The BCC Assessment Committee Greets You

The committee meets every other Thursday 12:10-1:30, after the Curriculum Committee, (room 341, Teaching-Learning Center).

BCC Assessment Committee

             

Jenny Lowood,English/ESL/Educ/LRNRE (Chair)Josh Boatright, Library Leonard Chung, Business/CIS Pieter deHaan, Sciences Matt Freeman, Social Sciences Iva Ikeda, ASL Willy Lizarraga, Modern Languages Sabrina Nelson, MMARTMatthew Woods, Arts & Humanities Alley Young, Counseling, Student Services Dmitry Zhiv, Mathematics Linda Berry,VPIDenise Jennings, Title III Coordinator

WASC SLO/AssessmentProficiency Requirements

Course SLOs and Assessment

Proficiency

RequirementOur Response

Faculty will complete SLOs for all courses and will assess them on an ongoing basis.

100% of all courses at BCC have SLOs, which are assessed on an ongoing basis.

Program SLOs and Assessment

Proficiency

RequirementOur Response

Faculty will complete SLOs for all programs and will assess them on an ongoing basis.

100% of all programs at BCC have SLO’s, which are assessed on an ongoing basis.

Student Support Outcomes & Assessment

Proficiency

RequirementOur Response

SLOs will be completed for all “student learning and support activities”; these will be assessed on an ongoing basis.

100% of all student learning and support activities at BCC have SLOs; they are assessed on an ongoing basis.

Institutional Learning OutcomesAssessment

Proficiency

RequirementOur Response

The college will define and assess its institutional learning outcomes.

The college has defined its seven primary institutional learning outcomes; these are assessed on a three-year cycle.

Our Areas of Focus: 2012-13

Looking to the Future

☛“Closing the Loop”

☛ Program Review

☛ ILO Assessment: Three-Year Cycle Begins

Closing the Loop

The Assessment Cycle

Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILO)

Assessment

BCC’s Institutional Learning Outcomes

• Communication• Critical Thinking• Ethics and Personal Responsibility• Global Awareness & Valuing Diversity• Information Competency• Quantitative Reasoning• Self-Awareness & Interpersonal Skills

BCC’s Assessment TimelineBased on ILO’s

Semester 1Communication

Semester 2Critical Thinking

Semester 3Quantitative Reasoning

Semester 4Ethics/Pers. Resp./

Self-Awareness/Interpersonal

Semester 5Global Awareness

Semester 6Information Competency

Spring 2012 – Fall 2012

Spring 2013 Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Fall 2014 Spring 2015

ProgramAssessment

ASL AA (capstone)English AA’s/c’sEnglish basic skills (courses)ESL (courses) MMART (capst)Spanish (capst)

Biotechnology AS/certs. Sciences

Math AAMath basic skillsCIS AS, certs. 

Art AA’s/cert’sPUB/HUSVPERSISTLRNRE (basic skills)Psychology AA  

Global Studies AASociology AA

Liberal Arts(cumulative), social sciences/ humanitiesPACE (caps)Business AA/C’sWomen’s Studies

Course Assessment

All courses with communication ILO

All courses with critical thinking ILO

All courses with quantitative reasoning ILO

All courses with ethics/pers.resp/ self-awareness/ interpersonal ILO

All courses with global awareness ILO

All courses with information competency ILO

Student Services Assessment

(LRC)   LRC CounselingLRCStudent Ambass.

  Library

High Impact Courses and Services

Some high impact courses and service areas will be assessed every semester:

☛ English 1A☛ English 5☛ Math 13

These courses fulfill key general education requirements and are taken by large numbers of students.

☛ Most student services areas will be assessed every year.

Assessing the First ILO: The Communication Rubric

Levels/Criteria

Benchmark Milestone - Developing

Milestone - Intermediate

Capstone

Context of andPurpose forWriting,includingAudienceAwareness

Presentation demonstratesminimal attention to context,audience, purpose, and theassigned tasks(s) (expectationof instructor or self asaudience).

Presentation demonstrates beginningawareness of context,audience, purpose, and assigned tasks(s).

Presentation demonstratesadequate consideration ofcontext, audience, andpurpose, and clear focus onthe assigned task(s).

Presentation demonstratesthorough understanding ofcontext, audience, andpurpose that is responsive to the assigned task(s) andfocuses all elements of work.

Organization Organizational pattern(specific introduction andconclusion, sequencedmaterial within the body, andtransitions) is not observablewithin the presentation.

Organizational pattern(specific introduction andconclusion, sequencedmaterial within the body, transitions) is intermittentlyobservable within thepresentation.

Organizational pattern(specific introduction andconclusion, sequencedmaterial within the body, and transitions) is clearly and consistently observablewithin the presentation.

Organizational pattern(specific introduction andconclusion, sequencedmaterial within the body, transitions) is clearly andconsistently observable andskillful and makes thecontent of the presentationcohesive.

Language Language choices are unclearand minimally support theeffectiveness of thepresentation. Language inpresentation is notappropriate to audience.

