II – MBA Accelerated Assessment Exhibit XXX – Student Learning 20012-18 Exhibit XXXI – MBA Course Mapping for Assurance of Learning 2012-13 Exhibit – MBA Assessment Master Schedule 2012-13 Exhibit XXXIIIa-j – MBA Oral Exam Assessment and Reports (Including Rubrics) 2012-13 Phase III – Coordinated Program-Level Assessment of Skills Exhibit XXXIV – MBA Student Learning Objectives 2013-18 Exhibit XXXV – Course Mapping Matrix for MBA AOL 2013-18 Exhibit XXXVI – MBA Program Master Schedule Overview 2013-18 Exhibit XXXVII -- MBA Business Program Master Schedule 2013-18 Exhibit XXXVIII – Faculty Data Collection Assignments Exhibit XXXIX – Committee Results Review Assignments Exhibit XL – Program-Level Rubrics Critical Thinking I and II Ethics Global Awareness Leadership Oral Communication Quantitative/Technical Skills Written Communication Exhibit XLI – Instructions for Completing Data Collection Instructions Syllabus Statement Exhibit XLII – Scoring Sheet Summary Forms Critical Thinking I and II Ethics Global Awareness Leadership Oral Communication Quantitative/Technical Skills Written Communication Exhibit XLIII – Aggregate Report Forms Critical Thinking I and II Ethics Global Awareness Leadership Oral Communication Quantitative/Technical Skills Written Communication Exhibit XLIV – List of Individual Faculty Course Improvements Exhibit XLV – “Closing of the Loop” Improvements and Actions Taken 2008-13
problems 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 15 were converted to multiple choice questions. The table at the end of this report compares the results from the Fall 2008 assessment with Murff and Dowd’s 2004 results. The FINC 335 class scored worse on questions 5, 11, and 12, but did better, as would be expected, on the multiple choice questions. The slightly better results for the 335 students in the non-multiple choice questions could be because they were farther along in the program and had to use math in several business courses. Overall, there doesn’t appear to be a significant difference in the results. Basic mathematical skills still appear to be lacking. *Given the number of questions on the quiz it was impossible to achieve a score of exactly 70 percent. One way to accomplish this is by requiring the successful completion of a business calculus course prior to acceptance into the business school. should be in by Fall 2012 improvement in math skills from the sophomore year to the junior/ senior year. Instructions: For each of the first eleven questions, solve for y Round your answer to two decimal places. Round your answer to two decimal places. If you can travel 25 miles in 35 minutes, at what speed in miles per hour (correct to three decimal places) are you driving? If a recipe requires 2¼ cups of flour to make 36 cookies, how much flour is needed to make 60 cookies?
Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2009-2010 Department/Program of Study: _____Undergraduate Business Core________ Submitted by: _________Damon Aiken_______________________ Action Due Date CAC Approval Submit initial plan 4th Friday Spring Qtr 2009 Conduct process 2009-2010 academic year Submit findings 4th Friday Fall 2010 Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Performance Characteristics Scoring Levels Expectation Standard Students will possess presentation skills that are sufficient for the variety of classes they will encounter in the business core. Use a presentation rubric devised by Dr. Aiken, Dr. Weigand, and the UBPC. Use rubric in a convenience sample across a variety of business classes (and at least two quarters). The rubric was administered to 23 student-groups in four classes (MKT 481, OPSM 441, MGMT 471, and MGMT 423). Ratings appear in six categories: 1. Verbal and Communications (5pt scale) 2. Organization & Structure (5pt 3. Analyses (10 pt) 4. Discussion & Conclusions (10 pt) 5. Recommendations (10 pt scale) 6. Overall Quality & Effectiveness (10 pt) 5 or 10 – Excellent 4 or 8 – Good 3 or 6 – Proficient 2 or 4 – Needs Improvement 1 or 2 – Poor (rubric attached) Students’ mean score will be above 35 (in total) and above the “proficient” level in each rubric category. Assessment Report 7 8 9 10 11 Observations from Summary Data Conclusions about Student Learning Actions Recommended Based on Observations Plan and Timetable for Taking Action Overall Reflection on Assessment Mean scores (by category, #4 above): 4.05 3.80 7.89 7.95 7.50 8.09 Means in each of the categories were above the proficient level. The lowest scores were on “Organization and Structure” and the development of sound/strategic “Recommendations.” Our observations: That students likely don’t spend the time evaluating their presentation’s structure and that they don’t
