Shoreline Community College ANNUAL OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT REPORT—2004-05

Assessment Liaison/s Phone EmailJim James 206-546-6949 jdjames@ctc.edu Pam Dusenberry 206-546-4626 pdusenbe@ctc.edu

A. Highlights of Major Assessment Activities/Project

For the eighth consecutive year, a major portion of Shoreline's Assessment allocation was dedicated to faculty assessment development efforts through an RFP process. With the merger of the Institutional Effectiveness and Strategic Planning Committees, the process was conducted by a new Outcomes Assessment Proposal Review Subcommittee (OAPRS). Remaining funds supported the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Assessment and Research, and the Assessment Liaison.

For 2004-05 funds were awarded to seven faculty projects (6 new and 1 continuing) representing 2 of the 6 Shoreline academic divisions and the Library/Media Center:

Summative Portfolio Assessment for the Visual Arts Program, Bruce Amstutz, bamstutz@shorelin.edu

Information Literacy Assessment , Joanna Tillson Library/ Media Services, jtillson@shoreline.edu

Student Learning in Courses and Programs: Gathering Data for PPA Reports: Pam Dusenberry, Humanities, pdusenbe@shoreline.edu

Assessment of Class Piano and Individual Piano Courses, Syllibi, Forms, Students and Equipment, Nancy Mateski, nmateski@shoreline.edu

Assessment and Curriculum Development Training for Faculty in English, Dutch Henry, Humanities dhenry@shoreline.edu

Norming Sessions for ESL Writing Assessment, Daina Smuidrins, Humanities, dsmuidri@shoreline.edu

Faculty Retreat: General Education at Shoreline: Where do we go from here?, Tim Payne, Inter-American Studies and Social Sciences, tpayne@shoreline.edu

IEAR 8/01 1

B. Examples of Educational Improvements Made/Actions Taken

Summative Portfolio Assessment for the Visual Arts Program

The major contribution of the grant project this year is the development and approval of the Associate in Fine Arts Degree. Although this degree will not go into effect until next year, the grant project made possible the research and collaboration necessary to move it through the many levels of the institutional dialog.

This broad dialog around the development and institution of the AFA degree was, itself, a positive contribution of the project:

o At the program level the faculty had the opportunity to envision their over-all curriculum as an integrated whole. The development of two tracks, one in photography and one in foundation art, made clear a difference in the values and overall outcomes of the two curriculums, one that gives students more choice in their directions of study. These degree options have brought a sense of mission and community to our program, and we look forward to welcoming two new art faculty next year to help us continue to build the program.

o At the division level the dialog stimulated and supported interest in humanities faculty for developing AFA degrees in other areas. In particular, AFA degrees in creative writing and in music may be developed on the model of the Visual Art AFA.

o At the institutional and the state level our development of the AFA degree coincided with a larger dialogue concerning the development of degrees with major ready focus. Our degree will now fit into this discussion as a possible model for AFA degrees in the state.

o The grant project also supported research into foundation art program requirements and portfolio assessments at regional and national colleges and developed documentation for the degree that will provide a larger resource for advising students interested in transfer.

o The grant project provided the occasion to bring art faculty and advisors from three local 4 year art colleges to visit our program and tour our facilities. These included the University of Washington Art Program, Cornish School of the Arts, and Cogswell College. We have contacted Western Washington University and look forward to their visit in the fall. These meetings gave us the chance to make these programs aware of our excellent facility and program and we look forward to further communication with them as our students develop portfolios to present to them.

o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix A.

Information Literacy Assessment

IEAR, 8/01 2

o The attached questionnaire (see Appendix) completed previously to collect data about student progress toward the information literacy outcome was administered to thirteen classes in the Humanities, IAS/Social Sciences and Math/Science divisions. It’s given out early in the quarter and again at the end in order to measure changes. The data entry for the 2004-2005 surveys is nearing completion.

o The data from the surveys implemented 2003-2004 was reviewed and comments were prepared (also attached). Although the significance of some data is unclear and in other cases more data is needed, a picture of students’ skills is emerging that will help faculty establish priorities for the improvement of students’ research abilities.

o The results from 2003-2004 were discussed with library and English faculty and were briefly presented to Humanities faculty. Such discussions improved instructors’ understanding of information literacy, provided a broader basis for interpreting the data and communicated some of the weaknesses and strengths in students’ skills. For example, even at the end of the quarter many students don’t understand the distinction between the library catalog and a periodical database.

o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix B.

Student Learning in Courses and Programs: Gathering Data for PPA Reports

o Assessment projects that start with course learning goals and then link to Gen Ed Outcomes help faculty more clearly see how course teaching adds to student development of college-wide learning goals.

o Conversations among faculty about defining and assessing student learning is one of the best benefits of assessment work: it builds collegiality and respect.

o Creating careful assessments and rubrics helped some faculty better decide what to teach. It also helped them create more careful, clear directions to students. One faculty participant found the creation and use of a rubric for evaluating student work to be transformative. It refocused her thinking toward what and how students learn rather than on what she wanted to teach. The rubric she created helped her give more feedback to students on their class work, less on quizzes.

o Creating rubrics helped faculty become much clearer on their expectations for student performance resulting in better performance and less anxiety among students.

o Several faculty found the use of rubrics saved them grading time. A couple faculty found using rubrics increased their assessment time, but believed the increased time was worth it because of improved student learning.

o The new course content organization in the new Master Course Outline web based form helps faculty see how course learning outcomes are related the Gen Ed Outcomes. It also provides assessment measures that can be used across

IEAR, 8/01 3

sections of the same course to gather aggregated student learning data on which program improvements can be based.

o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix C.

Assessment of Class Piano and Individual Piano Courses, Syllibi, Forms, Students and Equipment

o The grant made it possible to have all piano faculty meet to discuss changes that needed to be made and how we should implement changes.

o Evaluation forms were given to both class piano students and students taking individual piano lessons. Faculty evaluated the student’s comments and suggestions and made changes accordingly.

o The class piano faculty discussed and made changes in the curriculum to reflect changes in the music theory curriculum. Changes were made in all our grading forms for the various levels of class piano to reflect those changes.

o New materials for sight reading and ensembles were chosen for class piano. o The biggest improvement for class piano was the purchase of a new piano lab.

Having two piano labs will help with scheduling and teaching of class piano as well as other music courses. Piano faculty discussed how best to utilize the new piano lab.

o The new piano lab also helps the piano faculty who teach individual piano lessons and their students. In the past all practice rooms and piano studios were used for class piano on Fridays. Now the two teaching studios can be used for lessons and students have a total of 25 additional hours for use in the practice rooms.

o Changes in performance classes and piano juries (final exam for Individual Piano): We changed from having all students play in one joint performance class to each teacher having a performance class for just their students. It helped with the scheduling, length of class, and the students felt more at ease. We also divided piano juries into two sections and required students to attend only one section. This gave them an opportunity to practice until time for them to perform.

o Positive changes in student learning and performance were noticed and recorded by the faculty over the course of this grant.

o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix D.

Assessment and Curriculum Development Training for Faculty in English o Reading and discussing composition theory and research informed classroom

practiceso Evaluating assessment models provided suggestions for revision for facultyo Evaluating assessments helped faculty develop new classroom assessmentso Revision of the English 101 rubric

IEAR, 8/01 4

o Clarification program-wide expectations of students’ entrance skills and abilities for English 101

o Clarification of program-wide outcomes for English 101o Comparison of faculty emphases on different parts of the evaluation processo Comparison of faculty feedback modelso Development of goals and activities for future program-level outcomes work

o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix E.

Norming Sessions for ESL Writing Assessment

o Because so many of our students are academically-bound, our ESL program places an emphasis on writing skills to decide whether students are ready for level completion. Although we have a detailed curriculum and rubrics, many instructors felt they needed greater clarification and practice in the application of these tools. These quarterly sessions allowed both full-time and associate faculty to come to a more mutual understanding of what is considered level-appropriate writing.

o Our program is trying to encourage associate and newer faculty to teach a variety of levels. These norming sessions allowed instructors to assess writing samples in levels that were new to them or levels they are considering teaching in the future.

o Two ESL instructors presented our norming session rationale and techniques at the Faculty Retreat. Instructors from various programs attended the workshop, and even those who do not teach writing were able share ways they might apply these principles and techniques to assessment in their discipline.

o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix F.

Faculty Retreat: General Education at Shoreline: Where do we go from here?

o At the Faculty Retreat, professional-technical and academic transfer faculty from six divisions showed an interest in a variety of workshops dedicated to teaching, learning, assessment and General Education Outcomes.

o Having the time and space to talk and laugh together benefited the college tangibly: faculty built trust by playing and learning together; they built respect by learning more about each others’ disciplines and classroom approaches. Trust and respect will be the basis for repairing a damaged campus climate.

o Providing the opportunity for a broad group of faculty to explore General Education has positive effects on what faculty teach in their courses, and is necessary in order for the college to move forward in Gen Ed implementation.

IEAR, 8/01 5

o Providing a Gen Ed workshop that framed the discussion to avoid direct relation to Shoreline’s Gen Ed Outcomes was conducive to a deeper exploration of desired student outcomes. By avoiding the mention of Gen Ed, faculty participants came up with all kinds of outcomes that are not included or easily put under the categories of the existing outcomes.

o Faculty were all very attuned to forming a holistic picture of an ideal graduate – it was not just about individual skill sets.

o While there are some advantages of placing desired student outcomes in specific categories (a la the six current Gen Ed Outcomes), it is clear that faculty are somewhat resistant to putting all important skills, abilities and aptitudes into specific categories.

o In general, the outcomes desired by faculty for an ideal graduate are holistic, showing the importance of a well-rounded, integrated and well-balanced life.

o As a part of the holistic focus, good citizenship at all levels of society was very important to all faculty.

o During discussion, it was clear that faculty felt an obligation to model the kinds of behavior they wanted students to acquire – service, citizenship, critical thinking, ethical behavior, environmental and social awareness, etc.

o Faculty at the workshop indicated that they would like to continue the conversation, and several people mentioned that they thought that it might be time to address the apparent discrepancies in the existing Gen Ed Outcomes and the ones teachers considered equally important.

o Perhaps most importantly, faculty from across campus all had very similar ideas of how the perfect graduate should look.

o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix G.

C. Current Issues/Concerns Summative Portfolio Assessment for the Visual Arts Program

o The Visual Arts Program is concerned to infuse portfolio assessment into the program at all levels, both to better assess learning in the program and also to involve students themselves in on-going self-assessment of their learning. Portfolio development is an important means by which artists and designers in the visual arts make progress in their fields.

o Assessment in studio arts, to this point, takes place primarily at the course level rather than the program level. In the program objectives portion of its 2003-2005 Program Planning and Assessment document, the Visual Arts Program indicated that the “development of the Associate in Fine Arts Degree option would stress definition and assessment of outcomes at the program level as well as the course level.”

o Associate faculty in studio art are not involved enough in the dialog about outcomes and assessment. The MCO may be the only document defining these for them. Past assessment grants have helped to involve these important faculty

IEAR, 8/01 6

members in this dialog. The focus on a summary portfolio assessment for the program overall, and the annual show of graduate student portfolios, will hopefully create a broader more inclusive context for classroom assessment.

o Currently, when students do put together portfolios for transfer, they do so without structured support. Students intending to transfer to four year art programs complete the AAS transfer degree and in addition take extra art courses to prepare a portfolio of entry and placement. These art courses are often not taken programmatically. Students taking more than a few credits often do not take a broad enough foundation to support their goals, or take course in an appropriate sequence. These students often seek help only toward the end of their studies when they are making applications to colleges and realize they need a portfolio. Their portfolios are sometimes not as comprehensive as they should be, and some are not appropriately focused.

Information Literacy Assessment o Owing to workload, many instructors may find it difficult to take the time to

comprehend information literacy, to absorb the implications of the project’s findings and to plan their curriculum accordingly. Communication with part-time instructors is especially challenging.

o Information literacy is one of the college’s general education outcomes and the latest accreditation report recommends that the college begin building assessment for each outcome across all divisions. Nonetheless, some instructors seem to view research skills as the bailiwick of English instructors and librarians.

Student Learning in Courses and Programs: Gathering Data for PPA Reports

o A better system needs to be developed for disseminating information from assessment projects like this one.

o Faculty need more training on student learning assessment and program assessment. o The Program Planning and Assessment (PPA) process needs revision. The purposes,

report format, reporting hierarchy, and timing of the process all need to be changed to meet the needs of faculty, deans and the instructional VP.

o The role of the college-wide Gen Ed Outcomes in program evaluation needs to be made clearer, and generic methods of GEO evaluation need to be developed for programs to use.

o The relationship between the GEOs and Core Degree Requirements needs study and review.

Assessment of Class Piano and Individual Piano Courses, Syllibi, Forms, Students and Equipment

IEAR, 8/01 7

o With so many associate faculty in the piano area (5 associates and 1 tenured faculty), it is hard to meet several times a quarter as well as participate in assessment activities (i.e. piano juries). An ongoing grant or some form of stipend for associate faculty is needed.

o In all areas of music, faculty need to meet more often so associate faculty can contribute to discussions, know what is going on, and help make decisions. The vocal, instrumental, and theory areas also have many associate faculty members. It is understandable that they don’t want to come to late afternoon, evening, or summer meetings when they don’t get paid for their time.

o More office/teaching studio space is needed for piano faculty.o At least one high quality grand piano for performances is needed.

Assessment and Curriculum Development Training for Faculty in English

o Involving all part-time faculty in assessment activities o Integrating English 101 rubric in all sections of English 101o Norming student work at all levels of the English composition sequenceo Integration of alternative assessment methods and theories currently utilized by

faculty not involved in formal assessment worko Training for new part-time facultyo Use of Master Course Outlines in the development of course syllabi, assessments

Norming Sessions for ESL Writing Assessment

o Because we have the highest part-time/full-time faculty ratio and a large evening program, communication is extremely challenging. Although the writing samples and results are posted online, there is no substitute to being present while assessment is being discussed.

o State standardized testing is required in our program. The latest test (CASAS) tests receptive (reading and listening) and life skills rather than active (speaking and writing) and academic skills. Therefore, it is a challenge to integrate our curriculum with the state competencies. In addition, state testing has changed so frequently in past years that instructors don’t want to invest heavily in a system that they believe may change yet again. For example, at a recent CASAS training, we learned the testing series we are using is going to be phased out.

Faculty Retreat: General Education at Shoreline: Where do we go from here?

o There was a general desire to offer the workshop again, so that more faculty could be involved. One suggestion that had strong support was that Shoreline move forward from these workshops and link them to a more specific discussion of how to relate the outcomes to what faculty actually wanted to see in the students. One way of doing this would be to offer a series of Professional Development workshops for

IEAR, 8/01 8

interested faculty. Another way would be to set up a committee, but this was generally felt to be a less effective way of encouraging faculty participation and best using the expertise that Shoreline’s faculty.

o Faculty need to be additionally informed about the college-wide outcomes (Gen Ed Outcomes or GEOs) and further engaged in how they are realized in teaching, learning and assessment. Given some lack of knowledge and disinterest in the GEOs, one workshop group proposed that the GEOs be reviewed and updated, articulating their purpose more effectively. This way students and faculty would have a better understanding of the outcomes and how they reflect Shoreline’s values and goal of helping to create lifelong learners.

o Another important consideration is the relationship between distribution requirements, GEOs, and program and course outcomes. It was clear that many faculty would benefit from a better understanding of Shoreline’s existing graduation requirements, and the relation between distribution requirements, Gen Ed Core requirements, and the college’s six Gen Ed Outcomes. What learning do we expect of students when they earn 15 credits of Humanities or Social Science classes? Can faculty desires for holistic student outcomes be codified in existing distribution requirements?

IEAR, 8/01 9

D. Budget Summary

CATEGORY AMOUNT SPENT NOTES/COMMENTSSalaries and benefits:

1) assessment liaison2) institutional researcher3) clerical support4) other (please specify)5) total salaries/benefits

(indicate NA for “not applicable”)1) 2) 18, 000 (approx)3.4) N/A5) 18,000

2)also serves as co-liaison

Assessment project costs (faculty stipends/reassigned time, mini-grants, instrument costs, scoring costs, etc.)

Stipends: 31,085.73Benefits: 4,812.54

Professional development costs (travel, consultants, workshops, resource materials, etc.)

265.16

Support costs (supplies, printing, postage, etc.)

Other: (optional)

IEAR, 8/01 10

APPENDICES

IEAR, 8/01 11

APPENDIX A

SUMMATIVE PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR VISUAL ARTS PROGRAMAppendix – Project Overview

Project Manager: Bruce Amstutzbamstutz@Shoreline.edu

Contributors: Chris Simons, Mary Wills, D. Michael Larson, Alicia Zwifach, Sam Scott, Liza Halvorsen, Rob Fornell, Don Metke

Purpose: The purpose of this grant was to develop and institute an organized program of study in Fine Art serving the needs of students with serious goals in the arts and emphasizing portfolio development for assessment at the program level. Specifically the project focused on the development and institution of an Associate in Fine Arts degree tied to portfolio development and assessment for successful completion. Portfolio assessment, rather than grades achieved in specific courses, is the norm in both the academic and the professional fields of Art and Design.