Language choices aremundane and commonplaceand partially support theeffectiveness of thepresentation. Language inpresentation is appropriate to audience.

Language choices arethoughtful and generallysupport the effectiveness ofthe presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience.

Language choices areimaginative, memorable, and compelling, and enhance the effectiveness of the presentation. Language in presentation is appropriate to audience.

Note: This rubric was culled from the AACU Value Rubrics for Written Communication and Oral Communication (value@aacu.org).

Assessing the First ILO: Strategies

             

We focused on assessing how well students are achieving the communication ILO in courses that are “mapped” to communication:

☛ We applied the rubric to 256 randomly chosen essays from fourteen classes in eight different disciplines (Art, Business, English, History, HLTED, HUSV, Music, and Political Science); they represented five different departments.☛ Each essay was read and scored by two different readers and the scores compared; discrepancies were resolved by a third reader.☛ The scorers were from across the college:

☛ 1 from Business☛ 2 from English☛ 2 from History ☛ 1 from HUSV☛ 1 from MMART

Written Communication Assessment Results BCC Spring 2012

Percentages of students earning a grade of 6 (acceptable) – 8 (strong).

Does English 1A Make a Difference?

The chart below shows the scores of students who were identified as having taken English 1A, as opposed to those who did not identify whether they had taken English 1A.

purpose organization language

COM/ENGL 1A YES 77% 58% 65%

COM/ENGL 1A ? 51% 34% 37%

Variability Among Courses

In several courses, students demonstrated much higher proficiency in writing than in others.

purpose organization languageCOM/BUS 10 85% 92% 38%

COM/OVERALL 57% 39% 43%

purpose organization languageCOM/HIST 7B 80% 60% 90%

COM/OVERALL 57% 39% 43%

Action Plan – Communication ILO

Assessment

             

☛ The instructors of the “high scoring” classes (not in the English department) developed a packet on how to design a writing prompt or assignment and rubric for grading.☛ The packet will be shared with the college and we will conduct an assessment of essays written in those classes in which the packet is used.

Program Assessment:An Overview

What Are BCC’s programs?

BCC’s Assessment Committee, Curriculum Committee, Roundtable & Department Chairs’ Council have agreed that BCC programs are as follows:

☛Degrees and certificate programs (including general education)

☛Interdisciplinary programs, like PACE (including general education)

☛Basic skills

☛All programs in Student Services

☛Any other departments, as self-identified

Program Assessment

☛Program assessments follow the same steps as course assessments.

☛Program matrices help to show the relationships among institutional learning outcomes, program outcomes, and course outcomes.

A Sample Program Matrix

Program Assessment:An Example

Assessing The Writing Program– Step 1

Identification of Student Learning Outcomes (SLO’s)

☛ write well organized, well developed, effective, well edited, logically sound, and clear essays

☛ write effective, well edited, well organized research papers of 3,000-5,000 words which apply appropriate and clear organizational strategies

☛ apply active reading strategies in order to identify main ideas and critically analyze and explain ideas in texts

Assessing The Writing Program – Step 2

Assessment Plan

☛ All students in English 1A, English 201AB, English 269AB, ESL Writing 5, and ESL Writing 6 submit a portfolio consisting of a 4-5 page research paper, an essay written in class, and a reflective essay.

☛ All portfolios are scored by two English instructors, based on a departmentally designed rubric; the raters do not know the students’ names or class levels; scores are compared and discrepancies resolved by a third reader.

☛ The department reviews the results and recommends plans for improvement.

Assessing The Writing Program– Step 3

Analysis of Findings (Part 1)

Assessing The Writing Program – Step 4

Analysis of Findings (Part 2)

☛ English 1A students performed satisfactorily in the areas of clarity/style, organization, explanations/evidence, reading, and mechanics (more than 67% received scores of 3 and above in these areas).

☛ English 1A students did not perform as well in the areas of critical thinking (59%) and research techniques (46%).

☛ Writing 6 students performed well in all areas except clarity/style, and mechanics.

☛ 40% of English 269 students performed as well as students receiving a grade of B or A in English 201.

Assessing The Writing Program– Step 5

Changes in College Planning (Closing the Loop)

☛ Collaboratively develop open resource materials on research, which will be available for all students in the writing program

☛ Develop “accelerated” class for students who test into English 269, which has the same curriculum as English 201 but provides additional support, based on the writing workshop model

☛ Change curriculum for English 1A and English 201AB to allow for more practice in research skills

☛ Improve placement exam or other measures of incoming students to improve placement into English 269 and 201

Assessing The Writing Program– Step 6

Assessing Effects of Changes

Implementing Action Plans Across the College – Some

Examples

☛ We’ve developed an accelerated basic skills English course, as well as new resources, a new curriculum, and an English composition “model schedule” for English 1A, 201, and 248UX.

☛ We revamped our MMART certificate sequence.

☛ We used assessment findings in the redesign of our ESL curriculum.

☛ We added hours in the library and made other changes in student services areas.

☛ We changed curriculum in Spanish, Business, and many other departments.

Any questions?

Thank you!