Overall mean 38.72 That while students are competent in their analyses, they have trouble turning analyses into sound Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2010-2011 Department/Program of Study: _____Undergraduate Business Core________ Submitted by: _________Damon Aiken_______________________ Action Due Date CAC Approval Submit initial plan Conduct process Submit findings Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Performance Characteristics Scoring Levels Expectation Standard Students will possess knowledge of various international business issues sufficient for the variety of classes they will encounter in the business core. A 20-question multiple-choice quiz will be created by the UBPC. A convenience sample will be drawn across the spring MGT 490 classes. The quiz was administered to 63 students from three classes. Questions dealt with three main topics: international trade, monetary policies, and general international business. 18 - 20 – Excellent 15- 17 – Good 12 - – Proficient 11 or less – Needs Improvement Students’ mean score will be in the proficient range. Assessment Report 7 8 9 10 11 Observations from Summary Data Conclusions about Student Learning Actions Recommended Based on Observations Plan and Timetable for Taking Action Overall Reflection on Assessment Students’ overall mean score was 12.61 The overall mean was on the low end of the proficient range. Further analyses showed that four of the top five most Recommended actions: Share the data and test questions with faculty Dept. and/or college meetings (Winter quarter)
Readability: Writing level matches audience knowledge level of content. No unknown terms. A bit above level of intended audience. Some too technical terms Mismatched writing and knowledge. Readability causes negative reaction from reader. Tone: Professional, supportive and service oriented. Slightly less than professional and supportive. Could be viewed as unprofessional, overly negative or insensitive. Unacceptable tone. Instructions: (following directions) Complete content, based on assignment and reader. Minor omission Lacks required focus; missed content Major omissions TOTAL SCORE Presentation Rubric Evaluating Student Presentations Developed by Information Technology Evaluation Services, NC Department of Public Instruction 1 2 3 4 Total Organization Audience cannot understand presentation because there is no sequence of information. Audience has difficulty following presentation because student jumps around. Student presents information in logical sequence which audience can follow. Student presents information in logical, interesting sequence which audience can follow. Subject Knowledge Student does not have grasp of information; student cannot answer questions about subject. Student is uncomfortable with information and is able to answer only rudimentary questions. Student is at ease with expected answers to all questions, but fails to elaborate. Student demonstrates full knowledge (more than required) by answering all class questions with explanations and elaboration. Graphics Student uses superfluous graphics or no graphics Student occasionally uses graphics that rarely support text and presentation. Student's graphics relate to text and presentation. Student's graphics explain and reinforce screen text and presentation. Mechanics Student's presentation has four or Presentation has three misspellings Presentation has no more than two Presentation has no misspellings
more spelling errors and/or grammatical errors. and/or grammatical errors. misspellings and/or grammatical errors. or grammatical errors. Eye Contact Student reads all of report with no eye contact. Student occasionally uses eye contact, but still reads most of report. Student maintains eye contact most of the time but frequently returns to Student maintains eye contact with audience, seldom returning to notes. Elocution Student mumbles, incorrectly pronounces terms, and speaks too quietly for students in the back of class to hear. Student's voice is low. Student incorrectly pronounces terms. Audience members have difficulty hearing presentation. Student's voice is clear. Student pronounces most words correctly. Most audience members can hear presentation. Student uses a clear voice and correct, precise pronunciation of terms so that all audience members can hear presentation. Total Points:
Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2008-2009 Department/Program of Study: ______Business Education___ Submitted by: ______Pam Weigand_____________________ Action Due Date CAC Approval Submit initial plan 4th Friday Spring Qtr 2008 11-18-08 Conduct process 2008-09 academic year Submit findings 4th Friday Fall 2009 Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Scoring Levels Expectation Standard #4 The business education teacher demonstrates workplace competencies in keyboarding and digital information technology clusters, information systems management, information processing applications, technical communications, principles of entrepreneurship, business management, accounting & computation, economics & finance, international business, and business law. This year’s is on technical communication. Students will improve their business writing skills from the time they take Business