Participants and Process: There were a total of 9 participants in the project. Fine Art professors Bruce Amstutz, Chris Simons, Michael Larson and Pro rata Art History faculty Mary Wills were the principle participants of the project. Professor Larson retired at the end of Fall quarter 2005, but continued to participate in the grant, though to a lesser extent during Winter and Spring quarters. This group provided the expertise in the fine art curriculum and met on a near weekly basis during the year, as their schedule permited, to develop the degree concept, review portfolio requirements of regional and national college art programs, design and research the relevance of the core components of the program outcomes, design and review critical documents, and to develop resources for the campus wide dialogue about the degree. The college humanities advisor, Alicia Zwifach, was a regular participant at these meetings and provided a key institutional and advising perspective on the degree program, transfer to other institutions and provided insight and support in the broad dialogue about the degree in the college.

In addition to these regular meetings the group arranged and hosted visits from the art programs of the University of Washington, Cornish, and Cogswell College to review the degree program outcomes and facilities and to discus portfolio assessment as a tool for transfer and placement into their programs. Western Washington University has also been contacted and we expect to meet with them at the beginning of Fall quarter 2005. The group also participated in additional meetings directed toward dialogue at the level of the college as a whole as the degree went through the college approval process. The project was unique in that it involved dialog at the program, college, and even at the state level, which has been reviewing the development of new degrees providing a major ready focus. While this dialog often seemed to put the project off course and to slow down its progress, in the end it provided an important forum for input, communication and understanding of the degree and its emphasis on portfolio assessment, all of which have made it a stronger program.

During Spring quarter when the basic components of the degree and portfolio had been developed and articulated and when it was clear that the degree would likely be accepted, the program broke up some of its activities into subgroups to involve associate faculty into the process. Professor Bruce Amstutz met with the associate faculty teaching in the ceramics program, Sam Scott, Liza Halvorsen, and Rob Fornell, to look at the ways in which the AFA degree would provide focus in the outcomes and assessment processes in concentration areas like ceramics. Photography Professor Chris Simons met with Associate Faculty Don Metke to discuss assessment in the photography sequence of courses. While this part of the grant project was somewhat minimized due to the unanticipated length and depth of the campus dialog about the degree, it was an invaluable part of the process for involving the faculty who will be teaching many of the courses in the degree into the dialog. The program looks forward to their continued input as the AFA degree is instituted next year.

Challenges and Successes: At each stage of the process we found that the challenges we faced where closely tied to our successes. During the first quarter of the project the group confronted a major challenge in developing consensus within the program concerning foundation requirements for the degree. Our initial vision was that there would be one degree and that photography would be a specialization like 2D or 3D arts. We discovered, however,

IEAR, 8/01 12

that we had strong differences about what constituted the foundation core of classes and about how far students should be expected to progress in their specialization areas. The photography program at Shoreline has a well-developed curriculum and facility and the faculty there was committed to preserving the integrity of the whole curriculum. Faculty in the drawing, painting, sculpture and design areas, however, were committed to a program emphasizing strong foundation art skills, including a year of drawing. The development of two different AFA degree tracks, one in Foundation Art, and one in Photography, was a solution that was fully embraced by all parties and represented a healthy recognition and endorsement of the different strengths of the two tracks.

Another major challenge for the program was the lengthy and involved process mentioned above of taking the degree proposal through the college process for approval. This included, to date, two meetings with the Humanities Planning Council, two with the Curriculum Committee, two with the Faculty Senate, and one with the Vice-president of Academic Affairs. Each meeting, however, proved an incentive and opportunity for us to research and review our arguments and justification of the degree and the portfolio process, its benefits for students and the college, and to develop and refine our documentation of the degree components and process. At each level we encountered thoughtful and helpful feedback that helped us to improve both the degree and our articulation of its outcomes and benefits. Most importantly, the college-wide dialog brought an enthusiastic support for the degree and for portfolio assessment at the program level. Both the Music and the English program have communicated to us their interest in creating AFA degrees in their respective area that would follow the general model of our degree.

A further challenge for us was the dialog at the state level into which our project carried us. A discussion about the development of Associate in Fine Arts degrees that would be recognized within the state’s Direct Transfer Agreement had been started but was tabled at the state level. A number of AFA degrees exist in the state, but they follow the plan of the “Option B” degree which does not include the Direct Transfer Agreement. We felt very strongly that our degree should include all of the components of the “Option A” direct transfer degree and that it should therefore be recognized under the DTA agreement. In addition, new initiatives are being discussed involving “Major Ready” degrees that would focus, as our degree will, on the preparation of the student for transfer not just with junior status but into a specific major. We were concerned that progress on our degree would become bogged down in the intricacies of discussions that were beyond the focus of our participation. The concept of portfolio assessment as the primary way by which the degree would be assessed for transfer into a major is consistent with practice within fine art programs, but seemed like it could possibly cause confusion in a dialogue that usually considered transfer on the basis of course-to-course equivalencies.

To our great satisfaction, however, dialog at the state level has indicated support for our degree as a possible model for new degree directions. We understand that the State Articulation Transfer Council is now developing coding for degrees like ours as “professional” degrees, distinct from the traditional “transfer” and “professional/technical” degrees. We were also able to clarify that if a student found it useful they could apply for the AAS transfer degree as well. In any case, the development of a strong portfolio reflecting a broad art foundation will be the critical tool for transfer as a major.

Art faculty members are enthusiastic about the new degree and student interest seems equally high. An important concern for next year will be to develop advising materials that clearly communicate the components and process of the degree and the goals it is designed to support. Close collaboration and advisement with students as they go through the program will be crucial for its success. The research and dialog the grant supported this year, as well as the documents and resources developed, will be a strong support for this success.

IEAR, 8/01 13

2004 / 2005Annual Outcomes Assessment Report

SUMMATIVE PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR VISUAL ARTS

Appendix – Documents / Part 1 of 4

Associate in Fine Arts DegreeDocuments and Guidelines

CONTENTS

AFA: Purpose and Students Served •Catalog Description •

Planning Sheets •AFA – Foundation Art •

AFA – Photography •Course Sequence Plan •

Comparison Chart of Regional AFA Degrees •

IEAR, 8/01 14

AFA: Purpose and Students Served

The development of an Associate of Fine Arts Degree at Shoreline Community College is specifically designed to support the success of two groups of students that together form a significant part of the enrollment of the Art program. First, it would support those students who are preparing portfolios for competitive entry and/or placement at four-year college Art programs. Second, it would support students with a strong commitment to study Art and Design who choose to pursue their formal professional experience first. This second opportunity would allow these students to continue their formal degree education at a later date.

1. Students preparing portfolios for competitive entry and/or advanced placement at 4-year college Art Programs

Currently: Students are completing the AA transfer degree and are completing significant credits above 90 for various reasons: to develop portfolios for presentation to enter competitive programs, for advanced placement status, and for portfolio assessment. This portfolio assessment, rather than direct consideration of courses, is the norm in both the academic and professional fields of Art and Design. Students focusing on the fine arts usually transfer to five-year BFA programs. Entry is often competitive.

Students, therefore, are willing to take more courses at the community college level, as advanced placement is an advantage considering the expense of many of these BFA programs.

Students focusing on graphic design often complete a significant portion of the VCT AAAS degree in addition to their AA transfer degree.

Problems: Art courses are not presented or taken programmatically. Students taking more than a few credits often do not take a broad enough foundation to support their goals, or take courses in an appropriate sequence. Students who do not seek out direction from a faculty advisor in the Art program will not get the advising and

direction they need. These students often seek help only toward the end of their studies when they are making applications to colleges and realize they need a portfolio. Their portfolios are sometimes not as comprehensive as they should be, and some are not appropriately focused.

Students who do complete a program of extra study in Art do not receive the recognition and support that they deserve.

Solutions to problems and advantages the AFA would provide: The AFA would provide an organized program of study with an emphasis on portfolio development, and it would also provide recognition of this achievement. The degree is needed to support those students who are already pursuing this direction. The AFA degree would constitute about 104 credits, eleven credits more than the Option A Transfer AA degree. This is consistent with current AAAS degrees in VCT and Music Technology and other community colleges that now are offering AFA degrees. The AFA degree would help foreground the interconnected character of outcomes in the program overall.

Outcome development and assessment in the curriculum can proceed at the program level. Portfolio assessment can be emphasized throughout the program.

The achievement of an AFA degree communicates to competitive colleges that the student has made serious choices about his/her educational and career directions and has shown the commitment and planning skills to complete such a program.

The AFA will be important to students at the community college level who are going to go on to a four-year degree in an associated field, such as Arts Management or Art Therapy. A background and credentials in the arts would be of value for these students.

The development of advising tools promoting the AFA degree and explaining the different options in the program will help students to become aware of their options, make more informed choices, and seek advising in a more timely fashion.

IEAR, 8/01 15

The AFA degree will be a strong marketing tool, bringing in students to the college who already have specific goals in the field of art and design and are intending on building portfolios for competitive entry and advanced placement.

2. Students with a strong commitment to study in Art and Design for which a four-year degree is not an immediate option.

Currently - A significant part of our enrollment is from students who have serious personal and professional goals in visual arts and take multiple quarters of study at Shoreline, but do not have a four-year degree as an immediate option. Some of these students may already have a degree in another field.

Problems- these are students that the college often loses and whom the college does not serve well while they are here. These students often take Art courses unsystematically and do not develop the breadth that would support their potentials. They are not provided with academic goals to motivate and direct their study. Some students take a significant number of credits and a broad range of courses but

never achieve the credentials that recognize their achievements, making it difficult to reach goals in the arts that may not require a four-year degree. Such goals include teaching in community art centers or entry level positions in galleries and museums.

Some of these students lose direction and drop out of college. Others set academic goals and work with an advisor and achieve a personal program of study. Either way, the College never counts these students as completers.

Solutions to problems and advantages AFA would provide these students – The AFA degree would provide a meaningful and well-rounded program of study and the motivation and recognition that a terminal degree would provide. In addition these students would have the incentive to achieve a broad general education that would further support life-long success. A degree which recognizes the achievement of a strong program of study in the arts and a broad general

education can provide personal sense of confidence and direction as well as the credentials for teaching and working in areas in which a strong understanding of the arts is valuable but a four year degree would not be required. A student who completes the AFA degree has completed a significant portion of a four-year BA and remains in a position to make the next step in their education when they are ready and their circumstances allow.

Students would be attracted to Shoreline Community College for the opportunity that the AFA would provide them. Students currently only taking art courses would have incentive to enroll in non-art courses to complete General Education and Distribution requirements The College benefits from students becoming completers.

IEAR, 8/01 16

ASSOCIATE IN FINE ARTS DEGREEThis degree is designed for students who are interested in earning an academic degree with a concentration of study in the Fine Arts. The degree can serve as conclusive degree as it provides serious academic study beyond the requirements of an Associate in Arts Degree. This in itself may provide excellent employment opportunity for many art-related careers. The successful Associate of Fine Art Degree student may also expect some priority in admission as a transfer student to a four-year institution as a major in Fine Art. It must be noted that this degree meets all the requirements for a transfer degree but does not guarantee admission to a specific major. Portfolio presentation is usually the determining factor in acceptance for a Fine Art Major and this degree provides the opportunity for excellent portfolio preparation.

The degree has two tracks, a concentration in Photography requiring total program credits of 107 – 109 and a concentration in Foundation Studio Art requiring total program credits of 104 – 105. It is possible to complete this degree within a two year time span with registration continuing through Summer quarters. Without Summer quarter coursework the student should expect registration in classes beyond a two year time span.

General Education RequirementsEnglish 101 and 102 10 creditsQuantitative Reasoning 5 creditsP.E. 3 creditsMulticultural Issues 3/5 creditsHumanities distribution:(Art and Art History) 15 creditsMath/Sciences 15 creditsIntra-American Studies 5 credits

Photography Core RequirementsVCT 124/125 IntroMac / Dig Imag 4 creditsVCT 129 Photoshop Intro 3 credits

VCT 229 Advanced Photoshop 3 creditsArt 105 Drawing 4 creditsArt 109 2D-Design 4 creditsArt 100 Beg Photography 5 creditsArt 102 Inter. Photography 3 creditsArt 103 Adv. Photography 3 creditsArt 291 Documentary Photo 3 creditsArt 292 Color Photography 3 creditsArt H 201 Art History 5 creditsArt H 202 Art History 5 creditsArt H 203 Art History 5 credits

Total: 107 –109 credits

Foundation Art Core RequirementsArt 105 Drawing 4 creditsArt 106 Drawing 4 creditsArt 107 Drawing 4 creditsArt 109 2D Design 4 creditsArt 110 3D Design 4 creditsArt H 201 Art History 5 creditsArt H 202 Art History 5 creditsArt H 203 Art History 5 credits

In addition to the Foundation Art Core requirements a selection courses in 2D or 3D Concentration areas must be made

2D Studio Art Concentration Complete at least 3 courses from the following:*

Art 100, 102, 103 (photography)Art 205, 206, 207 (graphic design)Art 256, 257, 258 (painting)

3D Studio Art Concentration Complete at least 3 courses from the following:*

Art 201, 202, 203 (ceramics)Art 253, 254, 255 (design and materials)Art 272, 273, 274 (scuplture)* 2 concentration courses must be taken after Art 106, Art 109, and Art 110 Total: 104 –106 credits

IEAR, 8/01 17

Shoreline Community College 2005- 2006Associate in Fine Arts

FOUNDATION STUDIO ARTThe AFA degree in Foundation Studio Art requires 104 - 109 quarter credits in courses numbered 100 or above and a cumulative gpa of 2.0 or higher. Students granted the degree meet all of the requirements of a transfer degree and can expect some priority in admission as a transfer student to a four year institution as a major in fine art. Portfolio presentation is usually the determining factor in acceptance for a Fine Arts Major and this degree provides the structure for the preparation of a strong portfolio. Students interested in pursuing the AFA degree should contact an art advisor at the beginning of their program of studies. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR A COMPLETE LISTING OF AVAILABLE COURSES.

I. GENERAL EDUCATION/COREREQUIREMENTS 21 - 23 CrCourses used in Gen Ed core may not be used for Distribution Qtr Gr CrEnglish 101 5

English 102 5

Multicultural – min 3 Cr 3 - 5

Quantitative/Symbolic Reasoning 5

Physical Education 3

II. DISTRIBUTION REQUIREMENTS Humanities15 Cr.Included in Art and Art H courses in Visual Arts Core requirements

Math-Science15 Cr.Select from at least 2 different disciplines. Must include at least one lab science10 credits required in physical, earth and/or biological sciences. See list of choices on reverse side. Qtr Gr Cr1.2.3.

Social Sciences15 Cr.Select from at least 2 different disciplines.See list of choices on reverse side. Qtr Gr Cr1.2.3.

Intra-American Studies5 Cr. See list of choices on reverse side

STUDENT:ADVISOR:

III. FOUNDATION STUDIO ART REQUIREMENTS 48 - 51 Cr

Qtr Gr CrFine Arts Core 23 CrArt 105 Drawing 4

Art 106 Drawing 4

Art 107 Drawing 4

Art 109 2d Design 4

Art 110 3d Design 4

Art 281 Portfolio 1

Art H 201 Art History 5Art H 202 Art History 5Art H 203 Art History 5

In addition to the Fine Arts Core requirements, select a Concentration in either 2d or 3d Studio Art:2d Studio Concentration 12 to 15 Cr Select at least 3 courses from the list of 2d Studio Art options below1. 4 - 52. 4 - 53. 4 - 5

2d Studio Art options: Photography - Art 100, 102, 103Graphic Design - Art 205, 206, 207Painting – Art 256, 257, 258

3d Studio Concentration 12 to 15 Cr Select at least 3 courses from the list of 3d Studio Art options below1. 4 - 52. 4 - 53. 4 - 5

3d Studio Art options:Ceramics – Art 201, 202, 203Design and Materials – Art 253, 254, 255Sculpture – Art 272, 273, 274 Students transferring to U of W must meet high school core admissions requirements, including two years of the same foreign language in high school or two quarters in college.

Shoreline Community College 2005- 2006Associate in Fine Arts

PHOTOGRAPHYThe AFA degree in Foundation Studio Art requires 104 - 109 quarter credits in courses numbered 100 or above and a cumulative gpa of 2.0 or higher. Students granted the degree meet all of the requirements of a transfer degree and can expect some priority in admission as a transfer student to a four year institution as a major in fine art. Portfolio presentation is usually the determining factor in acceptance for a Fine Arts Major and this degree provides the structure for the preparation of a strong portfolio. Students interested in pursuing the AFA degree should contact an art advisor at the beginning of their program of studies. SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR A COMPLETE LISTING OF AVAILABLE COURSES.

