA 1

SRA 4 ICE 1

ACR 3 ICR 1

CER 3 IEA 1

EAR 3 IRA 1

ECR 3 IRE 1

EIS 3 RAE 1

ESA 3 RCE 1

ESC 3 RCS 1

ESI 3 REA 1

ISE 3 RIA 1

RIE 3 RSA 1

SCA 3 RSC 1

SCR 3 RSE 1

SER 3 Grand Total 417

Hialeah InterAmerican Kendall Medical North Wolfson Totals

Faculty 3 0 0 0 1 1 5

Staff 0 2 0 2 0 5 9

Administrator 0 0 1 2 0 2 5

Academic

AffairsStudent Services

Institutional

EffectivenessSAI

Faculty 6 1 0 0

Staff 0 3 0 0

Administrator 0 7 1 1

Faculty

Staff

Administrator

Totals

Hialeah InterAmerican Kendall Medical North Wolfson Totals

Member of the SAI

Testing and Assessment

Work Group

0 0 1 3 0 4 8

Non-Member of the SAI

Testing and Assessment

Work Group

3 2 0 1 1 4 11

Part of your class 6 CLP 1006 1 Via email 5

Part of your advising

caseload5 HSC 003 2

In person or

as part of a

group

4

Career exploration

advisement1 SLS 1505 3 By phone 1

EAP Level 6 Class 2 SLS 1125 2

Not applicable 6

Yes 5 Yes 9

No 8 No 4

Not applicable 6 Not applicable 7

Survey Completion by Campus and Status

Survey Completion by College Area and Status

Survey Completion by Work Group Membership and Status

Survey Completion by Campus and Work Group Membership

FOCUS 2 Post Pilot Survey Results for Faculty, Staff, and AdministratorsSurveys collected from February 10, 2014 to February 18, 2014

Source: https://miamidadecollege.wufoo.com/forms/focus-2-postpilot-survey-faculty-staff-admin/

Did you look up results in the FOCUS 2

system?

Did you require students to

bring FOCUS 2 results for a

meeting?

Likert Questions

8 11

How did you utilize FOCUS 2 with

students?

In which course did you utilize

FOCUS 2 with your students?

How was your caseload

instructed to complete

FOCUS 2?

Member of the SAI Testing and

Assessment Work Group

1

2

5

Non-Member of the SAI Testing

and Assessment Work Group

6

5

0

1

The FOCUS 2 platform

was easy for me to

navigate and utilize.

4.2

It was easy for me to

generate FOCUS 2

reports.

3.8

The FOCUS 2 results

were easy for me to

interpret.

4.1

Overall experience using

FOCUS 2 with your

students.

4.1

Overall reaction to

FOCUS 2 by your

students.

3.9

The strategy was to confirm career path, and ensure students were embarking on the right path. Focus 2 was used by HS

potential graduates, FTICs, transferred students, and those contemplating a career change. The above audience were

asked to take Focus when they visited, emailed, or phoned me.

Please tell us about the strategy you used to incorporate FOCUS 2 into your course, caseload, etc.

Students were asked to do FOCUS 2 and we discussed results in class

In conjunction with our career unit in CLP 1006 (Psychology of Personal Effectiveness) the students used their results to

confirm and/or explore other career paths and occupations. I led a discussion and answered students questions about

careers and their results on FOCUS 2.

-Sent e-mails to all students in my caseload. -Bring the results to the advisement/iIEP appointment. If they did not

complete the assessment and bring a copy, they must e-mail the results in order to avoid the V1 hold back. -Ask student

to check the curriculum in his/her major to make sure that the courses required in his/her pathway are classes that they

have the ability/skills to do well and/or understand the academic efforts and level of commitment needed to complete

their degree and fulfill their career goals For SLS 1125- class assignment-compare results with SDS (career assessment

utilize in sls classes) and generate a report on their career/major. 10% of the grade.

I emailed the students to complete the inventory before their scheduled appt.

The request was made later in the term, it was added as an optional extra credit assignment

Due to the length of the survey, not all of my students were motivated to complete it. Even after offering extra credit,

the majority of students still did not attempt the survey.

I used it as part of an assingment for the class

We first talked about the importance of using this instrument. Then we talked about in the class.

Took them to the media room.

Rated on a scale of 1-5 with 5 being the

highest

2

This is for their personal use.

Comments about FOCUS 2

A very extensive and comprehensive career assessment tool.

Easy to use- students-counselors/administrator.

The ability to generate reports by advisers is needed.

Students mentioned several times they were logged out for some unknown reason before they were finished and

wanted an easy way to reenter rather than starting from the beginning.

i would like that focus 2 would allow me to get a report of all the students in my caseload who have taken it. the only

way i could see who has takent it and who hasn't is by cheking one by one

The overall survey was too lengthy and the objectives needed to be more clear and succinct.

It is a great idea to place students.

It is a wonderful advisement tool.

FTICs, students who are at 25% benchmarks and are still undecided, and those considering a career change, were asked

to participate by email, in person, or by phone with email follow up.

We had been using SDS in the SLS classes. I give the students the SDS and later in the semester the Focus 2. The students

prefer the results of the Focus 2 much better than SDS.

Please tell us how your students utilized their FOCUS 2 results.

Many said it helped them to choose their major/career

They used it to explore careers that they had not considered or knew nothing about. (Since it was too close to the end of

the semester I did not have time to do much more; however, in the future I would like them to use their results in a

career paper that they submit to me.)

To declare a major To research/learn about thier field of study To compare careers

Some researched careers, others did minimal with the results.

They reviewed it, they already had a career focus and know what program they wish to enter. It more or less matched

their field.

Students were very intrigued by their results. The feedback I received from some indicated that although their

personality traits may not match the career pathway they selected, they still plan to seek out their career goals.

We had no chance to go over the results

We used our Media Services computers.

They had a better insight about the careers.

3

I enjoy seeing the students completing the Focus 2.

After reviewing and using other career assessments, I believe that Focus 2 is the most effective. I have assigned students

to use Focus 2 and received positive feedback. Users are able to navigate from one area to other with ease and

confidence. I was able to search for students, review sections, and create queries. I would like to see how if student

participants who indicated "undecided" in pre-survey, have identified or confirmed a career pathway on program of

study screen.

4