Communication to the time they take their methods courses at the end of the program in the general areas of conventions, completeness, conciseness, and coherence. For Fall and Winter quarters, 2008/2009, all students’ will be given a one to two-page writing assignment at the beginning of the quarter in Business Communication and at the end of that quarter. Two faculty will evaluate papers using the attached rubric. A writing sample from those students in their methods courses will also be evaluated in the same way. All three documents will be compared and analyzed to determine changes in strengths and weaknesses. Eight will be used to evaluate all (See attached rubric) See attached rubric for the four scoring levels used to evaluate all 80% of the students’ writing evaluation scores will increase from the first to the second and to the last (third) evaluated writing assignment in all eight performance areas. Assessment Report 7 8 9 10 11 Observations from Summary Data Conclusions about Student Learning Actions Recommended Based on Observations Plan and Timetable for Taking Action Overall Reflection on Assessment
Organization 3.1 2.6 2.9 Decreased 2.9 Conciseness 2.9 2.8 2.6 Decreased 2.8 Mailability 1.5 2.1 2.3 Increased 2.0 Knowledge 2.9 3.1 3.3 Increased 3.1 Readability 3.8 3.8 3.6 Decreased 3.7 Tone 3.6 3.7 3.9 Increased 3.7 Directions 3.4 3.1 3.2 Decreased 3.2 Criterion from Weakest to Strongest Mailability 2.0 Too many errors to send Conventions 2.5 Punctuation, format, spelling, grammar Conciseness 2.8 Unnecessary verbiage/information Organization 2.9 Coherent, logical order, sentence structure Knowledge 3.1 Application of knowledge Directions 3.2 Ability to follow instructions Readability 3.7 Knowledge level matches writing Tone 3.7 Service oriented, professional Date_______________________________ Rater Name_______________________________ Student Name__________________________ Rubric for Evaluating Written Documents Writing 4 3 2 1 Conventions (punctuation, format, spelling, grammar) Perfect grammar and spelling Punctuation properly used to support writer’s intent Format promotes professional image Punctuation creates reader confusion Less than professional format Purpose clear Minor misspelling Grammar causes reduced clarity Format lack of education Improper punctuation causes multiple readings for understanding Incorrect vocabulary Misspellings Focus is on writer not purpose Structure and organization Coherent Logically presented reader expertly to purpose Strong sentencing Headings as aids when appropriate Needs more leading through sentencing and reorganization Weak order Paragraphs contain mixed content Headings needed for readability Disorganized Writing’s purpose is lost Incomplete sentences Conciseness (avoids unnecessary information and verbiage) Brief and focused Addresses necessary content using fewest words without omitting content. Limited redundancies not affecting reader. Too much information Excess wording Roundabout focus little or no attempt to edit for brevity Excess language and content.
Student Learning Outcome Strategy or method of measurement Observations gathered from data Actions recommended based on observations Plan and timetable for taking action Overall evaluation of progress on objective Use quantitative skills in analyzing economic data. Embedded test questions from final exams administered in randomly selected upper division (400-level) courses throughout AY 2011-2012. (1.) Data were gathered from 6 sections of 3 courses that typically emphasize the use of the quantitative tools of economic analysis. (2.) Findings from 124 sampled exams indicate the 74.54% of students scored at least 80% on the selected problems. If the criteria were lowered to 75% as acceptable for passing, 79.72% of the students would have been considered to have answered the problems correctly. (1.) Because many of the students in our upper division courses are NOT economics majors, this assessment of ALL students only provides an assessment of the courses and not necessarily of the major. Subsets of BA, Econ & BA, Econ Math Option majors only should be used instead. (2.) Sample a wider number and variety of upper division courses to see if results are consistent across the electives. (3.) Since this SLO should apply to lower division courses as well, we should sample the principle courses also. (4.) Because core required upper division courses are more rigorous in their use of quantitative methods, the future standard for passing required upper division classes should be 75% rather than 80% for electives. Plan: (1.) Starting with AY 2012-2013, use the portfolio requirement to collect upper division examinations from BA, Econ & BA, Econ Math Option majors and use those for the basis of assessment of the two programs the department offers. (2.) Starting with AY 2012-2013, use different evaluation criteria for upper division elective courses as compared to upper division required courses. This SLO is still central to the program.