I. GENERAL EDUCATION/COREREQUIREMENTS 21 - 23 CrCourses used in Gen Ed core may not be used for Distribution Qtr Gr CrEnglish 101 5

English 102 5

Multicultural – min 3 Cr 3 - 5

Quantitative/Symbolic Reasoning 5

Physical Education 3

II. DISTRIBUTION REQUIREMENTS

Humanities15 Cr.Included in Art and Art H courses in Photography Core requirements

Math-Science15 Cr.Select from at least 2 different disciplines. Must include at least one lab science10 credits required in physical, earth and/or biological sciences. See list of choices on reverse side. Qtr Gr Cr1.2.3.

Social Sciences15 Cr.Select from at least 2 different disciplines.See list of choices on reverse side. Qtr Gr Cr1.2.3.

Intra-American Studies5 Cr.See list of choices on reverse side

STUDENT:

ADVISOR:

III. PHOTOGRAPHY CORE REQUIREMENTS 53Cr

Qtr Gr CrVCT124 Intro to the Mac 2

VCT 124 Digital Image Basics 2VCT 129 Photoshop Intro 3VCT 229 Advanced Photoshop 3Art 105 Drawing 4

Art 109 2 d Design 4Art 100 Beg. Photography 5Art 102 Inter. Photography 3Art 103 Adv. Photography 3Art 119 Studio Photography 3Art 291 Documentary Photography 3Art 292 Color Photography 3Art H 201 Art History 5Art H 202 Art History 5Art H 203 Art History 5

Students must complete an intermediate algebra course in high school or college or complete a math course for which intermediate algebra is a prerequisite.

* Students transferring to U of W must meet high school core admissions requirements, including two years of the same foreign language in high school or two quarters in college.

A. Educational Pathway For Associate in Fine Arts DegreeAssociate of Fine Arts: Photography

First YearAUTUMN WINTER SPRING SUMMER**English 101 5cr *English 102 5cr *Natural Sc 5cr*Q.S.R. 5cr *Multicultural 3-

5cr*Social Sci. 5cr

Art 100 5cr Art 102 3cr VCT 129 3cr*Art 292 3cr *PE 3cr

VCT 124/125 4cr *Art 105 4crTotal Credits: 14/19 Total Credits: 18/20 Total Credits: 13/16

Second YearAUTUMN WINTER SPRING SUMMER*

*Natural Sci 5cr *Social Sci. 5cr *IASTU 5cr VCT 229 3cr *Natural Sci 5cr *ART 109 4cr

Art H 201 5cr Art H 202 5cr Art H 203 5cr Art 103 3cr Art 119 3cr Art 291 3cr

Total Credits: 13/16 Total Credits: 12/18 Total Credits: 12/17Total Program Credits: 107 - 109

Associate of Fine Arts: Foundation Studio ArtFirst YearAUTUMN WINTER SPRING SUMMER*

*English 101 5cr

*English 102 5cr

*Natural Sci. 5cr

*Q.S.R. 5cr *Social Sci. 5cr *Social Sci. 5cr

Art 105 4cr Art 106 4cr Art 107 4crArt 109 4cr *Multicultural 3-

5crArt 110 4cr

Total Credits: 13/18 Total Credits: 12/19 Total Credits: 13/18

Second YearAUTUMN WINTER SPRING SUMMER*

*Natural Sci 5cr

*Social Sci. 5cr *IASTU 5cr

*PE 3cr

*Natural Sci 5cr

**ArtConcentration 4cr

Art H 201 5cr Art H 202 5cr Art H 203 5cr**ArtConcentration 4cr **ArtConcentration

4crArt 281 Portfolio 1cr

Total Credits: 12/17 Total Credits: 14/19 Total Credits: 14/15Total Program Credits: 104 - 106* Courses highlighted in italics for Autumn, Winter, and Spring quarter can be completed during Summer quarter

** Areas of ConcentrationTwo-Dimensional Studio Art: Complete at least 3 courses from the following:Art 100, 102, 103 (photography)Art 205, 206, 207 (graphic arts)Art 256, 257, 258 (painting)- Or-Three-Dimensional Studio Art: Complete at least 3 courses from the following:

Art 201, 202, 203 (Ceramics)Art 253, 254, 255 ( Design and Materials)Art 272, 273, 274 ( Sculpture)

Shoreline CC AFA: Studio

21-23 General Ed. Req. 10 Eng 101, 102 3-5 MultiCul 5 QSR 5 PE

50 Distribution 15*Humanities 15 Nat Science 15 Social Sc. 5 IASTU

36 Foundation 12 Basic Dwg. 105,106,107 4 2Design,109 4 3D Design 110 (15 *Art History) 1 Portfolio

12 Art Concen:

(48 Art Credits)____ 104 Total Credits

Comments Meets the DTA

*Art/ArtH satisfies 15 Humanities credits

Shoreline CCAFA: Photography

21-23 General Ed. Req. 10 Eng 101, 102 3-5 MultiCul 5 QSR 3 PE

50 Distribution 15 *Humanities 15 Nat Science 15 Social Sc. 5 IASTU

53 Foundation 11 B&W Photog. 3 Color Photog. 3 Elec. Imaging 3 Doc. Photog. 10 VCT 4 Design, 109 (15 *Art History) 4 Drawing

(53 Art Credits)____ 109 Total Credits

Comments Meets the DTA

*Art/ArtH satisfies 15 Humanities credits

Spokane FallsAFA

15 General Ed. Req. 10 Eng 101,201 5 Math 115

20 Distribution 5 Humanities 10 Social Sc. 5 Lab Sc.

46 Foundation 11 Drawing

9 2D design 4 3D design

10 Art History 5 Intro to Art

1 Health/Art 1 Portfolio 4 Painting 1 Exhibit

16 Electives

(62 Art Credits)___ 97 Total Credits

Comments Does not meet the DTA. Student may transfer to EWU as candidate for a BA degree; with portfolio,, may be admitted to BFA program at EWU.

North SeattleAFA

15 General Ed. Req. 10 Eng. (2) 5 QSR (1)

15 Distribution 5 Humanities 5 Science 5 Soc. Sc.

45 Foundation 5 Art Business 15 Art History 15 Drawing 5 2D Design 5 3D Design

25 Electives 5-20 Studio Grp 1 5-20 Studio Grp 2

(70 Art Credits)___ 100 Total Credits

CommentsDoes not meet the DTA

Everett CCAFA in Studio Arts

15 General Ed. Req. 10 Eng 5 QSR

15 Distribution 5 Humanities 5 Soc. Sc. 5 Sc.

40 Foundation 10 Core: 5 Design 5 Drawing 15 Specialization: Drawing, or Painting, or Ceramics 15 Electives

15 Interdisciplinary

5 Final Present. Portfolio

(60 Art Credits)___ 90 Total Credits

Comments The AFA in Studio Art does not meet the DTA. Their AAS does meet the DTA. Fifteen AAS credits are art specialization. (Maybe! ???)

Appendix – Documents / Part 3 of 4

Outcomes and Assessment in Fine Art Sequences

CONTENTS

Outcomes and Issue in Ceramics for AFA Students – Discussion notes •Basic Outcomes in Ceramics Courses: Foundation level •

Suggestions for Advanced Ceramics Courses •Notes on Assessment of Learning in Photography Sequence •

Outcomes and Issues in Ceramics for AFA StudentsThe following is a summary of a discussion on 6/2/05 with ceramics instructors Bruce Amstutz, Liza Halvorsen, and Sam Scott. Additional notes are added from discussion with ceramics instructor Rob Fornell, who was not able to make the original meeting.The subject of this discussion was the Associate of Fine Arts degree and how it will relate to the curriculum and outcomes in the 3-quarter sequence of ceramics courses. The basic topics of discussion included the building a curriculum to meet the diversity of student goals in the advanced courses; outcomes in problem solving, skills and craft for these courses; and the importance of real world survival skills for artists.

Diversity of Student Goals -The first course in the sequence, Art 201, has a well-established focus on outcomes in basic skills, problem solving with respect to form and craft, and general appreciation of the art form. It is the course in the sequence that has the highest enrollment and is taken by many transfer-oriented students as part of their humanities distribution requirement. Students taking the subsequent courses do so for a variety of reasons and the outcomes are consistent with those of the basic course but allow the student to pursue more individualized directions. One benefit of the AFA degree will be to enable us to track students in concentration areas like ceramics and to review and develop the outcomes and curriculum in these areas to better meet their needs.

The diversity of goals and interests of students in these courses was a subject of discussion. Not all students in these courses will be AFA degree seeking students. Those in the AFA program might be:

• generally interested in 3D media, including a range of materials and processes. These students could have interests that range from product design, interior and industrial design to sculpture and more fine art directions, or they could be students who are still exploring different perspectives. These students would be taking ceramics courses mixed with other 3D courses. Some of these students will be interested in transferring to 4-year art programs.

• focused on pursuing ceramics in the academic setting of a 4-year BFA program. The interest of these students could range from sculptural ceramics to functional vessel forms. Some of these students may investigate a range of materials besides clay as they explore individual directions. These and the above students who are focused on transferring for further study in academic settings have particular concerns relative to academic applications, resumes and exhibition records.

• interested in a highly focused program directed toward working as a studio potter. These students might or might not be considering transfer to a 4-year college as an immediate next step, and may look forward to working in a diversity of studio settings as they build their career. They will have a somewhat different marketing context for their portfolio and resume, and different needs relating to continuing studio work outside of the academic setting and marketing of their work.

Each of these interest areas would have somewhat different learning sets. Tracking student directions and advising them appropriately, as advisors and as teachers creating curriculum, will be important. The ability to identify and track students with the AFA advising code can be a useful tool in staying in contact with these students and helping them to identify the sets of learning experiences that are available to them. The group discussed the possibility of creating track guides for students that could advise them of combinations of courses (ceramics with sculpture for example) or specific project directions available within the ceramics sequences.

Another group of students in the ceramic courses may be those who are taking concentration courses in ceramics before having taken foundation art. It is typical that students may take a couple of classes in ceramics before they gain the confidence in their artistic abilities the sense of commitment to consider a serious direction in the arts. At the same time, an important idea of the AFA is that students will take the majority of their foundation courses before they take their concentration courses. It was suggested that students be required to take two of the three concentration courses after the basic foundation courses and that an allowance for special project courses in the concentration area be made. These students would then get some credit for courses taken early in their program and also would be able to take additional credits in ceramics as part of their concentration.

Outcomes: Problem-solving – The emphasis on problem-solving skills in form and craft of the courses over all is seen as a supportive framework for all groups of students. While the teacher generally establishes the intent of specific problem solving at the basic first quarter level, students at more advanced levels should take more responsibility for defining and assessing the intent of the projects with respect to form and craft. This focus on more advanced students defining and assessing their own intent, ie. taking responsibility for their own artistic process, is a shared value with other course sequences in the foundation art program. It is also reflected in the outcomes that are to be assessed in the program’s portfolio assessment requirement.

Outcomes: Skill and Craft – More specific outcomes in skills and craft were suggested for those students whose goals are focused within ceramics as a medium. Areas suggested for development included glaze development and the use of slips and underglazes; kiln loading and firing, as well as a experience in a broader range of firing temperatures; and the introduction of outcomes in plaster and mold making (see Liza Halvorsen’s list of suggestions for advanced classes). The group discussed changes to the ceramics facility that may be needed to institute these changes, including some crossover use of the sculpture studio to keep plaster and low fire materials and processes separate. The program might also consider purchasing a second electric kiln to support more student involvement in firing and diverse firing processes.

Acknowledgment of the role that workshops and the student club, the Clay Club, have made in expanding the experiences of students in these areas was made. Students in the AFA should be advised to be active in the club and to take advantage of workshops as ways to develop broader skills and experiences to complement coursework and to add to their resume and portfolio.

Outcomes: Real World Survival Skills – The group was concerned that the program consider practical business and career oriented survival skills that artists need and that are not usually a part of academic programs. The new AFA process will emphasize the student’s preparation of a resume, artist’s statement, and portfolio. Advisors in the program should support students in their search for colleges and in the application process. It was felt that non-academic skills and strategies should also be emphasized. Suggestions included marketing strategies and skills for self-employed artists and craftspersons; internship and mentorship opportunities; and post-graduation studio development, including: studio basics, shared space and group space options, equipment, materials sourcing, costs and pricing.

Strategies for introducing these outcomes into an already heavy course load for the degree were discussed. Besides infusing some of these outcomes in the existing curriculum and in the portfolio preparation process of the degree, and support for club organized workshops and activities, the group discussed the idea of program sponsored seminars in relevant subject areas that students would be encouraged to take as part of their portfolio and resume building process.

Portfolio Development – The group was especially concerned with the problems and issues of photographic documentation of work for portfolios. The development and presentation of a portfolio of work is an important component of the AFA degree assessment process, and it is the major way in which artist’s represent and market themselves. As practicing artists themselves the associate faculty noted the time, expense and skill required to secure good photographs. Would students have access to resources for documenting work? Should the program include seminars in photographing artwork? What are the standards for effective photo-documentation?

Another issue regarding documentation is the format in which reproductions of artwork should be presented. The standard for many years has been a plastic sheet of 15 to 20 slides, and the AFA will require submit 20 slides for evaluation and as part of the program’s record. Requirements for images for college portfolio reviews and for jurying for exhibition and publication run the range form slides to digital images to actual work. In view of the transitional standards for image presentation the student should be advised to document work in several formats.

The web is also becoming an important tool for artists to represent and market their work and this might also be a subject for a seminar or workshop. It was noted that the VCT program has a specialization in web design and that this might be a source for additional training or collaborative support.

Basic Outcomes in CeramicsFoundation Level

Craft Students demonstrate basic skills in throwing at the wheel, handbuilding and glazing associated with the hand

forming of ceramic vessels. They pay attention to the requirements of materials and processes. They use time management and project management skills in the effective and timely completion of projects. They demonstrate the ability to keep accurate records as a support in processes where feedback is delayed

and/or ambiguous.

Problem Solving

Students apply basic understandings of processes and materials to analyze and predict the behavior of clay and glazes in response to one’s actions and the physical environment.

They combine simple process for forming simple forms in order to achieve more complex forms. They demonstrate the ability to persevere and negotiate with ambiguous consequences of processes that take

time to learn and are difficult to control by their nature.

Form Students hand form vessels which reflect their consideration of such aspects of form as surface qualities and

the contributions of material to form, spatial relations of containing, organizing principles such as gesture, symmetry or asymmetry, the relation of the tactile qualities of weight and balance to visual form and function.

Appreciation Students use the vocabulary of form to describe what specifically appeals to them about forms they “like.” They participate in class presentations of their own and fellow students projects, identify projects which

successfully meet the terms of project goals, and identify projects that they find interesting and compelling and endeavor to use the appropriate language of visual form to explain their sentiments.

They visit galleries or museums in which handcrafted ceramic vessels are displayed, observe pieces carefully and use appropriate language of form to describe them. They identify relations of form that they find appealing or evocative and attempt to explain how they are affected and why. They show an understanding of the diversity of forming processes and make a personal connection with their own efforts.

June 2, 2005Shoreline CC with Bruce AmstutzAFA Meeting – CeramicsLiza Halvorsen

Some Suggestions for Advanced Classes:

• Glaze mixing, tri-axial blend glaze development, advanced techniques

• Slip, terra sigillata, underglaze techniques

• Kiln (electric) loading and firing, participating in gas kiln loading and firing

• Alternative firing techniques: raku, pit, saggar, low temp glazes etc

• Plaster mold making, one part mold, two part mold

• Seminar on portfolio development – photography – slides and digital

• Seminar on applications and resumes for college transfer, jobs, exhibitions, artist statement

• Seminar on post graduation studio development – studio basics, equipment, costs,shared space, group space options

Notes on Assessment of Learning in Photography Sequence

HOW LEARNING IS ASSESSED IN ART 100 – Chris Simons

Assessment of learning in Art 100 occurs in stages.

The first stage is in the explanation of a process or assignment through varying the intake of data by visual explanation combined with oral dissertation. Discussion follows with stimulation by instructor questioning.

The second stage is though written instructions where students are given a prescribed problem to solve.

The third stage is in the student essay where students analyze and describe the solution to the problem assigned.

The fourth stage is again through essay where students analyze each other’s solutions to an assigned problem.

The fifth stage is through group discussion of the student work, again stimulated by instructor input

ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING IN ADVANCED PHOTOGRAPHY – Don Metke

I assess learning capabilities in my advanced classes through a process of repetitive and thorough discussion. This allows for students to execute their abilities and to fulfill and accomplish assigned exercises. This process involves participation in both written, oral and group critique. Discussion of the project / exercise encourages the individual creative process. Identification and comprehension of task (assignment handout with problem to solve) and examples of other’s work assist in giving students a process for verbal questioning and explanation of concepts. In addition students are assessed through written report as well as interaction through oral presentation. This may be related to an assignment or as a project in the genre of the class. I explain what I want through example and definition. I offer and suggest ideas, however I leave enough room for students to problem solve and define through their own perceptions and experiences. In the end, students show their understanding through physical evidence, interpretations of the assignment, and group critique. Everyone understands that this presentation is critical to the process and it also allows each student to justify their work to the group, to elaborate their personal interpretations and define their intent and content as a visual presentation.