Students should possess the knowledge and skills needed to effectively manage the compensation function. This year’s focus is on performance appraisal. Students will be expected to demonstrate their knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal formats/methods. Students will also be expected to demonstrate their knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal rating errors and biases. Multiple choice questions regarding performance appraisal formats/methods and performance appraisal rating errors and Biases will be developed by HR faculty. These questions will be embedded in Exam #2 of HUMR 427 (Compensation). Performance Characteristics – (1) Knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal formats/methods. (2) Knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal rating errors and biases. Scoring Levels – 5 = Excellent (90-100) 4 = Above Average 3 = Competent (70-79) 2 = Below Average 1 = Poor (0-59) Expectation Standard -- 80% of students will achieve an average rating of 3.0 or higher. (1) 82% of students achieved an average of 3.0 or higher with regard to “Performance Characteristic” # 1. (2) 85% of students achieved an average rating of 3.0 or higher with regard to “Performance Characteristic” # 2. Students exceeded the expectation standards for both “Performance Characteristics.” The students have demonstrated that they have adequate knowledge of the research literature regarding both performance appraisal methods, and performance appraisal rating errors and biases. Based on the assessment data that was gathered, no major changes or actions are required. However, HUMR instructors should continue to ‘stay on top’ of recent research in the area of performance appraisal. HUMR instructors should continue to keep abreast of new research in the area of performance appraisal by reading the most recent issues of Personnel Psychology and the Journal of Applied Psychology. The objectives are important for the HRM program, and assessment of these objectives should continue.
Students should possess the knowledge and skills needed to effectively manage the compensation function. This year’s is on performance appraisal. Students will be expected to demonstrate their knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal formats/methods. Students will also be expected to demonstrate their knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal rating errors and biases. Multiple choice questions regarding performance appraisal formats/methods and performance appraisal rating errors and Biases will be developed by HR faculty. These questions will be embedded in Exam #2 of HUMR 427 (Compensation). Performance Characteristics – (1) Knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal formats/methods. (2) Knowledge of the research literature regarding performance appraisal rating errors and biases. Scoring Levels – 5 = Excellent (90-100) 4 = Above Average 3 = Competent (70-79) 2 = Below Average 1 = Poor (0-59) Expectation Standard -- 80% of students will achieve an average rating of 3.0 or higher. (1) 82% of students achieved an average of 3.0 or higher with regard to “Performance Characteristic” # 1. (2) 85% of students achieved an average rating of 3.0 or higher with regard to “Performance Characteristic” # 2. Students exceeded the expectation standards for both “Performance Characteristics.” The students have demonstrated that they have adequate knowledge of the research literature regarding both performance appraisal methods, and performance appraisal rating errors and biases. Based on the assessment data that was gathered, no major changes or actions are required. However, HUMR instructors should continue to ‘stay on top’ of recent research in the area of performance appraisal. HUMR instructors should continue to keep abreast of new research in the area of performance appraisal by reading the most recent issues of Personnel Psychology and the Journal of Applied Psychology. The objectives are important for the HRM program, and assessment of these objectives should continue.
Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2011-2012 Department/Program of Study: Human Resources Submitted by: Dr. David E. Terpstra Action Due Date CAC Approval Submit initial plan 2nd Friday Fall Qtr 2011 Conduct process 2011-12 academic year Submit findings 6th Friday Spring 2012 Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Performance Characteristics Scoring Levels Expectation Standard Students should possess the knowledge required to effectively manage important aspects of the compensation function. This year’s focus is on (PFP) plans. Students will be expected to demonstrate their knowledge of the research literature regarding PFP plans. Multiple choice questions regarding PFP plans will be developed by HR faculty. These questions will be embedded in Exam #2 of HUMR 427 (Compensation). 1. Knowledge of the research literature regarding PFP 5 = Excellent (90-100) 4 = Above average (80-89) 3 = Competent (70-79) 2 = Below average (60-69) 1 = Poor (0-59) 80% of students will achieve an average rating of 3.0 or higher Definitions/Instructions: Learning Outcome Goal: One, or part of one, of a program’s adopted learning outcome goals as published in catalog or other program. Objective: Student expected performance, stated in measurable terms, that demonstrates accomplishment of the learning outcome. Strategy/Method of Measurement: Mode and process through which student performance data will be gathered. Examples: embedded test questions in a course or courses, portfolios, in-class activities, standardized test scores, case studies, analysis of written projects, etc. Most measurements benefit from the use of a clearly defined set of criteria (rubric). Performance Characteristics (criteria): Aspects indicative of performance. Pre-defined set of criteria by data collected will be evaluated: e.g. elements of writing, elements of effective oral presentation, elements of effective management of “x.” Scoring Levels (for Individual Student Performance): Set of defined scoring options used by evaluators to determine level of student achievement. Expectation Standard (collective performance of students): Summary/acceptable measure of collective student performance; e.g. mean student score from rubric; percentage of students meeting defined standard of acceptability.
Graduates demonstrate appropriate levels of MIS technical skills in database Students will be able to create and link relational database tables, and build queries that can extract data from them Questions on MISC 481 midterm and final for Fall and Winter quarters, AY0809 Given a description of a business situation, the student must properly draw an ERD of a set of tables, showing keys, attributes, relations and cardinalities. an ERD, with keys, attributes, relations and cardinalities, the student can write an SQL query to extract specific information. Students will be scored on the accuracy of their drawings, and on the effectiveness of their queries. 1 = poor, 2= adequate, 3 = excellent Expectation Standard -- 60% of the students tested will score 2 or higher On the ERD question: 64% scored a 3, 18% scored a 2, 18% scored a 1 On the SQL query: 45% scored a 3, 36% scored a 2, 19% scored a 1 Conclusion – Students met our expectation standards in both areas. The fact that almost 20% of the students fell into the lowest category is cause for concern. The discussions on scoring the SQL query question revealed differences in teaching approaches among instructors, that need to be addressed. The instructors who teach DB skills should coordinate how these topics are presented in different classes. More lecture time and homework in MISC 481 should be devoted to SQL skills. Review our assessment policies to see if we should refine the scoring. We need to identify those who are having problems earlier and give them additional instruction. Spring 2009, meet and coordinate DB instruction. Fall 2009, implement decisions on DB instruction. This was our use of quantified expectation standards. One problem encountered was the fact that the way the tests are presented (online and paper mix) makes it difficult to assess performance across the classroom on a single question. The objectives tested are core skills for MIS professionals and should continue to be assessed periodically.
Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2010-2011 Department/Program of Study: _Marketing___________________________________ Submitted by: __Drs. Vince Pascal and Damon Aiken_________________ ____ Action Due Date Signature CAC Approval Submit initial plan 2nd Friday Fall Qtr 2010 Conduct process 2010-11 academic year Submit findings 4th Friday Spring 2011 Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Performance Characteristics Scoring Levels Expectation Standard The student will be able to explain and apply principles of managing the marketing mix as they relate to marketing planning and integrate these into a marketing plan. Select and apply Segmentation Base(s) to break down a market into viable segments. Develop in-depth Target Market Description Design strategies & tactics appropriate to the selected target market(s) In MKTG 412: Students develop a written marketing plan in which they will be required to correctly identify and develop at least one marketing mix strategy in accordance with objectives listed under Column 2. Each student will develop at least one strategy and its associated tactic(s) outlined in the plan. Two essay questions will be presented in Exam 2 which will require individual students to correctly identify and justify the basis for selecting marketing strategies relevant to a marketing mix. In MKTG 417: A final written case will require individual students to analyze the marketing mix and present strategic recommendations. MKTG 412: Target market adequately described in the marketing plan. Position statement adequately specified. Marketing strategies appropriately developed around the 4Ps with specific detail for their implementation and sufficiently articulated in a marketing plan report. MKTG 412: MKTG Plan 5 = Excellent 4 = Good 3 = Competent 2 = Weak 1 = Poor Essay Question 18 = Excellent 16= Good 14 = Competent 12= Poor 10≤ Failed MKTG 417: MKTG Case 100 = Excellent 90 = Good 80 = Competent 70 = Weak 60 = Poor MKTG 412: 90% of marketing plans will rate a 3 or better on the Target Market and Strategies and Tactics sections of the plan 80% of the students will receive a 14 or higher on the exam questions concerning planning and marketing mix strategies. MKTG 417: 90% of cases will rate an 80 or better.
Exhibit XI Form UG Business Program Assessment “Closing of the Loop” Summary of Strengths, Improvements, and Actions Taken 201_ Qtr /Year of Pilot Qtr /Year of Learning Objective Assessed Met Standard 1st Time? If “Yes” to Meeting Std, List Observations, Strengths, and/or Actions If ‘No” to Meeting Std, List Improvements and Actions to be Taken Champion(s) and Dates (List Committee and/or Instructor Applying Improvement) Effective? (2nd Data Set Shows Improve- ment)* W2013 Ethics Ethics Subcategory 1 Etc. Quantitative Global Awareness Teamwork Information *If “Closing of the Loop” shows action taken was not effective, indicate “no”, and list what new action is to be taken
College of Business and Public Administration Eastern Washington University Identification of the appropriate quantitative technique(s) Does Not Meet Expectations (0) Marginally Meets Expectations (1) Meets Expectations (2) Exceeds Expectations (3) Can clearly choose the appropriate quantitative technique(s) used for the assignment Can clearly explain the appropriate quantitative techniques used for the assignment. Fully understands the data requirements of each technique. Fully understands the underlying assumptions of each technique Performs (computes) the appropriate analyses with the use of appropriate Produces results that are accurate Produces results that are relevant Produces results that are appropriate to an understanding of the indicated problem(s). Interpretation of the results. Interprets the results in the context of the assignment Explains the results in the context of the assignment. conclusions or makes recommendations. Clearly communicates conclusions which are supported by the results. Explains the analytical basis for making recommendations regarding alternatives. Limitations. Understands the limitations involved in the analysis, results, and recommendations. Articulates the limitations involved in the analysis, results, and recommendations. Overall Evaluation Quantitative Reasoning Rubric II Quantitative Reasoning Learning Goal -- Students can identify and perform appropriate quantitative analyses when given a particular business problem.