2004 / 2005Annual Outcomes Assessment Report

SUMMATIVE PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR VISUAL ARTS

Appendix – Documents / Part 4 of 4

On-line Resources

Art Programs in Washington State:Cornish Collegehttp://www.cornish.edu/main.asp?pg=285&sid=2http://www.cornish.edu/art/

Seattle Universityhttp://www.seattleu.edu/home/prospective_students/transfer_students/direct_transfer_guarantee/http://www.seattleu.edu/artsci/directory/casdir.asp?searchterm=Fine%20Arts&task=departmenthttp://www.seattleu.edu/artsci/finearts/

Evergreenhttp://www.evergreen.edu/faculty/facbysubject.htm#Vhttp://www.evergreen.edu/admissions/transfer.htmhttp://www.evergreen.edu/catalog/matching.htm#Art

University of Washingtonhttp://www.artsci.washington.edu/deptdetails.asp?ID=6http://art.washington.edu/undergrad/apply/portfolio04.html

Western Washington Universityhttp://www.ac.wwu.edu/~artdept/index.html

Out of State ProgramsArtCenter College of Designwww.artcenter.edu/

Otis College of Art and Designwww.otis.edu/

Rhode Island School of Designwww.otis.edu/

Oregon College of Art and Craftwww.ocrc.edu/

Other Resources FATE Foundations in Art: Theory and Educationwww.foundationsinart.org/

Betz Survey of Foundation Arthttp://faculty.weber.edu/sjbetz/webmechanicsfolder/foundationsurv45.html

The ICRC Handbook (handbook for the Washington State Direct Transfer Agreement)www.washingtoncouncil.org/ICRC.html

15

<<Return>>

APPENDIX B

Information Literacy Assessment ProjectJoanna Tillson, jtillson@shoreline.eduBruce McKenna bmckenna@shoreline.edu

OverviewA team of librarians and English 102 instructors previously created a questionnaire with fifteen questions addressing students’ choice of information resources, the logistics of online searching, evaluation of sources and bibliographic citation. Five additional questions provide information about the individual students, e.g. number of credits acquired, number of sessions with a librarian and whether English 102 has been completed. The latter questions allow us to break down the results of the content questions according to student characteristics.

Between Fall 2003 and Spring 2005 the questionnaire was given to 26 classes across the curriculum, once early in the quarter and again at the end. About one-third of the students participating were taking English 102.

Although data entry for the 2004-2005 surveys is just now being completed, we have reviewed the data from 2003-2004. Results are mixed. In some instances students’ knowledge improves from the beginning of the quarter to the end, but in other cases the percentage of students giving an incorrect response increases. Since in those cases the number of “don’t know” answers usually decreases, we suspect that during the quarter terms such as “online catalog” become familiar to students so they think they know the correct answers but in reality they don’t.

In general, students did well in recognizing the role of print resources. Nonetheless, recognizing their importance doesn’t necessarily mean that students are using them. Other surveys have revealed a gap between what students know and what they do.

As of the end-of the quarter surveys 80% of the students had completed at least 30 credits, 90% had completed English 102 and 80% had had at least one orientation with a reference librarian. Consequently, this student population has had ample opportunity to acquire and polish information literacy skills. Viewed in that light, the students’ ability to select online tools and conduct skillful searches is disappointing. Responses to questions addressing the principles underlying source citation are also weak.

Although it has become clear that some questions are not well designed, the team will use the same survey next year in order to provide a continuous stream of data. We will review the results from 2004-2005 and will continue the dialog with other faculty, which has been extremely valuable. Assessing the significance of the data and determining what action the campus needs to take based on it constitute the project’s greatest challenges.

17

Information Literacy Survey

Note: in the items below, a completely correct response may require selecting only one of the alternatives or it may require selecting more than one. Please be careful to consider this as you respond.

1. Which of the following can be used to develop ideas for a topic?

(Mark as many as apply.)

a. Clusteringb. List makingc. Question writingd. Freewritinge. Any of the abovef. Don’t know

2. Which of these is most likely to provide the full text of an article from a magazine, journal, or newspaper?

a. Online catalogb. Internet search engine c. Periodical databased. The Reader's Guide to Periodical Literaturee. None of the abovef. Don’t know

3. If you were searching in a magazine database such as ProQuest or Ebsco, what phrase would produce the greatest number of articles?

a. Salmon and habitatb. Salmon habitatc. Salmon or habitatd. Salmon not habitate. None of the abovef. Don’t know

4. If you were searching in a magazine database such as ProQuest or Ebsco for articles about the bulldog bat, which of the following would you try first?

a. Bulldog or batb. Bulldog and batc. Bulldog batd. None of the above e. Don’t know

5. Which resource would you usually go to first for a broad overview of a research topic?

a. Internet search engineb. Newspaper/magazine articlec. Bookd. Subject encyclopediae. None of the abovef. Don’t know

6. Which resource is most likely to be influenced by advertising?

a. Web siteb. Newspaper/magazine articlec. Bookd. Subject encyclopediae. None of the abovef. Don’t know

7. Which resource is most likely to offer in-depth information?

a. Web siteb. Newspaper/magazine articlec. Bookd. Encyclopedia e. None of the abovef. Don’t know

8. Which of the following statements about documentation of Internet sources are true and which are false? (Mark “DK” if you don’t know.)

a. The citation on a Works Cited list for a magazine article I found online would be identical to the citation for the same article if I found it in print.

T / F / DK

b. The title of a source is the most important and as long as the title is accurate including the author’s name isn’t crucial.

T / F / DK

c. Guidelines for when to document Internet sources are exactly the same as for print-based resources. T / F / DK

d. It is okay to quote directly from a web page without using quotation marks as long as the source is cited at the end of the paper. T / F / DK

19

The next questions are about MLA and APA format. Answer either 9a or 9b but not both. Answer the one about the format you are most familiar with. Mark “DK” if you don’t know.

9A. The following forms might appear as correct in-text citations in an MLA-formatted paper:

a. (Jones 99) T / F/ DKb. (“Star Wars”) T / F/ DKc. (“Start Wars,” by Brown, p. 13) T / F/ DKd. (Jones, p. 99) T / F/ DKe. (“Star Wars” 5, 10-12) T / F/ DKf. (1) T / F/ DKg. (Bianco, 1997) T / F/ DK

9B. The following forms might appear as correct in-text citations in an APA-formatted paper:a. (Smith, 1996, p.23) T / F/ DKb. (“Tipping”) T / F/ DKc. (“Tipping” 33) T / F/ DKd. (Smith et al 14) T / F/ DKe. (E. Smith, 1979) T / F/ DKf. (p. 89) T / F/ DKg. (Smith and Johnson) T / F/ DK

10. Web pages are always more up-to-date than printed material. T / F/ DK

11. If you were searching in a magazine database such as ProQuest or Ebsco, which of these searches would you use first when dealing with the broad topic of discrimination?

a. A keyword search using the term discriminationb. A subject search on discriminationc. Don’t know

12. Your instructor says your topic must be more specific, but your brainstorming has reached a dead end. Now your class is in the library and your instructor has asked you to use this time to focus your topic. What do you do now?

a. Look through the reference collectionb. Use a magazine databasec. Use an Internet search engined. None of the abovee. Don’t know

13. Your assignment is to write a research paper about the portrayal of the military in the media.Which of the following words would you include in a key word list? ? (Mark as many as apply.)

a. Mediab. Militaryc. Portrayald. Armed servicese. All of the abovef. None of the aboveg. Don’t know

14. Which of the following would you consider when evaluating a source? (Mark as many as apply.)a. Relevanceb. Publisher

c. Use of evidenced. Authore. Date of publicationf. Comprehensivenessg. All of the aboveh. None of the abovei. Don’t know

15. The criteria in #14 are used for evaluating print materials as well as online sources.

T / F / DK

16. How many times this quarter have you independently discussed your research needs with a reference librarian?

a. 0b. 1-2c. 3-5d. 6 or more

17. How many college courses have you taken including this one that have had a session with a librarian? a. 0b. 1-2c. 3-5d. 6 or more

18. Have you completed English 102? No / Yes

19. Have you completed Library 150? No / Yes

20. If you have been to any of these drop-in workshops offered by the SCC library, please circle the ones you’ve attended.

a. Library Basicsb. Finding Booksc. Finding Articlesd. Web Search Strategiesa. Avoiding Plagiarism

21. Roughly how many college credits have you completed?a. 0-10b. 11-30c. 31-45d. 46-70e. more than 70

Course Name and Number in which this survey was taken (for example History 222)___________

21

Information Literacy Assessment Survey

New General Education Outcome assessed under the aegis of the Office of Institutional Research

Students will access, use, and evaluate information in a variety of formats, keeping in mind social, legal and ethical issues surrounding information access in today's society.

Year one, questions developed by Bonnie Frunz, Gary Parks, Joanna Reeves, and Joanna Tillson

15 content questions, 6 questions regarding student experience—number of credits, library experience, et

cetera

Year two (last year) survey administered to a variety of courses with a research component. 13 sections in

Science, IAS, Health Occupations, and Humanities.

Year three (this year) last year’s data analyzed. Survey administered first two quarters

Presentations to faculty and staff begun this quarter

80% of the students had completed 30 or more credits

80% had at least one in-class session with a reference librarian

64% discussed their research needs individually with a reference librarian at least once

40% had taken at least two research related courses

Information presented here is taken from the comparison of responses to the survey administered the first

and last week of courses with a research component

192 student responses from the beginning of the courses, 177 at the end

General Education Information Literacy Outcomes are in Comic San MS. Only those

outcomes that were assessed are reprinted here.

The survey questions and results follow the Outcomes and are in Times New Roman. The asterisk (*)

after a number indicates a statistically significant change in the response. Some survey results are printed

more than once as they apply to more than one outcome.

Comments follow each survey question and are in Palatino Linotype italics.

Sometimes there were varied interpretations.

Shoreline Community College 232004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

GENERAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES

INFORMATION LITERACY

Students will access, use, and evaluate information in a variety of formats, keeping in mind social, legal and ethical issues surrounding information access in today's society.

I. Define and articulate a need for information.A. Identify an information need

1. Which of the following can be used to develop ideas for a topic? (Mark as many as apply.)

Pre %/Post % a. Clustering 14/13 b. List making 25/23c. Question writing 12/13d. Freewriting 19/23e. Any of the above 70/68f. Don’t know 2/2

Q1. A good percentage answered correctly but there isn’t much of a change from pre to post responses. Even with the high response we find it puzzling that more students wouldn’t answer “Any of the above.” Are they not recognizing some of the terminology?

C. Identify key concepts and terms that describe the information need 13. Your assignment is to write a research paper about the portrayal of the military in the media.Which of the following words would you include in a key word list? (Mark as many as apply.)

a. Media 56/53b. Military 60/64c. Portrayal 20/19d. Armed services 38/35e. All of the above 35/31f. None of the above 5/6g. Don’t know 3/5

Q13. This question has generated a lot of discussion. That 1/3 of the students wouldn’t include either “Armed services” may indicate students’ belief that they would get enough sources with the a and b responses or it may be that the term is not familiar to them.

II. Locate, access and use information from a variety of sources.B. Select and use the most appropriate tools and strategies for accessing needed information.

2. Which of these is most likely to provide the full text of an article from a magazine, journal, or newspaper?a. Online catalog 6/12 *b. Internet search engine 10/8c. Periodical database 55/63d. Reader's Guide 5/2e. None of the above 7/6f. Don’t know 17/8 *

Q2. There are a strong number of those who responded c. The main confusion seems to be with a, indicating some confusion between the catalog and a database, especially since this percentage increases from pre to post.

5. Which resource would you usually go to first for a broad overview of a research topic?

a. Internet search engine 59/43 *b. Newspaper/magazine article 2/2c. Book 3/3d. Subject encyclopedia 32/49 *e. None of the above 1/1f. Don’t know 3/3

Q5. Perhaps there is some vagueness here about the resources available. They may presume they are at home and would log on to the Internet first thing. Compare this response the next question, Q12, which places the student in the library

12. Your instructor says your topic must be more specific, but your brainstorming has reached a dead end. Now your class is in the library and your instructor has asked you to use this time to focus your topic. What would be your best choice?

a. Look through the ref collection 30/46 *b. Use a magazine database 12/14c. Use an Internet search engine 32/22 *d. None of the above 9/9e. Don’t know 17/11 *

Q12. Since the question is about focusing your topic in the library the best answer is a, but b is not out of the question here.

7. Which resource is most likely to offer in-depth information?

a. Web site 7/8b. Newspaper/mag article 1/4c. Book 77/74d. Encyclopedia 13/11e. None of the above 0/2f. Don’t know 2/2

Q7. A good percentage responded well, though this is a bit obvious. There has been some discussion about how in-depth encyclopedias are and their place in student research.

Shoreline Community College 252004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

11. If you were searching in a magazine database such as ProQuest or Ebsco, which of these searches would you use first when dealing with the broad topic of discrimination?

a. A keyword search using the term discrimination 26/27b. A subject search on discrimination 62/71 *c. Don’t know 12/2 *

Q11. This generated lots of discussion about the value of starting with one search vs the other.

13. [repeated] Your assignment is to write a research paper about the portrayal of the military in the media.Which of the following words would you include in a key word list? (Mark as many as apply.)

a. Media 56/53b. Military 60/64c. Portrayal 20/19d. Armed services 38/35e. All of the above 35/31f. None of the above 5/6g. Don’t know 3/5

D. Apply information retrieval and selection skills and concepts to emerging technologies.

3. If you were searching in a magazine database such as ProQuest or Ebsco, what phrase would produce the greatest number of articles?

a. Salmon and habitat 33/34b. Salmon habitat 21/29 *c. Salmon or habitat 24/30d. Salmon not habitat 2/0e. None of the above 1/1f. Don’t know 20/6

Q3. This generated a lengthy discussion of how we teach search techniques, of the differences among different databases, and of the frequently changing logic that databases and search engines employ.

4. If you were searching in a magazine database such as ProQuest or Ebsco for articles about the bulldog bat, which of the following would you try first?

a. Bulldog or bat 2/2b. Bulldog and bat 16/15c. Bulldog bat 72/80 *d. None of the above 1/1e. Don’t know 11/3

Q4. This is very straight forward so the correct response is high. Again the discussion involved how databases are evolving as much as how we ought to teach the basic search techniques.

Shoreline Community College 272004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

III. Identify the basic principles of how information is produced, stored, organized, transmitted and accessed.

A. Identify basic concepts of information organization, in online, print and other formats.

11. [repeated] If you were searching in a magazine database such as ProQuest or Ebsco, which of these searches would you use first when dealing with the broad topic of discrimination?

a. A keyword search using the term discrimination 26/27b. A subject search on discrimination 62/71 *c. Don’t know 12/2 *

IV. Critically evaluate information and its sources.B. Evaluate online and print sources for objectivity, authority, accuracy, and currency. 6. Which resource is most likely to be influenced by advertising?

a. Web site 65/68b. Newspaper/magazine 32/28c. Book 1/1d. Subject encyclopedia 0/1e. None of the above 1/2f. Don’t know 2/2

Q6. Since both a and b are good answers we are pleased with this response.

11. Web pages are always more up-to-date than printed material. True: 22/22 False: 70/70 Don’t Know: 8/9

Q10. This is an encouragingly high percentage though we wish it were even higher. Does this reflect a lingering preference for the Web as new and up to date, print as old and out of date?

14. Which of the following would you consider when evaluating a source? (Mark as many as apply.)a. Relevance 54/45 *b. Publisher 30/22 *c. Use of evidence 50/40 *d. Author 40/32e. Date of publication 54/41 *f. Comprehensive. 40/32 *g. All of the above 43/55 *h. None of the above 4/2i. Don’t know 7/3

Q14. The structure of the question may be hurting our ability to interpret the responses. Still overall it seems our students need help here. These terms and ideas should be more familiar to them.

15. The criteria in #14 are used for evaluating print materials as well as online sources.True: 75/91 *False: 5/2 *

Don’t Know: 20/7 *Q15. This is very encouraging. In principle they know this very well.

V. Use information, considering the economic, legal, ethical and social issues surrounding its access and use.C. Use information ethically and legally, considering issues such as plagiarism and copyright.

8. Which of the following statements about documentation of Internet sources are true and which are false? (Mark “DK” if you don’t know.)

b. The citation on a Works Cited list for a magazine article I found online would be identical to the citation for the same article if I found it in print.True=22/17 False=55/72 * Don’t Know=23/11 *

Shoreline Community College 292004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

b. The title of a source is the most important and as long as the title is accurate including the author’s name isn’t crucial.

True=11/10 False=80/83 Don’t Know=9/8

c. Guidelines for when to document Internet sources are exactly the same as for print-based resources.

True=36/44 False=37/41 Don’t Know=27/16 *

d. It is okay to quote directly from a web page without using quotation marks as long as the source is cited at the end of the paper.