the ubiquitous business concept of “maximizing shareholder return” –no matter the impact on other stakeholders. All of our classes that address this goal should include student practice in ethical reasoning and should employ a much wider application to many current business “principles” and practices. Sp2013 Develop Ethics Rubric for assessment of ethical reasoning. Revise the assessment approach so that reasoning is evaluated instead of simple cognitive knowledge. Assessment Coordinator Rubric to be put into use W2014 W2013 Sp2013 Teamwork No Overall, particular issues stood out as priorities for improvement. First, students displayed extremely weak understanding of those qualities that distinguish effective team process. In other words, they don’t understand the issues that affect team effectiveness. This makes it difficult for them to intervene constructively. Second, students do not understand how team goals can be made more meaningful for team member. And, finally, they do not appear to understand the observed approaches shared by successful teams. These three issues all relate to the broad idea that our students do not really understand the distinction between group work and teamwork, much less the difference between a group and a team. This is where improvement must begin. Instructors using teams should provide lectures with a focus on a) the distinction between a group ad a team, and b) the characteristics of effective team process. We need to really look at our use of groups in courses. We need to evaluate whether we are creating circumstances where teamwork is required, or whether group work is being used to simplify the instructor’s grading work. Group work is clearly UG Program Committee/Instructors making extensive use of teams Yes, though not as much as needed Additional Review Needed
Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2008-2009 Department/Program of Study: ____MBA Program____________________________________ Submitted by: _____Dean Kiefer__________________________________________________ Action Due Date CAC Approval Submit initial Assessment Plan (below) 4th Friday Spring Qtr 2008 11/04/08 Conduct process 2008-09 academic year Submit findings in Assessment Report (below) 4th Friday Fall 2009 Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Performance Characteristics Scoring Levels Expectation Standard Develop and demonstrate leadership abilities including an understanding of the importance of diversity, and interpersonal relationships in an organization. Identify leadership styles. Use the appropriate in a given situation. The portfolio will require an essay discussing the student’s personal experience in a leadership role during their MBA studies. Presentation on the students’ essays as a part of the MBA oral exam. Question and answer period during the oral exam based on the presentation. Students are able to apply the appropriate leadership style in a given situation. Students recognize when a change in style is required and adapt appropriately. Students discuss the principles of leadership appropriate to each leadership style. 4 Understands principles and applies. 3 – Understands principles completely 2 Understands principles 1 – Does not understand principles 75% of the students will achieve a score of 2.5 or higher. Assessment Report 7 8 9 10 11 Observations from Summary Data Conclusions about Student Learning Actions Recommended Based on Observations Plan and Timetable for Taking Action Overall Reflection on Assessment 91.5% of the students taking the oral examination were judged by the committee to understand or understand and the principles outlined in the learning objective. The average score on a 4-point scale was 3.45. Students are learning and understanding the material to which this learning objective applies. Revisit the learning objective to clarify and allow more effective measurement. AY 2010-11 Learning objective is very broad and difficult to measure. Further though is needed to develop a better measure. Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2009-2010
Action Due Date CAC Approval Submit initial plan 2nd Friday Fall Qtr 2010 Conduct process 2010-11 academic year Submit findings 6th Friday Spring 2011 Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Performance Characteristics Scoring Levels Expectation Standard Analyze and formulate solutions to problems related to the environment in which organizations exist and function including information technology, legal, ethical, economic, social, political and global aspects. To articulate, explain, and evaluate functional and integrative theories, perspectives, concepts, and facts, then to use those theories, perspectives, concepts, and facts to solve practical problems, support arguments, and evaluate multiple viewpoints in the context of company strategy, governance, and structure. Students analyze and present a case on a company to a panel of three evaluators. Each evaluator scores the student’s performance. The third evaluator, who is the graduate school representative has the option of scoring or checking a box to indicate that the exam was conducted fairly. In this dataset, one of the graduate school representatives scored and the other checked an indicator box. Scoring was averaged for all numerical values. A copy of the rubric used is attached, along with the explanation associated with each rating value. See attached rubric. 1=does not meet expectations 2=marginally meets expectations expectations 4=exceeds expectations Ninety percent of students should an average of 2.5 or better for the first two categories on the rubric, and 95% should score 2.5 or better when averaging all categories. (Note: the quantitative category was not scored) Definitions/Instructions: Learning Outcome Goal: One, or part of one, of a program’s adopted learning outcome as published in catalog or other program. Objective: Student expected performance, stated in measurable terms, that demonstrates accomplishment of the learning outcome.
Exam Chair ______________________________________ MBA Faculty Member_______________________________ GAC Rep ________________________________________ Candidate must score an average of 2.5 to pass the oral exam and have no average scores of 1.0 in any category. Scoring example: To score a 4, all items in phrases listed under "4" must be met, otherwise a lower category is scored. Category 4 Exceeds Expectations 3 Meets Expectations 2 Marginally Meets Expectations 1 Does Not Meet Expectations Comments --> Knowledge of Functional and Integrative Theories, Perspectives, Concepts, and Facts (TPCFs) Can clearly articulate, explain, and evaluate all important TPCFs written or implied in portfolio material and raised during questioning Application of Theories, Perspectives, Concepts, and Facts (TPCFs) Can choose appropriate TPCFs to solve practical problems; can provide illustrative examples and evaluate the outcome and usefulness of the TPCF; can use TPCFs to support arguments; understands multiple viewpoints Quantitative Knows which data to collect; can analyze, and interpret numerical data from a variety of sources and reports and use the information to solve problems or evaluate situations Written Communication Skill Content is well organized; grammar and mechanics are correct. Word selection is sophisticated enough for graduate work. Presentation and Oral Communication Skill Good eye contact; volume and intonation are strong. Meaningful gestures and good rate of delivery. Right quantity of speaking and visuals. Professionalism Follows of presentation etiquette, maintains composure under questioning pressure *Score total requirement (30) is based on assumption that 2 examiners evaluate candidate in all 6 categories (min exam avg = 2.5). (Adjustments to required score can be made by multiplying the number of categories evaluated by each examiner by 2.5). **GAC representative marks "yes" if he/she agrees that the exam was reasonably conducted and evaluated in each category or that adequate reason was used for eliminating evaluation in a particular category (to be done in exceptio Assessment Plan and Report Academic Year 2010-2011
Department/Program of Study: MBA Program Submitted by: Brian Grinder Action Due Date CAC Approval Submit initial plan 2nd Friday Fall Qtr 2011 Conduct process 2011-12 academic year Submit findings Summer 2012 Assessment Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 Learning Outcome Goal Objective Strategy/Method of Measurement Performance Characteristics Scoring Levels Expectation Standard Graduates are able to understand and apply the principles of financial theory, analysis, reporting and markets to unfamiliar circumstances to create value. Student can clearly choose and explain appropriate financial techniques used for the assignment. The student fully understands the data requirements of each technique and underlying assumptions. Each student enrolled in BADM 603 will analyze a case that focuses on financial analysis. A written analysis of the case will be submitted. Using the attached rubric, the written case and the oral exam of the case will be used to assess the student’s ability to meet the specific objective to be assessed (column 2). Students must a median of at least 2.5 to pass the oral exam and have no median score of 1.0 in any category. A median score of 2.5 is needed to pass the specific objective being assessed (column 2). Scoring will use the attached rubric. At least 70% of students will score a median of 3 or higher on the specific objective (category). Definitions/Instructions: Learning Outcome Goal: One, or part of one, of a program’s adopted learning outcome goals as published in catalog or other program. Objective: Student expected performance, stated in measurable terms, that demonstrates accomplishment of the learning outcome. Strategy/Method of Measurement: Mode and process through which student performance data will be gathered. Examples: embedded test questions in a course or courses, portfolios, in-class activities, standardized test scores, case studies, analysis of written projects, etc. Most measurements benefit from the use of a clearly defined set of criteria (rubric). Performance Characteristics (criteria): Aspects indicative of performance. Pre-defined set of criteria by which data collected will be evaluated: e.g. elements of writing, elements of effective oral presentation, elements of effective management of “x.” Scoring Levels (for Individual Student Performance): Set of defined scoring options used by evaluators to determine level of student achievement. Expectation Standard (collective performance of students): Summary/acceptable measure of collective student performance; e.g. mean student score from rubric; percentage of students meeting defined standard of acceptability. (continued) Assessment Report