True=14/9 False= 71/78 Don’t Know=15/13

Q8. The responses to a, b, and d are much stronger than c. Is this a problem with the question or with the concept we are assessing?

[Correct responses marked in boldface]9. The following forms might appear as correct in-text citations in an MLA-formatted paper:

a. (Jones 99) T / F/ DK T:43/72* F:36/15* DK:21/13*b. (“Star Wars”) T / F/ DK T:22/30 F:53/53 DK:25/17*c. (“Start Wars,” by Brown, p. 13) T / F/ DK T:38/21* F:39/62* DK:23/17d. (Jones, p. 99) T / F/ DK T:50/40* F:29/45* DK:21/16e. (“Star Wars” 5, 10-12) T / F/ DK T:33/45* F:34/39 DK:44/16*f. (1) T / F/ DK T:46/50 F:28/31 DK:25/19g. (Bianco, 1997) T / F/ DK no data T F

Q9. This was the cause of much discussion. Some felt there was too much fine detail work here to expect better results. Others felt more strongly that with only a few basic principles addressed the answers aren’t as strong as we would like.

<<Return>>

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX Assessment of Student Learning in Courses and Programs: Gathering Data for Program Planning and Assessment Reports (Student Learning Assessment Projects - SLAP)Pam Dusenberry, pdusenbe@shoreline.edu

B. Project OverviewC. The goals of this project were to

1. engage faculty in examining student learning of course and program outcomes, 2. engage faculty in examining student learning of the General Education Outcomes (GEOs) in their

courses and programs,3. help faculty gather data on student learning to include in Program Planning and Assessment Reports

scheduled to be written in Fall 2005,4. provide models of course and program student learning outcomes assessment at course and program

levels that others can use,5. investigate and document how these activities could be used for classroom and

program improvement, and6. promote among faculty an increased understanding of and respect for each other’s disciplines.

D.Measuring student learning in terms of the outcomes we have defined at the course, program and general education levels is no easy task. This project sought to help seven faculty members from several disciplines choose student learning outcomes for a particular course or program and conduct a research project to evaluate their students’ learning of the outcome.

In Fall 2004, participating faculty read and discussed several articles on writing student learning outcomes, choosing or designing assessment measures, and creating rubrics for evaluating student work. In addition, group members designed assignments or assessments to evaluate student learning of outcomes, developed scoring rubrics and created research plans for using these materials.

During Winter 2005, faculty conducted their research and gathered data and met to discuss and troubleshoot their research projects. In addition, the group discussed and evaluated the program review process at Shoreline.

In Spring 2005, the group evaluated their findings and wrote brief reports that can be used in Program Planning and Assessment reports when next they are written. Please see Appendix B (pp. 7-27) for these reports.

E. Project Participants, Disciplines and Project Descriptions

Participant Discipline Project Description Gen Ed Outcomes Addressed

Mayumi Steinmetz

World Languages

Oral Communication Rubric to gather data on oral communication skills of students at various levels of language learning.

General Intellectual: Think critically in a discipline

Communication: Self-assess communication abilities

Shoreline Community College 312004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

Participant Discipline Project Description Gen Ed Outcomes Addressed

Linda Barnes Nursing Provide a connection to the Nursing Program Evaluation Committee; no assessment project per se.

Steve Bogart Math Develop and use an assignment and rubric for assessing communication and quantitative reasoning skills in Math 107 and Math 208. Review new Math 099 placement process.

Quantitative Reasoning: all subcategories

General Intellectual: Think critically in a discipline

Communication: Write effectively

Chip Dodd Geography Develop pre- and post-assessments for place-name familiarity; administer them in consecutive sections.

General Intellectual: Think critically in a discipline

Matt Houghton Career Education Opportunities(CEO)

In his Career Education Opportunities (CEO) classes, carry out pre- and post-assessments of the eight personal qualities as identified as most important for work success by U.S. Department of Labor Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS).

Communication: Self-assess communication abilities

General Intellectual: Use an integrated approach to solving problems

Julie Kemp History Create and use a rubric for assessing students’ on-line discussion skills.

Communication: Listen, understand and respond; Read and analyze

General Intellectual: Think critically in a discipline

Swati Sircar Math Develop a rubric for group problem-solving skills to be used for student self-evaluation as well as instructor evaluation of small group problem solving.

Quantitative Reasoning: Compute fluently; Solve problems; Communicate quantitative information

General Intellectual: Think critically in a discipline

Stuart Trippel Accounting Develop an assessment for end-of-course skill set for Acct 210 and 220, used in all sections W05 and Spr05, and in fast track, hybrid sections offered in Su05. Data provide info on student learning and to compare modes of delivery.

General Intellectual: Think critically in a discipline

Troy Wolff English Survey English faculty on whether and how they use the new student learning outcomes on the revised MCO for

General Intellectual: Think critically in a discipline

English 102.

Shoreline Community College 332004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

Meeting Dates and AgendasDate Agenda10-19-04 Project Introduction10-27-04 Writing Student Learning Outcomes11-08-04 Creating Assessments of Student Learning

Writing Rubrics 11-22-04 Student Learning Assessment Project (SLAP) Plans – discuss participants’ plans

(see above project description grid)1-10-05 SLAPs progress reports and problem solving1-24-05 SLAPs progress reports and problem solving2-14-05 SLAPs progress reports and problem solving2-28-05 Program Planning and Assessment3-14-05 Program Planning and Assessment 4-11-05 Overview of Project Completion Reports4-25-05 Brainstorm of major learning and concerns for final report5-09-05 Summary report reviews5-23-05 Final Report

F. Project FindingsMost faculty who completed their student learning assessment projects created rubrics for evaluation of student learning. Faculty found the creation and use of rubrics helped in common ways: Assessment projects that start with course learning goals and then link to Gen Ed Outcomes help faculty more

clearly see how course teaching adds to student development of college-wide learning goals. Conversations among faculty about defining and assessing student learning is one of the best benefits of this

project. Creating careful assessments and rubrics helped some faculty better decide what to teach. It also helped them

create more careful, clear directions to students. One faculty participant found the creation and use of a rubric for evaluating student work to be transformative. It refocused her thinking toward what and how students learn rather than on what she wanted to teach. The rubric she created helped her give more feedback to students on their class work, less on quizzes.

Creating rubrics helped faculty become much clearer on their expectations for student performance resulting in better performance and less anxiety.

Several faculty found the use of rubrics saved them grading time. A couple faculty found using rubrics increased their assessment time, but believed the increased time was worth it because of improved student learning.

The new course content organization in the new Master Course Outline web based form helps faculty see how course learning outcomes are related the Gen Ed Outcomes. It also provides assessment measures that can be used across sections of the same course to gather aggregated student learning data on which program improvements can be based.

Please see Appendix C (pp. 28-29) for verbatim participant evaluations.G. Assessment Project Recommendations

1. Develop a broader and deeper professional development program so that faculty can learn how to do course and program assessment. Such assessment should be related to the GEOs and to the Strategic Plan.

2. Continue providing opportunities for faculty across disciplines to develop and discuss outcomes, rubrics and evaluation processes.

3. Provide further professional development opportunities on writing student learning outcomes, rubrics, assignments and assessments at course and program levels.

4. Encourage faculty to participate in norming sessions for evaluating student work.

H. Program Planning and Assessment (PPA) DiscussionSince one goal of this project was to look at the connection between student learning assessment at course / program levels and “closing the loop” to program improvement, the SLAP group

discussed and critiqued the Program Planning and Assessment process as it was last practiced in Fall 2003. Several themes emerged from the discussions: The purpose and use of PPA reports needs to be reexamined. Participants find value in writing PPAs because

it feels good to summarize program efforts and to see the big picture. Understanding other disciplines, their work and issues, is also an important outcome.

Some conflict is felt in the dual nature of PPAs: one purpose is to describe and evaluate programs, the other is to justify program existence and needs for additional resources.

The timing of the process does not work. Since program evaluation is not an on-going, continuous effort, when the PPAs are written in one quarter, it feels like evaluation also needs to be done at that time. Also, even though program evaluation goes on informally (or sometimes more formally), how to report information from evaluative efforts is not clear.

The reporting structure is not reasonable or sensible, especially given the dual purpose of PPAs. It is important, of course, that the EVPAA understand the descriptions, evaluation and justification contained within the reports. But she cannot be expected to read and respond to 34 or so program reports. The information should serve many levels of the college—not just the instructional VP. The information should be used horizontally to let all groups know about programs and for programs to be accountable to themselves and their deans (and the institution and to accreditors) for evaluation and improvement efforts. The EVPAA needs to know this information but not necessarily to respond to it. She does need to receive and respond to justification of needs to inform budget allocation.

The form and format need revision to eliminate repetition and awkward information sequencing. If possible, the format should encourage more uniformity than is currently seen.

While faculty evaluate student learning in their classes all the time, in general they do not document how it is used for program improvement.

PPA Recommendations1. Revise the process and timing of the PPA process to include on-going, continuous assessment and writing

so that it is not an unfeasible burden in one quarter and evaluation of student learning in programs becomes part of the culture.

2. Change the reporting structure so that programs and deans are responsible for on-going evaluation and improvement.

3. Revise the form. Please see Appendix D (p. 30) for one suggested revision.4. Train faculty in how to measure and document student learning in courses and programs in a continuous

process. Also, develop a system for making program improvements based on evaluation and train faculty in that, too.

Shoreline Community College 352004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

APPENDIX BParticipant Project Summary Reports

2004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Participant ReportSteven Bogart, Professor of Mathematics

Math 107 ProjectThe goal of my projects was to create rubrics to help assess quantitative reasoning and communication skills demonstrated in narratives and proofs. Most of my assignments are computational; errors are easy to identify and quantify, so grading is fairly straightforward. Many of my assignments involve explaining mathematical concepts in a sentence or paragraph; I usually have one or two main ideas in mind which the student must mention, so grading is not too much more complex than for computational problems. However, in Math 107 (Mathematics: A Practical Art), my students write a paper, create a poster, and give a presentation on a topic they learned outside of class. Because of the length and open-ended nature of these tasks, they are difficult to judge and grade. I created a rubric to help.

Math 107 Rubric for Big ProjectYour paper (including textbook problems) will be graded out of eight points. If you plagiarize, you will receive a score of zero! Write in your own words; your audience should be your classmates.

For mathematics, four points:Complete and substantially correct mathematics 4 pointsSome minor errors or misunderstandings 3 pointsMissing something big, either problems or concepts 2 pointsMissing most of the point or largely incomplete 1 pointMakes no sense or is missing 0 points

For presentation and flow, four points:Clear and complete presentation that could be easily followed by another student

from class 4 pointsComplete presentation that another student could follow with some difficulty but

that I can still follow easily 3 pointsPresentation with a few significant gaps or one that is difficult for me to follow

2 pointsPresentation with many significant gaps or one which I can barely follow

1 pointPresentation makes no sense or is missing 0 points

Your poster and presentation will be graded together out of four points. Your goal should be to get across a small number of main ideas that might be accessible and interesting to your classmates. The scoring below assumes your mathematics is correct; otherwise, you will receive little credit. Missing either the poster or the presentation will result in a deduction of two points. You should have clear examples of your own construction that illustrate main ideas.

For the poster and presentation together:Interesting idea clearly expressed AND interesting example clearly presented 4 points(Interesting idea clearly expressed AND some example presented) OR(Interesting example clearly presented AND some main idea expressed) 3 points(Interesting idea clearly expressed OR interesting example clearly presented) OR(Some main idea expressed AND some example presented) 2 pointsSome main idea expressed OR some example presented 1 point

Missing main ideas AND missing or irrelevant example 0 points

Math 208 Project

My Math 208 (Linear Algebra) students turn in dozens of proofs and counterexamples. Because of the variety of approaches and errors, assigning partial credit is difficult. I revised a rubric I have been developing for years, shared it with students on day one, and used it consistently throughout the quarter. Writing these rubrics helped me clarify both what I want students to really understand in each assignment and how I can expect them to demonstrate this understanding. Thinking about rubrics helped me craft better directions for students, sharpened my thinking about expectations for student work, and made my grading more consistent. I hope that having a rubric helped students understand my motivation and expectations for making assignments, and helped them write in a more focused way. I would like to create more open-ended assignments; developing the grading rubric will be a key part of creating such assignments. When next I teach Math 208, I would like to have students do more self assessment and peer assessment.

Math 208 Grading RubricEach problem shall be graded on a scale of zero points to five points, according to the following criteria.

5 points (A): Correct, complete, and logically rigorous solution. Write-up contains a clear logical path from premise to conclusion, with few (if any) irrelevant statements. Each logical step is explained unambiguously in language appropriate to the class. Appropriate citations are included, and the connection between the student's statement and the work cited is explicit. Vocabulary and notation are used correctly. Another student should be able to read this write-up and follow statement-by-statement without having to fill in any gaps. This is a "textbook solution."

4 points (B): Correct solution, but with minor gaps in logic or small errors in use of vocabulary or notation. Logical connections between statements may occasionally be incomplete. Rigor may occasionally be relaxed. A few statements may be irrelevant. Another student should be able to read this write-up and follow statement-by-statement with few gaps to fill and errors to correct. Such gaps and errors should be easy to remedy.

3 points (C): Major gaps in logical flow, although basic outline is correct. May include some minor logical flaws in generally correct overall pattern. However, this logical pattern may lack clarity. May include some errors in use of vocabulary or notation, although these should not hinder basic understanding of statements. May lack sufficient citations or clear connections between cited works and student statements. A few statements may be irrelevant, and rigor may be relaxed in occasionally be relaxed. Another student should be able to read this write-up to get a reasonable outline of ideas but will have to stop several times to fill in details.

2 points (D): Logical flow contains significant flaws, although a rough outline of a reasonable solution is present. Vocabulary and notation may be misused to the point where the intent of the writer is difficult, although not impossible, to determine. A number of statements may be irrelevant, and rigor may be relaxed in general. Another student should find this write-up difficult to follow, although with some effort may be able to use it as a beginning for a better write-up.

1 point (F): Solution contains true statements, but statements are irrelevant to the problem at hand, or solution contains a seemingly reasonable logical flow that is, in truth, full of false statements and conclusions. Another student would find this write-up useless.

Shoreline Community College 372004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

0 points (F): Solution contains a significant number of statements which are false and which would be irrelevant even if true, or solution is full of meaningless statements for which no reasonable interpretation is possible. Another student would find this write-up to be, at best, useless. At worst, the write-up would corrupt some correct ideas the reader already has.

N.B. The following scale assumes computations are done correctly. Incorrect computations carry a penalty based on severity and significance.

Math Placement ProjectPlacement in mathematics classes is a difficult issue with which the mathematics department has struggled for years. Since prerequisites are not enforced, students often place themselves into classes for which they are not prepared. Other students are correctly placed according to prerequisites, but have not retained a sufficient mastery of background material to succeed. In an effort to increase student success in Math 099 (Intermediate Algebra), the department decided, starting Fall Quarter 2004, to implement an algebra assessment during the first week of the quarter. This test, which counts for 5% of the course grade, measures knowledge of beginning algebra skills necessary for success in Math 099. On the first day, all Math 099 students are given a review sheet with sample problems and a list of skills from Math 080 (Beginning Algebra). This material is reviewed in class during the first few days, and on the first Thursday, all Math 099 students take a department-wide exam, which has several versions. The exams are graded overnight and handed back on Friday along with recommendations. Faculty help students decide whether Math 099 is an appropriate course; if not, faculty assist students in getting into an appropriate course. At the end of the quarter, ordered pairs of assessment exam scores and course grades are given to the department head. At the end of the year, we will analyze the data as best we can to measure the value of this assessment. The data analysis has significant limits in that we will never know how students who chose to leave Math 099 would have done had they remained. The mathematics department dearly hopes that automated prerequisite checking finally becomes a reality in the near future.

2004-05 Student Learning Assessment ProjectsCharles Dodd, Professor of Geography

Project Goal

The project developed for student learning assessment in Geography involved measuring learning/retaining place name knowledge in Geography 100. Developing place name knowledge is a major course outcome for Geography 100. Lack of information on the retention of place name knowledge is a recognized problem in introductory college level geography courses. I wanted to develop a method of assessment that measures retention of place name knowledge, assessing both passive and active knowledge of place names. In addition, a crucial concern in the design of the assessment method was to develop a procedure that easy to implement in terms of time (student and instructor), physical resources and integration with course content and activities.

Student Learning Outcomes Assessed

Students were assessed on passive and active knowledge of places names. A place name is a named or labeled place that is officially/commonly used on maps and is a commonly recognized physical or human geographic feature. Examples include Seattle, Washington State, the Columbia River, Jakarta, the Tibetan Plateau, Honshu, etc. Passive knowledge involves identifying or recognizing place names within their spatial or locational context. Active knowledge involves using place name knowledge to solve a spatial or locational problem or to locate a place name with little locational or spatial prompting. In Geography 100 students are expected to learn the locations of over 450 place names that are global in distribution.