Conclusions about Remediation Efforts (relate to findings and corrective measures applied) Providing students with the assessment rubrics (as well as the rubric specific to the assignment) did seem to increase scores. Given that scores increased from the fall to the spring measurements, there are a number of probable reasons: The International Students’ office work is paying off The emphasis on writing throughout the MBA program is paying off Spring quarter professor is an easier grader Random chance variation Recommendations Continue to communicate with International Students office Continue to inform students about Writing Center Continue to stress writing throughout the MBA core Have the same professor teach BADM 540 in both the fall and spring (consistency in scoring/grading and professor will become more of an expert teaching the class – i.e., become more “invested” in the class). Attachments Rubrics, test instruments, raw data, etc. BADM 540 Written Communications Rubric Assessment Goal: Communications Students are competent in both written and oral communications. . Student ____BADM 540 Spring (n = 22)_________ Date _6/12/13___________ Professor _Dr. Damon Aiken_________________________________________ International Students Content Category 4 Exceeds Expectations (n) 3 Expectations (n) 2 Marginally Meets Expectations (n) 1 Does Not Meet Expectations (n) Comments MEAN and Meaning Maintains a controlling idea, an understanding of purpose and audience and completes all parts of the task. 1 4 2 2.86 Content and Development - Demonstrates knowledge of the subject matter through proper use of marketing concepts and terms 2 4 1 3.14 Organization - Demonstrates an appropriate structure , direction, paragraphing or grouping of information, logical connections and transitions. 1 3 3 2.71 Language use, Voice and Style - Demonstrates effective awareness of the reader and purpose, effective sentence structure and word choice and displays a professional tone. 1 2 4 2.57 Mechanics and Conventions - 1 3 3
2008-2013 Year Learning Objective Assessed Met Std 1st Time? Observation/Improvement/Action Advised or Taken Champion(s) Effective? (2nd Data Set Shows Improvement) 2008-09 Leadership Yes Course transparency with use of portfolios Revise measure to be more detailed Curriculum Change – Added BADM 603 Oral Exam to increase rigor of assessment - Faculty (incl those teaching Leadership MBA Committee/Dean/Graduate Faculty N/A N/A N/A 2009-10 Analysis of Business Environment No Pedagogical Improvement – Theories and concepts more tightly integrated with cases in BADM 590; doctor/patient metaphor used to explain approach to case analysis; added more financial statement analysis during introductory phase of BADM 590 BADM 590 Faculty Yes 2010-11 Quantitative/ Technical Skills No Pedagogical Improvement -- remedies included providing an analytical guideline, detailed schedule, evaluation form, and the requirement to sign an honesty statement. Course Content Improvement – BADM 503 was revised to specifically on applied data analysis skills, especially skills for chi-square and regression modeling Course Content Improvement -- BADM 520 (Research Methods) was also revised to provide students with exercises or activities to review and practice basic statistics. Assignments included comprehensive case analyses or projects BADM 503 and 520 Faculty BADM 503 Faculty BADM 520 Faculty Yes
2011-12 Creation/Financial No Pedagogical Improvement – BADM 530 was altered to include more case work and to make more work individualized instead of BADM 530 Faculty Yes 2008-12 Written No Students are now required to use and cite appropriate references, refer to and use tables and figures appropriately in BADM 520 A variety of resources, including BUED 302 and Write Experience practice, were suggested for students who failed to meet the standard using Write Experience. Students re-took the Write Experience exam until they met the standard. (Write Experience was eliminated after their revised software program showed grading flaws) International students writing the formal paper for BADM 603 were encouraged to find writing assistance in the skills center and/or professional editing assistance if they failed the first review based on their writing BADM 520 Faculty MBA Director Students Yes 2008-12 Oral No Oral presentations were assessed for style and content in BADM 590. General guidelines for oral presentations were used in BADM 590 and BADM 552. Filmed presentations were required in BADM 590 so students could perfect their vocal and visual presentation. BADM 552 and 590 Faculty Yes 2012-13 Critical Thinking N/A A new method of assessing critical thinking is planned. A new rubric is under development Assessment Coordinator Pending 2013-14 Critical Thinking Yes MBA Director will work with instructor to pre-test and post-test students on standardized critical thinking test MBA Coordinator/Instructor of BADM 555 Pending 2013-14 Critical Thinking Yes More emphasis will be placed on articulation of assumptions Instructor of BADM 555 Pending