Method of Investigation

Students are pre-assessed at the beginning of the quarter on the second day of instruction. The same method of assessment (although NOT the same assessment) covering the same material is given on the last day of instruction. Each assessment is scored on a point system (20 pts total). Questions in the assessment DO NOT take the same form as those in course work or course assignments. This was done to avoid assessing question recognition rather than retention knowledge of named spatial features. Moreover, students are asked questions on material from throughout the quarter. To ensure a high level of participation, students were allowed to combine the average of both scores and use this to substitute for a low quiz score (there are 11 scheduled place name quizzes).

Shoreline Community College 392004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

Example assessment:

1) Which of the following is a city in India? (1 point)

a) New Delhib) Jakartac) Malayad) Manila

2) Which of the following is NOT in Saudi Arabia? (1 point)

a) Meccab) Jiddac) the Jordan Riverd) Riyadh

3) Baghdad is found on what river? (1 point)

a) Nileb) Orangec) Tigrisd) Po

4) Rostov-on-Don, the Don River and Kazan are found in what country? (1 point)

a) Russiab) Afghanistane) Franced) Turkey

5) Namibia, the Orange River and Mombasa are in what part of the world? (1 point)

a) Republic of Congob) Russiac) Indiad) Africa

6) The city of Brisbane is found in which Australian state? (1 point)

a) Western Australiab) South Australiac) New South Walesd) Queensland

7) Features on the right are found in the countries on the left. Match them correctly by writing the correct letter next to country on the left. (6 points)

Mexico A) Rio PlataB) Bogotá

Chile C) the AndesD) Rio Orinoco

Cuba E) Vera CruzF) Caracas

Venezuela G) Havana

Columbia

8) On the attached map mark where the following place names are located by writing in the appropriate letter on the feature on the map (4 points)

A) GeorgiaB) OhioC) New OrleansD) Colorado River

9) You wish to visit Senegal. Flying directly from Seattle, what Ocean would you need to cross? What city could you fly into in that country? Identify at least two countries next to Senegal that you could fly to if Senegal was too expensive to fly into directly. (4 points)

Findings

Only one section of Geography 100 has completed the entire assessment procedure. However, the results from this one section were indeed fascinating and worthy of discussion. The mean for the pre-course assessment was 11.0 with a standard deviation of 4.1. The mean for the post-course assessment was 15.5 with a significantly tighter standard deviation of 2.9. The result from this one section suggests that student knowledge of place names has improved as a result of taking the course. The assessment was easy to implement and student participation was very high.

Recommendations

For this assessment to be meaningful several sections must participate. By Fall 2005 assessments for 4 complete sections (both pre and post course assessments) will have been done.

Implications for Program Improvement and/or Future Directions

Hopefully this assessment procedure will provide meaningful data on the elusive issue of retention of place name knowledge. I intend to share the results of this data at the Fall 2005 Meeting of the Association of Washington Geographers.

Shoreline Community College 412004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

2004-05 Student Learning Assessment ProjectsMatt Houghton, Career Education Opportunities (CEO) Instructor

IntroductionMy 10 credit class is entitled Career Education Options. All my students are high school dropouts. My class is to prepare them for the professional technical degrees they can enroll in after they successfully complete my class. I wanted to assess the change in students’ intrinsic learning throughout the quarter, to see the quality of the educational experience, and to show the students their own growth in these areas. I wanted the assessment tool to be at least somewhat student centered; a self-assessment both pre- and post-course seemed to be most efficacious and easily administered.

MethodI chose an assessment tool developed by Dr. Skip Downing which measures eight skills and personal qualities: personal responsibility, self-motivation, self-management, interdependence, self-awareness, lifelong learning, emotional intelligence, and belief in one’s self. These eight qualities have been identified by the U.S. Department of Labor Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS). These qualities were identified by SCANS as the most important for workers to demonstrate in order to have job success; these are the skills employers want schools to teach their employees, according to the Department of Labor in 2003. Proficiency in each of these eight qualities is taught throughout the quarter.

The 64 question assessment takes about 20 minutes and was administered in class during the third day of class. Students add up their own test scores and write a brief synopsis of their findings, and where they think they need to concentrate their educational efforts for the class. The last week of class the students took the same questionnaire, and then asked to compare their scores.

OutcomeUnfortunately, this quarter I asked the students to hold onto their test scores throughout the quarter, and a majority lost them in the process. Next quarter I will make copies to keep so that a comparison can be made. Those who took the post test say they remember that they had improved their scores even though they couldn’t verify this. Of the four students who did both the pre-and post-test (or those who kept their scores, anyway!) all four reported improvements in all eight of the SCANS qualities measured. The strongest gains were in either Gaining Self Awareness, or Adopting Lifelong Learning. The consistently lowest scores and smallest gains were in Interdependence; given the lack of trust my students feel given their various troubling life histories, this is not surprising. It does point to the need to address this topic in depth in future classes.

ConclusionThis assessment allows students to see important intrinsic features of their career and student skill set, and measures them over time. As well, this assessment allows me to track the needs of my students in the quarter taught, and over time gives me a picture of this population’s aptitudes and deficiencies; I can change my curricula accordingly, and measure change.

In the future, I intend to make this test an ice-breaker activity so students can identify which quality they are best at, and then prepare a presentation about why they scored so high on this particular quality. I think this might help boost some resiliency amongst the students, and get them thinking about what they are doing right already.

Matthew E. HoughtonCareer Education OptionsShoreline Community College

Downing’s self assessment can be viewed athttp://college.hmco.com/collegesurvival/downing/on_course/4e/students/index.html 

2004-05 Student Learning Assessment ProjectsJulie Hofmann Kemp, History Instructor

1. Project Goal / Student learning outcomes you assessed The goal of the project was to come up with constructive ways to articulate, communicate, and assess the

requirements and expected outcomes for online discussion boards Outcomes assessed were critical thinking, information technology, and communication

2. Method of investigation: Creation of a initial grading rubric Revision of the rubric to a matrix after discussion with colleagues in the SLAP group Use of the matrix to grade student discussions Winter 2005 Presentation of matrix and initial results of using it to colleagues at the Faculty Retreat and revision

according to some faculty input3. Findings:

The act of creating a matrix helped to articulate better my own expectations for online discussion Giving the students the matrix helped students to understand the different components used in assessment

and to see the different ways in which their contributions were assessed4. Recommendations:

Make the matrix available for faculty to use if they like. Continue to revise the matrix, perhaps by adding relative values and weighting to the mechanics and

content sections to further clarify expectations Revise the matrix to reflect better the specific outcomes addressed

5. Implications for Program Improvement and/or Future Directions: This is a model that could be translated to the assessment on class discussion with relative ease, although

the actual work involved in using the model on a daily or even weekly basis might be onerous With the consistent increase in hybrid- and online course offerings in our program, it is vital that we

develop tools that will help to communicate with our students and to help them take more responsibility for their participation. A clear expression of expectations must assist in empowering students and helping them to understand that responsibility.

6. Other Issues and Concerns: Exceptionally low enrollments and attendance in Spring Quarter 2005 made the matrix virtually unusable, in that the critical mass necessary for healthy discussion simply did not exist. Should enrollment continue at this level, the matrix and the requirements might need to be changed, although that then introduces the question of whether the same rigor is applied in courses with low enrollment. Alternatively, the instructor might offer a broader range of discussion questions to the students, but in such a case, the students would then be required to do an even greater amount of work. If we are expected to offer a variety of assessment and learning styles, enrollments must be such that we can take advantage fully of those styles.

Shoreline Community College 432004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

Online Discussion Grading Matrix

Criteria Fails to meet requirements

Partially/Poorly Meets Requirements

Does a fair/adequate job of meeting requirements

Better than average job of meeting requirements

Exceptional performance

Part One:MechanicsNo. of Log-ins / contributions

Did not log in / contribute

Logged in / contributed the minimum amount required

Logged and contributed daily

Spacing of Log-ins Logged in 0-1 times Logged in minimum times and spaced to guidelines

Logged in more than required , beginning at start of board and ending near closing day

Responses Did not respond Responded to all threads once

Responded to all threads, some more than once and new, or all more than once

Part Two:ContentThoughtfully addressing questions posed by instructor/classmates

Did not address the question

Addresses question and some student responses; shows understanding of the question

Addresses question with own opinion and incorporates critique of other responses; expands on questions / responses

Use of evidence Uses no evidence or examples

Uses some specific examples

Uses specific examples and primary source evidence

Integration of different sources of information(overall)

Does not provide answers that show any integration

Responses integrate info from text and lecture

Responses integrate info from text, lecture, class discussion, and primary sources

Online Discussion Grading Matrix

Criteria Fails to meet requirements

Partially/Poorly Meets Requirements

Does a fair/adequate job of meeting requirements

Better than average job of meeting requirements

Exceptional performance

Part One:MechanicsNo. of Log-ins Did not log in Logged in fewer than

the minimumLogged in the minimum amount required

Logged in more than required

Logged and contributed daily

Spacing of Log-ins Logged in 0-1 times Logged in minimum times, but did not space to guidelines

Logged in minimum times and spaced to guidelines

Logged in more than required, all spaced to guidelines

Logged in more than required , beginning at start of board and ending near closing day

Responses Did not respond Responded to some threads

Responded to all threads once

Responded to all threads, some more than once or started new

Responded to all threads, some more than once and new, or all more than once

Part Two:ContentAddressing questions posed by instructor/classmates

Did not address the question

Answer does not show understanding of the question

Addresses question and some student responses

Addresses question and incorporates critique of other responses

Addresses question with own opinion and incorporates critique of other responses; expands on questions / responses

Use of evidence Uses no evidence or examples

Uses some specific examples

Uses specific examples and primary source evidence

Integration of different sources of information(overall)

Does not provide answers that show any integration

Responses show use of textbook info or lecture

Responses integrate info from text and lecture

Responses integrate info from text, lecture, class discussion, and primary sources

Shoreline Community College 452004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

2004-2005 Student Learning Assessment Projects Participant ReportSwati Sircar, Mathematics Instructor

Project GoalI created a master rubric to grade/assess how my students solve problems in beginning & intermediate algebra & pre-calculus, i.e. Math 80, 99 & 120. Types of problem mainly include story or word problems where students are required to formulate the problem, draw diagrams & solve it. However parts of the rubric can be used for a much wider range of application type problems including solving equations & solving triangles.

MethodI used this rubric to communicate to my students

what are the different parts pf problem solving how much are each part worth how each part is graded independently, so that a mistake in part A does not reduce points in part B if it is done

correctly (even) with (possibly) wrong data from part A

It helped me to grade their worksheets using this rubric to an extent & provide concrete feedback on each problem.

It helped them to understand how I assess their work & how each part is plays a key role in problem solving.

FindingsIt became clearer to me what I want to assess from my students works while creating this rubric. Earlier I used to grade the worksheets very superficially since we used to go over the problems in class. Now, in addition, I go thru each & every worksheet providing my input on each problem. I believe that way I can help my students understand the material better. Looking at the worksheets so closely also helps me to figure out how each student is doing & who needs more help & where. That way when I return their worksheets I include my feedback specifically so that they can use that to improve their mastery of the subject.

In addition, when my students are actually doing a worksheet in class, I look into their work & depending on where they are provide my input then & there – it might be

correcting a diagram or asking a related question that might help them self-correct the diagram, suggesting alternative ways of solving a problem, giving hint to a group that is stuck suggesting or showing how a picture can help understanding the situation

They often cross check their answers with me & I take that opportunity to mention that the process they are using is more important & check if all the important steps are there.

Also with this kind of a master rubric it is easier to devise grading scheme for any problem or test. Thus it also helps in creating tests – quizzes, midterms & finals.

RecommendationsTo do something so meticulous it helps a lot if I can give a copy of the worksheet to each student, i.e. a printed page with enough spaces in between to work out the problems. That makes it easier to grade time-wise. Unfortunately sometimes we can’t do that any more due to budget constraints. So now it’s pretty difficult for me to look over my students shoulders & figure out which problem they are working on & see how they are doing.

Future Directions Have the rubric on my website so that my students can get a feel of how they will be assessed. Depending on the

budget I might provide them with a paper copy at the beginning of each course. Notify grading scheme for each test to all students possibly over email. Explore the possibility of other faculty using or benefiting from this rubric.

Math Problem Solving Strategy Rubric Swati Sircar

Perfect Almost correct Partly correct No workPicture & Label: known

variables unknowns

variables in particular

the quantity we want to calculate

Everything clearly marked

3 points

Correct picture & most things labeled or slightly incorrect picture with all correct labels

2 points

Correct picture but not everything labeled

1 point

No picture, no mention of what is what

0 points

Info Extraction: known

variables conditions

Identifies conditions & known variables

3 points

Got most of the situation correct, missed 1-2 things

2 points

Missed some variables or didn’t get the situation correctly

1 point

No info gathered from the problem

0 points

Formula Identification:

Identifies correct formula

2 points

Identifies related formula that can help but not in the most efficient way

1 point

No identification or identifying unrelated formula

0 pointsFormulaApplication: careful with

unit conversion if needed

Correct input of known values with proper unit conversion

2-3 points

Partly correct input of known values, may be wrong unit conversion

2-1 points

No correct input

0 points

Solution: simplify as

required mention unit

Simplified as required & correct units mentioned

3 points

Almost correct except for some arithmetic or careless mistake

2 points

Some correct steps &/or unit missed

1 point

No correct steps

0 points

Shoreline Community College 472004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

2004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects ReportMayumi Steinmetz, Professor of Japanese

1) Project Goal / Student learning outcomes you assessed

Creating oral communication rubrics to improve students’ oral skills at all levels (Japanese 111, 112, 113, 211, 212, and 213) and to help the instructor assess students’ skills more objectively, accurately, and consistently.

2) Method of investigation

a) Created final oral interview rubrics for Japanese 111, 112, 113, 211, 212, and 213 classes. Each rubric includes specific task descriptions, required sentence patterns, vocabulary words, expressions, and assessment in pronunciation and fluency.

b) Students were given final oral interview directions and rubrics a week prior to their interviews.

3) Findings

a) I used to use a more general assessment sheet for the final oral interviews in the past. Students were more anxious about the oral interview and felt more nervous. The new rubric that I created is very specific. By looking at the rubrics, students could anticipate how the oral interview will be assessed. Students knew exactly what I was looking for before they came to the oral interview. Therefore, they could practice instead of worrying about it. Students performed much better, with confidence.

b) Since I have to interview 30 students individually while I ask questions, I have to evaluate students’ skills as quickly as possible. These rubrics made it much easier to evaluate students’ various skills.

c) In order to make a good rubric, I, as an instructor, have to consider exactly what and how to assess students’ oral communication skills. In addition, this information needs to be communicated effectively with students so that they can study and practice appropriately.

4) Recommendations Evaluation of oral examinations can be subjective and vague. Sometimes students do not understand why they received their scores. It is important to communicate to students what I will assess, how I will assess, and why I will assess them before examinations.

5) Implications for Program Improvement and/or Future DirectionsI hope that having a good experience in final oral interviews will improve the retention rate for

the next level. I hope that students are encouraged with their skills and feel satisfaction of their progress and encouraged to continue studying Japanese as lifelong learners.

Japanese 112 Oral Interview Assessment Rubric Name: Score: /100

Task 1 Reading Numbers and katakana words /20

Task 2 Role play - Shopping at a vegetable store /25

Task 3 Role play - Shopping at a department store /25

Task 4 Conversation /30

Communication Skill

Content

159 8,965 678 9,170 291 14,018 3,304 39,002 1,823 152,700 /10

Completed the task with appropriate use of expressions, manner of speaking. Used good communication strategies.Asked the price for each item and total. Used appropriate counters.

/ 10

Completed the task with appropriate use of expressions, manner of speaking. Used good communication strategies.- Asked which floor - Asked to see the item.- Asked how much it is.- Asked for a different size or a cheaper one- Purchased the item.- Asked to have it put in a box and wrapped as a gift. /10

Communicated well with appropriate use of expressions, manner of speaking. Understood most questions and answered correctly. Also asked questions in a timely manner. Used good listening responses and made the conversation flow logically.

/15Language Control

　　バンクーバー　　ショーライン　　ワシントン　　イギリス　　カリフォルニア　　ニュージーランド　　ニューヨーク　　オーストラリア　　サンフランシスコ　　メキシコ /10

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures. - Sentence structure ください。おねがいします。- Particles- Vocabulary - Countersいっぽん、ひとつ、etc.- Expressions いくらですか。 /10

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures. - Sentence structures/て verbs みせてください。いれてください。とってください。つつんでください。- Particles- Vocabulary- Expressions　もうすこし／もっと adj.　あの、すみません。うりばはなんかいですか。いくらですか。 /10

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Sentence structures すき／きらい　です。- Particles

- Vocabulary

- Expressions /10

Delivery

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Shoreline Community College 492004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

Japanese 113 Oral Interview Assessment Rubric Name: Score: /100

Task 1 /20

Task 2 /20

Task 3 /20

Task 4 /40

Communication Skill

Content

Completed the task by ordering food at the restaurantwith all the necessary information and expressions.Used good communication and conversationstrategies.—すみません—を おねがいします—にします

/8

Completed the task by inviting a friend to do something during the summer break. The information should include the activity, place, date, and time.—にいきます—ませんか／ましょう

/8

Completed the task by calling the instructor and telling her that you are very sick and need to go to the doctor. Described the symptoms, asked permission for the late assignment and make up exam.

/8

Completed the task with all the necessary information about the family, oneself, daily activities, school activities, work, hobbies, experiences, childhood memories, abilities, and desires.

/16

Language Control Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —すみません—を number おねがいします—にします

/8

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —にいきます—ませんか／ましょうか—はどうですか—いいですね／ええ、ぜひ—んですけど—つごうがわるい

/8

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —んです—からです—てもいいですか—しゅくだい／しけん—きぶんがわるい—が　いたい

/8

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —かぞく—V たことがある—V たり V たりする—たい—potential forms—こどもの時

/20

Delivery

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /4

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /4

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /4

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /4

J211 Oral Interview Assessment Rubric Name: Score: /100

Task 1 I. Weather /20

Task 2 J. How to use /20

Task 3 K. Role Play/Travel

plan /30

Task 4L. Conversation /30

Communication Skill

Content

Completed the task with all the necessary information about the weather. Described

- weather, - climate, - temperature.

/5

Completed the task with all the necessary information about how to use an equipment.

/5

Completed the task with all the necessary information. Information included: locations, activities, airplane reservation, & accommodations. Used good communication and conversation strategies.

/10

Provided accurate, relevant information in organized manner. Developed topic, expanded ideas, and demonstrated logical progression of ideas.Communicated well with appropriate use of expressions, manner of speaking. Understood questions and answered appropriately. /10

Language Control

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —はーが—かもしれない—でしょう—そう—になる /10

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —方—ボタンをおす—スイッチを入れる- Conjunctions such as まず、つぎに、さいごに /10

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary, Conjunctions- Expressions —volitional F. と思う—つもり／予定—予約、—泊—日、旅館—時、前に、後で /15

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —と思う —てみる／—ていく／くる—たら—ないで /15

Delivery

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Shoreline Community College 512004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

J212 Oral Interview Assessment Rubric Name: Score: /100

Task 1 /25

Task 2 /25

Task 3 /25

Task 4 /25

Communication Skill

Content 10

Completed the task with all the necessary information about the dorm rules. Includes 4 patterns x 2——てもいい——てはいけない——なくてもいい——なくてはいけない

Completed the task with the descriptions of the room. 5 sentences using:Intransitive Verbs + いますTransitive Verbs + あります１）２）３）４）５）

Completed the task with all the necessary information to give the direction. Used good communication and conversationstrategies.

Completed the task with all the necessary information about the party plan. Used good communication and conversationstrategies.

Language Control

10

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —てもいい—てはいけない—なくてもいい—なくてはいけない

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions

Intransitive Verbs + いますTransitive Verbs + あります

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —と—てから—が見える—はず—とおる、わたる、まがる—まっすぐいく

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —ておく—てあるーことができるもう／まだため

Delivery

5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery.

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery.

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery.

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery.

J213 Oral Interview Assessment Rubric Name: Score: /100

Task 1 /30

Task 2 /30

Task 3 /40

Communication Skill

Content

Completed the task with all the necessary information about the Injured roommate (family member). Described

- how s/he was injured, - what s/he cannot do, - what you would do to help

him/her.

/10

Completed the task with the all the necessary information for the job interview using the polite languages. . Used good communication strategies.Demonstrated

- qualification as an English teacher

- ability to use polite forms (bilingual)

- desire to get this position /10

Completed the task with all the necessary information about childhood memory and paranting. Used good communication and conversationstrategies.Described

- what parents did (positive, negative)

- what you wished parents did- what you would do to your

child /15

Language Control

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —てほしい—てあげる—やすい／にくい／すぎる—ように／ようにする／ようになる

/15

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —honorific forms

—humble forms

—polite forms /15

Express information clearly and precisely using the targeted structures.

- Particles- Verb tense, conjugation, endings- Vocabulary- Expressions —passive forms —causative forms —causative-passive forms —てくれる／もらう

/20

Delivery

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery.

/5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery.

/5

Easy to understand.Accurate pronunciation Smooth delivery. /5

Shoreline Community College 532004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

2004-2005 Student Learning Assessment Projects Participant ReportTroy Wolff, Professor of English

This project goal actually focused on English Instructors’ awareness and implementation of Assessment and Outcomes in the teaching of English 102: Reasoning, Research, and Writing courses. The English department revised its master course outline for Eng 102 this past year, and the new MCO format draws much more attention to the role of assessment and outcomes in the teaching of the course. My project was a series of questions set in a “before-and-after” scenario; I sought to discover to what extent, if any, the new MCO format increased instructors’ awareness of outcomes and assessment in their planning and teaching.

The goal of the survey was two-fold. First, I wanted to see if making outcomes and assessment more visible in the new MCO template would increase faculty awareness of how their teaching could be shaped by consideration of outcomes and assessment, as opposed to the old MCO format centered more on individual assignments and teaching to Gen Ed requirements. Second, I simply wanted this survey to increase the overall awareness and, in my opinion, value, of teaching outcomes and assessment among my fellow English faculty who have not been a part of the Assessment learning group.

A series of questions was presented to the English faculty during a departmental meeting, along with a template of the new MCO format. Instructors could respond either by name or anonymously, and in either hard-copy or electronic formats. The questions were made available to both associate and full-time faculty, but only full-time faculty responded.

Five full-time faculty provided feedback, and the common consensus is that yes, the new MCO format does draw increased awareness to the possibility of outcome-focused pedagogy, even among very experienced 102 instructors. All but one of the respondents admitted to considering at least minor new strategies in future 102 courses based on the new MCO suggestions. In another important area, all five respondents admitted that the old MCO format played little role in their teaching of 102—strongly suggesting that the recent efforts put forth to merge outcomes and assessment and course design have paid off.

As for the future direction this project suggests, even though no associate faculty responded, I am encouraged by the words of these experienced full-time instructors as to the improvements in the new MCO format. I envision newly hired 102 associate faculty consulting the new MCO and being immediately aware of the role outcomes and assessment can play in the 102 classroom—a strong improvement over the old model. Below are the questions of the survey:

Revised English 102 MCO Survey“ARTSLAP”

In light of this new MCO form for English 102, with its much clearer emphasis upon outcomes and assessment, would you be willing to answer the following questions? If so, please send your responses to me any time in the next two weeks. An electronic version of these questions is also available, just ask me via email.

With your honest input, we are hoping to see if this new MCO format will trigger any reevaluation/increased awareness of how our students learn in 102, and how we know they are learning. If you’ve taught 102 for a long time, and these MCO questions don’t really apply to you, then perhaps consider this new MCO form, and these questions, from the perspective of a new associate instructor teaching 102 at Shoreline for the first time.

1) How familiar were you with the old English 102 MCO? To what degree did it influence your planning and teaching of the course?

2) What role did outcomes serve, and to what degree did they hold importance, in your 102 courses under the old MCO? Did you have any assessment tools to measure this?

3) After looking at this new MCO template, and the prominence of outcomes and assessment, can you see yourself making any changes in the assessment of student learning the next time you teach 102? If so, what might this look like in your class?

4) Would you be willing to provide follow-up feedback to this project either over summer or fall quarter, discussing these changes, and whether our not you saw these outcome-focused changes as beneficial to students or you?

5) Finally, has this new MCO format in any way triggered new thinking or awareness of the role in outcomes in the classroom, and/or possible ways to assess the reaching of these outcomes?

Shoreline Community College 552004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

APPENDIX C2004-05 Student Learning Assessment ProjectsVerbatim Participant Evaluations

1. What aspects of this project were most useful to you? How were they helpful?

Seeing other examples (of projects) and hearing the discussion of how other examples were created was a great help in creating and revising my project materials.

The actual creation and use of the assessment materials; working with many colleagues across the disciplines

Cross discipline discussionsGetting different perspectives on teachingGot new ideasImprove my project with feedback from othersExplaining to others helped me clarify my thoughts

Sharing ideas in the meeting. I got lots of ideas that I did not think about in the past. I tend to focus on my disciplines, but hearing ideas from other disciplines broadens my way of thinking.

2. Did this project help you change your courses for the improvement of student learning? If so, what changes did you make?

I didn’t really change my course structure, but I was able to present a clear grading scheme to students. Creating rubrics forced me to think about what I really wanted students to learn and how I could get them to demonstrate such learning.

I didn’t change much except in the way I approached this area of assessment Trying to make worksheets more vital part of the learning process – spending

more time on providing feedback on themCommunicating clearly to the student what carries how much weight & hence how they should prioritize while studyingHaving a better idea on what to test the students onIn short, my focus has dramatically shifted from teaching to helping students learn.

Definitely. This project made me think how important it is to know what I am evaluating. I became more conscious about the connection between how I communicate with students that I am evaluating and the outcome of students’ performance.

3. How might what you learned in this project be used in program improvement efforts or in the Program Planning and Evaluation process or both?

Rubrics are not widely used in grading mathematics classes, so my experience at developing rubrics might give other mathematics instructors inspiration to think about the way they assess student learning.

I think it will help all of the faculty in expanding online offerings Question why we are doing what we are doingFocus on the end goal & think how that ties in with the course material & teaching I would say this project helped my evaluation process most. My final oral interview assessment

is a much easier process now. I am less exhausted. Students perform much better so their improved skills make my job much easier, too.

4. What suggestions or improvements in SLAP can you recommend?

A centralized, publicized location for materials on teaching and learning – publications as local as examples from our faculty – would be a wonderful resource.

None – more participants might be better. More written communication e.g. forwarding write ups before the meetings When I started this project, I was not aware that this was related to PPA. I was more interested

in assessment itself rather than tying it to PPA. I wish we spent more time discussing different assessment methods in different disciplines.

5. What future directions do you think assessment of student learning or of Gen Ed Outcomes should take in the future?

I don’t think I have a good answer to this. Assessment and outcomes should actually have something to do with each other. Outcomes

should be considered by a greater number of faculty both in general and in specific, i.e., faculty should look at the current outcomes and review and revise them on a regular basis.

Make sure the faculty who did not participate can benefit from what we found, i.e. find a way to circulate the results & ideas floated in this forum.Have a resource body that can help faculty who wants to assess student learning.Have a website with all documentation & contact info of people who worked on those ideas/projects.

Assessment of student learning is so important. Even if a professor gives a brilliant lecture, if students are not effectively learning, a brilliant lecture does not mean much. We should continue this dialogue as a campus community. Perhaps, study groups or workshops on this issue might help.

Shoreline Community College 572004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

APPENDIX DSuggested Revision of the PPA Form

From the Student Learning Assessment Projects Group

Part I: Program Description1. Program Mission and Purpose2. Program Student Learning Outcomes3. Students Served

Part II: Program Assessment Criteria, Methods and Findings1. College Mission, Vision and Core Values2. Strategic Directions3. General Education Outcomes4. Program Student Learning Outcomes5. Achievement of 2003-05 Program Goals 6. Student Satisfaction with Program7. State Performance Reporting Criteria

A. Basic Skills RateB. Prepared for WorkC. Transfer Prepared

8. Graduation Rates9. Student Success in Obtaining Employment10. Student Success at Work11. Student Success at Transfer Institutions12. Faculty and Staff Development and Achievements13. Community Involvement and Outreach14. External Review

Part III: Program Improvements and Goals1. Improvements Made or Planned2. Significant Anticipated Changes3. 2005-07 Program Goals

Part IV: Program Needs1. Staffing2. Equipment3. Capital Projects

<<Return>>

APPENDIX D

Project title: Assessment of Class Piano and Individual Piano courses, syllabi, form, students and equipment.

Project Manager: Nancy Matesky, Professor of Music nmatesky@shoreline.edu

Other participants:Helena Azevedo, Associate Faculty teaching class piano and individual pianoJensina Byington, Associate Faculty teaching class piano and individual pianoIvona Kaminska-Bowlby, Associate Faculty teaching class piano and individual

pianoChristopher Bowlby, Associate Faculty teaching class piano, Fall quarter only.Tamara Friedman, Adjunct Faculty teaching individual pianoDainius Vaicekonis, Adjunct Faculty teaching individual piano

Class Piano:The class piano teachers met twice each quarter, once during the quarter and again at the end of the quarter. We also try to communicate by email, but not all teachers respond in a timely manner. Some of the associate faculty are only on campus 3 days a week, they do not have Shoreline email addresses, and the computer they have on campus to use is extremely slow. Due to curriculum changes in both music theory and class piano (the two classes are closely linked) we made changes in the Criteria for Grading form for all levels of class piano. A notebook of all the old forms, the various changes made during the year and the final copy is kept in 817. Here I will include only the final form for each level of class piano.

Shoreline Community College 592004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

Shoreline Community College 612004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

The following evaluation form was given to all class piano students winter quarter.

CLASS PIANO QUESTIONAIREWINTER QUARTER, 2005

Circle your level of Class Piano: 121 122 125

How does class piano help you in your musical goals?

Name specific ways class piano has helped you in music theory.

What specific skills helped you in music theory?

What music theory related activities do you like the most?

What activity would you like to spend more time on? Rate the following 1-7 with 1 being top priority.

_____Sight Reading (Dozen a Day, Alfred)

_____Transposition

_____Modes

_____Blues

_____Melody Harmonization

_____Duets, Ensembles

_____ Solos

Do you like the disks as a teacher aid?

How many hours outside of class do you practice?

How many days of class piano did you miss?

What grade do you think you are going to receive?

After discussing the students’ comments and suggestions, some changes were made in course content and the testing schedule. The following shorter evaluation form was given for spring quarter.

Shoreline Community College 632004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

CLASS PIANO QUESTIONAIRESPRING QUARTER, 2005

1. How does class piano help you in your musical goals?

2. What specific skills learned in class piano helped you in music theory?

3. How many hours per week outside of class do you practice?

4. Comments or suggestions?

The above evaluation form received more positive comments and appreciation of changes we had made in the classes. Most students feel that class piano is really helping them in the music theory classes, as well as preparing them for transferring to a four year school.

All the student evaluations and faculty assessments are kept in a notebook in 817.

Class Piano faculty also made changes in the syllabi, course content, and supplementary materials. Discussions were held regarding the changing of textbooks and editions and whether or not to order the CD’s or disks that are available with the textbooks. We decided on several supplemental books for sight reading and ensemble playing to use in class piano.

While the class piano teachers do not schedule the classes each quarter, we make suggestions to the department head as to what schedule we think would work best for the students and teachers.

The class piano faculty helped with the process of acquiring and setting up the new piano lab which is a very welcome addition to the Music Department.

Challenges: Finding meeting times when all associate faculty are on campus is difficult.

Finding a year-long schedule for all the levels of class piano (Music 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127) that provide continuity for the students as well as the teachers.

Individual Piano:Teachers met at the end of piano juries each quarter and also on Prep Day each quarter. We also try to correspond by email but not all teachers respond in a timely manner. More teachers were able to attend the Honors Recitals, Student Recitals and the Small Ensembles Recitals. Thus they were able to assess their own students’ performances on these recitals. Each teacher also held performance classes for their own students; usually 5-7 students. The students said this worked much better than having 1 large performance class for all individual piano students, usually 25-35 students.

As a result of our meetings and discussions and the students’ evaluation forms, we made changes in the Piano Jury format. We divided the Juries into two sections and required students to attend only 1 section; leaving them time to rehearse before they perform. Fall Quarter the order of the Jury program was from lower intermediate level to the most advanced student. Winter Quarter, when we divided into two sections, the first section was for scholarship applicants’ the 2nd section was for non-applicants. Winter Quarter evaluation forms told us the students did not like that order. Spring Quarter the order of performers for the Jury program was alphabetical. The students liked that better. The Jury Sheet was modified during Fall Quarter.

Changes were also proposed to the recital application forms, scholarship application forms and syllabi. These changes will be implemented for Fall Quarter, 2005.

Other areas we discussed and changed: The piano scholarship audition process and how we assess the performance of

applicants. Attendance requirements at lessons, recitals, master classes and other events. Repertoire requirements.

Challenges: Finding a meeting time for all associate and adjunct faculty to meet. Scheduling of lessons - there are only two piano teaching studios that 6 piano

faculty use for office hours and for teaching individual lessons to 30 plus students.

All the student evaluations and faculty assessments are kept in a notebook in 817.

Following are the evaluation forms and the jury sheet:

Shoreline Community College 652004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

ASSESSMENT OF PRIVATE PIANO INSTRUCTION ATM. SHORELINE COMMUNITY COLLEGE

March 11, 2005PLEASE COMMENT ON THE FOLLOWING TOPICS AS THEY RELATE TO YOUR PRIVATE PIANO LESSONS AND TEACHER AND/OR AS THEY RELATE IN GENERAL TO PRIVATE PIANO INSTRUCTION AT SHORELINE.

1. PIANO JURIES

2. PIANO SCHOLARSHIPS, REQUIREMENTS AND APPLICATIONS

3. RECITAL AND PERFORMANCE OPPORTUNITIES, PERFORMANCE CLASS, RECITAL ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS

4. LESSON SCHEDULE, MAKE-UP/EXTRA LESSONS

5. REPERTOIRE REQUIREMENTS

6. LESSON CONTENT: TECHNIQUE, MUSICIANSHIP, LEARNING STRATEGIES, MEMORIZATION TECHNIQUES, PRACTICE TECHNIQUES

7. GRADING

8. SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING PRIVATE PIANO INSTRUCTION

9. OTHER

Shoreline Community College 672004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

ASSESSMENT OF PRIVATE PIANO INSTRUCTION AT

N. SHORELINE COMMUNITY COLLEGEJune 3, 2005

PLEASE COMMENT ON THE FOLLOWING TOPICS AS THEY RELATE TO YOUR PRIVATE PIANO LESSONS AND/OR AS THEY RELATE IN GENERAL TO PRIVATE PIANO INSTRUCTION AT SHORELINE.

1. LESSON CONTENT: TECHNIQUE, MUSICIANSHIP, LEARNING STRATEGIES, MEMORIZATION TECHNIQUES, PRACTICE TECHNIQUES

2. PIANO JURIES

3. PIANO SCHOLARSHIPS, REQUIREMENTS AND APPLICATIONS

4. RECITAL AND PERFORMANCE OPPORTUNITIES, MASTER CLASSES, PERFORMANCECLASS, RECITAL ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS

5. SUGGESTIIONS FOR IMPROVING PRIVATE PIANO INSTRUCTION

SHORELINE COMMUNITY COLLEGE ~ MUSIC DEPARTMENTPIANO JURY SHEET / REPERTOIRE RECORD

FILL OUT COMPLETELY AND LEGIBLY~DUE ONE WEEK BEFORE JURIES

Name_____________________________Quarter______________Year______________

Teacher__________________________ Course Number: Music 172 or 272 (circle one)

Major____________________________ Primary Instrument_______________________For A,B,C,D: list composer’s first and last name, full title of solo with appropriate name, key (if applicable), Opus, K. (Mozart) or Hob. (Haydn) numbers and which movement: number or tempo marking (as you would on a recital program).

A. Completed compositions new this quarter:

B. Completed compositions begun a previous quarter:

C. New compositions as yet unfinished:

D. Compositions reviewed during this quarter:

E. Scales, arpeggios, chord progressions, technical studies:

* memorized# performed in piano performance class or studio piano class+ performed on public recital

JURY SELECTION______________________________________________________(Must be memorized)

Student’s signature________________________________________________________

Teacher’s signature________________________________________________________

Outstanding Jury ___

Honorable Mention___ Revised November 19, 2004

Shoreline Community College 692004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

<<Return>>

APPENDIX E

1. Assessment and Curriculum Development Training for Faculty in EnglishProject Manager(s) & e-mail address: Dutch Henry, dhenry@shoreline.edu

2. Approximately ten English faculty, both full- and part-time, met many times throughout the year and discussed the following topics:

Course syllabi English 101 and 102 Master Course Outlines Grading forms Assessments in English 100, 101, and 102 Assessment rubrics Faculty feedback on student essays Feedback in online writing courses Sample student essays in English 101 Recent research in composition theory, practice, and pedagogy Future topics, activities, and goals for outcomes assessment in English

Participants were unanimous in identifying the most valuable activity as the discussion and evaluation of sample student essays. As one participant wrote in his project evaluation, “Reading sample student papers, or "norming," is one of the best activities we did in our meetings. It really focused our attention on how we individually assess student work, and it's always affirming to learn that we agree, often closely, in our assessments.” Participants used current versions of the English 101 essay rubric and often spent time discussing the rubric, its effectiveness, its usefulness for student learning, and ways in which it might be revised. Reconsideration of the rubric was identified as one of the key tasks for outcomes work in 2005-2006.

Research was conducted on current trends in composition theory and practice and several meetings were spent discussing an extensive list of articles. Faculty concluded that the current approaches at Shoreline match the data and theories presented in contemporary research. However, it was also clear that the English program would benefit from regular discussions of current practices and studies in composition theory. Therefore, all of the research materials collected during the project will be made available to faculty in both electronic and hard copy form.

The challenges in this project were twofold. First, it is difficult to cover all of the areas of interest presented by program faculty. Early in the project, participants developed an extensive list of topics to cover, but there simply wasn’t time, despite tremendous commitment from faculty and funding to cover their time. The goals were ambitious, but too many for one year. Second, participants are so busy with their teaching demands and committee work that it is difficult to develop consistent meeting patterns that will include all who want to work on the project. Alternative

Shoreline Community College 712004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

methods of participation such as email discussions, independent work, essay exchanges, etc, were not as successful or as beneficial as the face to face meetings. Faculty prefer the give and take and materials examination that can occur in meetings. Meetings, though, are much more difficult to arrange.

3. Materials : Sample student essays Faculty evaluations of student essays Assessments English 101 rubric Suggested revisions of English 101 rubric Bibliography of recent research in composition theory and practice Future goals and activities in English outcomes assessment

Faculty Evaluations of Sample Student EssaysUsing English 101 Rubric

For consistency, faculty members are identified by the same number throughout the charts. All faculty used the English 101 rubric, although not all faculty use the same rubric in their classes. The essays were submitted by a variety of faculty teaching different sections of English 101.

“A New Generation”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 5 4 4 62 5 5 5 53 5 5 5 54 5 5 5 65 5 4 4 5

“Where the Rain Shines Through the Pouring Sun”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 5 5 5 52 5 5 5 53 5 5 5 54 5 5 5 55 5 5 4 5

“Easily Agreeable”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 5 5 5 62 4 4 4 53 5 5 5 54 5 5 5 65 5 5 5 5

“Outsiders—Life’s Natural Place Setters”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics

1 4 4 4 52 4 4 4 53 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 55 5 4 4 5

“Prejudice: A Glimpse at Ludo’s Life”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 5 5 5 62 5 5 5 53 5 5 5 54 5 5 5 55 5 5 4 5

“The Adolescent Experience No One Talks About”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 5 5 5 62 5 5 5 53 5 4 5 54 5 5 5 55 5 5 5 5

“Childhood No Longer Innocent”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 5 5 5 52 5 4 4 53 5 4 4 54 4 5 5 55 5 4 4 5

“The Chimney:Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 4 4 4 42 3 3 3 43 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 55 4 4 4 5

“The Courage To Be”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 4 4 4 52 4 4 4 53 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 45 4 4 4 5

“Prejudice: A Glimpse at Ludo’s Life”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 4 4 4 42 4 4 4 43 4 4 4 54 4 4 4 55 4 4 4 5

Shoreline Community College 732004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

“The Adolescent Experience No One Talks About”Faculty Development Organization Style/Voice Mechanics1 5 5 4 52 4 4 4 53 5 5 5 54 5 5 5 55 5 4 4 5

ENGLISH 101 ESSAY RUBRIClevel 6 level 5 level 4 level 3

DEVELOPMENT

Focus (thesis, purpose or controlling idea) is clear, imaginative, fully realized, and insightful.

Body paragraphs supported by a variety of relevant facts, examples, illustrations from experience, references to related readings, etc.

Well-reasoned and insightful arguments, observations, etc.

Demonstrates specific attention to relationship between audience and purpose.

Clearly and thoroughly responds to assignment.

Focus is clear and thoughtful. Body well supported by facts,

examples, illustrations from experience, references to related readings, etc., though support may not be as varied and vivid as level 6.

Generally well reasoned arguments, observations, etc.

Demonstrates understanding of audience and purpose.

Response to assignment is generally adequate and thorough.

Focus is generally adequate but may not be immediately clear to all readers.

Body generally supported by facts, examples, details. No more than one paragraph with inadequate support.

Some logical inconsistencies in arguments, observations, etc.

Demonstrates some understanding of audience and purpose.

Minimally responds to assignment.

Focus is vague, either too general, too narrow, superficial, or indirect.

Body supported by few facts, examples, etc. More than one paragraph with inadequate support.

Frequent logical inconsistencies in arguments, observations, etc.

Demonstrates poor understanding of audience/essay purpose.

Does not respond well to assignment.

ORGANIZATION

Vivid, engaging, informative introduction.

Clear, logical, and inventive organization of ideas in relation to one another and to the essay’s focus.

Appropriate and smooth transitions between paragraphs and sentences.

Inventive, thorough, memorable conclusion.

Informative, appropriate introduction.

Clear and logical organization of ideas in relation to one another and to essay focus.

Appropriate and smooth transitions between paragraphs and most sentences.

Appropriate conclusion.

Adequate introduction. Ideas generally organized in

relation to one another and to the focus; organization readily apparent. No more than one paragraph unrelated to the focus.

Adequate transitions between paragraphs and sentences.

Adequate conclusion.

Ineffective or poorly developed introduction.

Unclear ordering of ideas; organization not readily apparent. More than one paragraph not clearly related to the focus.

Transitions often lacking or inappropriate.

Ineffective or poorly developed conclusion.

STYLE

/

VOICE

Engaging and individualized voice appropriate to the audience/purpose.

Thorough consistency of tone/voice.

Refreshing and revealing word choice.

Varied and skillful sentence structure.

Vivid and varied use of detail in examples and descriptions.

Voice appropriate to the audience/purpose though somewhat generic or predictable in places.

General consistency of tone/voice. Some variety of word choice. Variety of sentence structure. Interesting and varied use of detail

in examples and descriptions.

Voice adequate to the audience/purpose though often generic or predictable.

May be slight inconsistencies in tone/voice, verb tense, etc.

Predictable word choice; low range of synonyms employed.

Sentences mechanically sound but predictable; some variety of structures.

Minimal variety of detail in examples; descriptions often vague.

Voice noticeably generic or inappropriate (e.g. first person narrative may predominate in an analysis assignment.)

Inconsistent style/voice. Wording very predictable; few

synonym alternatives used; diction at times inaccurate.

Sentences not always sound; little variety; most sentences written in basic and repetitive structures.

Little or no variety of detail; descriptions usually vague.

MECHANICS

Full variety of sentence structures used correctly. No sentence structure errors

Accurate and precise diction and phrasing throughout.

Virtually no grammatical, punctuation and mechanical errors (none which affect the flow or clarity of the paper.)

Some variety of sentence structure used correctly. Sentences demonstrate effective coordination and subordination.

Accurate diction and phrasing. Infrequent grammatical and

mechanical errors rarely disrupt flow or clarity.

Generally adequate sentence constructions. No more than two sentence structure errors.

Diction/phrasing usually accurate. Few grammatical, punctuation, and

mechanical errors (errors do not frequently disrupt the flow or clarity of the paper.)

Frequent sentence structure problems.

Diction phrasing often inaccurate. Frequent and varied grammatical,

punctuation and mechanical errors which interfere with the clarity.

Date: Name: Suggestions for revision:

ENGLISH 101 ESSAY SCORING GUIDE DRAFT Feb’05

level 5 (3.5-4.0) level 4 (2.5-3.4) level 3 (2.0-2.4) level 2 (1.5-1.9)

DEVELOPMENT

Essay focus (its thesis or controlling idea) is clear, inventive and fully realized.

Essay body relies on evidence to support its claims. Evidence includes relevant facts, examples, illustrations from experience and references to related readings.

Body contains well-reasoned and insightful arguments/observations.

Writing demonstrates specific attention to the relationship between audience and purpose.

Response to assignment is clear, thorough and illuminating.

Focus is clear and thoughtful. Body is well supported by evidence

though support may not be as varied and thorough as level 6.

Body contains generally well reasoned arguments/observations.

Writing demonstrates understanding of audience and purpose.

Response to assignment is generally adequate and thorough.

Focus is generally adequate but may not be immediately clear to all readers.

Body is generally supported by evidence. No more than one paragraph lacks thesis support.

Body contains some well-reasoned arguments/observations, while others may show logical inconsistencies.

Writing demonstrates some understanding of audience and purpose.

Response to assignment is minimal.

Focus is vague, too general, too narrow, superficial, or indirect.

Body is not always supported by evidence. More than one paragraph lacks adequate support.

Arguments/observations show frequent logical inconsistencies.

Writing demonstrates little understanding of audience and purpose.

Response to assignment is incomplete or unsatisfactory.

ORGANIZATION

Introduction serves as a vivid, engaging and informative “welcome mat” to the paper and establishes essay design.

Ideas relate clearly to essay focus and are arranged in a logical sequence.

Paragraphs and sentences are linked by appropriate transitions.

Conclusion inventively, thoroughly and memorably unifies the essay.

Intro is informative and effective. Ideas relate clearly to essay focus

and are arranged in a logical sequence.

Paragraphs and sentences in most instances are effectively linked by transitions.

Conclusion effectively unifies the essay

Intro is adequate but may be somewhat mechanical.

Ideas are generally organized in relation to one another and to the focus; essay design is readily apparent. No more than one paragraph is unrelated to focus.

Paragraphs and sentence are adequately linked by transitions.

Conclusion adequately unifies essay.

Intro is ineffective or lacks development.

Ideas are not generally organized in relation to one another; design is not apparent. More than one paragraph appears unrelated to focus.

Paragraphs and sentences are not adequately linked by transitions.

Conclusion fails to unify or adequately complete essay.

STYLE

/

VOICE

Writing style or “voice” is engaging, individualized and carefully tailored to the essay audience/purpose.

Writing tone is consistency and control by use of refreshing and revealing word choices.

Sentences patterns are inventive, varied and skillful.

Detailing, illustrations and descriptions are abundant and serve to enhance essay design.

“Voice” is appropriate to the audience/purpose, though it may somewhat generic or predictable in places.

Tone shows consistency and reveals a variety of word choices.

Sentences are generally varied and skillful.

Detailing is thorough and varied.

“Voice” is adequate to the audience/purpose though sometimes generic or predictable.

Tone is generally consistent but may be show occasional verb tense shifts or predictable word choices.

Sentences are mechanically sound. Some constructions may be predictable or repetitious.

Detailing is adequate but minimal or sometimes vague.

“Voice” is noticeably generic or inappropriate (e.g. first person narrative may predominate in an analysis assignment.)

Tone is often inconsistent; wording is predictable or inaccurate.

Sentences may be sound but written in basic and repetitive structures; others may be garbled, awkward, strained or confusing.

Detailing is mostly minimal or vague.

MECHANICS

Writing demonstrates full command of grammar, punctuation, sentence patterns and the conventions written English.

Phrasing and diction are always precise and show a high degree of sophistication.

Regarding conventions (spelling, punctuation, formatting), the writing is error free.

Writing demonstrates some variety of sentence patterns. Sentences demonstrate effective coordination and subordination.

Phrasing and diction are accurate. Writing shows Infrequent lapses in

technical control rarely disrupt flow or clarity.

Writing demonstrates generally adequate sentence constructions. No more than two sentence structure errors.

Phrasing and diction are usually accurate.

Writing may show some lapses in technical control, but these errors do not frequently disrupt continuity or clarity.

Writing demonstrates frequent confusion over sentence boundaries, typified by frags, comma splices or run-ons.

Phrasing and diction are often inaccurate.

Writing often shows lapses in technical control that frequently disrupts continuity and clarity.

Name: Date: Suggestions for revision:

<<Return>>

Shoreline Community College 752004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

APPENDIX F

Project Title: Norming Session for ESL Writing

Project Manager(s) & e-mail address: Daina Smuidrins dsmuidri@shoreline.edu

Purpose

The purpose of this project was to hold quarterly writing norming sessions with current ESL student writing samples to help standardize our expectations for ongoing assessment and level completion. Our ESL program is unique in that it integrates non-academic and academically bound immigrant and international students. Because so many of our students are academically bound, the program places a greater emphasis on writing skills than other ESL programs. Student writing plays a large part in determining whether students are ready for level completion. We have assessment rubrics and detailed curriculum. Although these tools are very helpful, faculty felt they needed regular group discussion and clarification about what constitutes level appropriate writing.

Outcomes:

to come to a shared understanding of what constitutes level appropriate writing to practice applying the program assessment rubrics to allow instructors to understand the expectations of levels below and above the

levels they usually teach to give instructors confidence to teach new levels to have the results posted online for the benefit of those not present and future

instructors

Number and Nature of Participants:

3-5 full-time faculty joined each session, but were not reimbursed for their time.

Session 1 – full-time faculty, plus 5 associate faculty

Session 2 – full-time faculty, plus 30 associate faculty (not reimbursed out of this grant because the session took place during a program meeting)

Session 3 – full-time faculty, plus 4 associate faculty

Session 4 – full-time faculty, plus 4 associate faculty

Specific activities and processes:

Prior to the workshop, the manager collected in-class writing samples from the levels to be addressed, chose several samples, and re-typed them. At the workshop, participants read the writing samples and wrote their score on a transparency, thus allowing for anonymity. An overhead project was then used to view the scores. Finally, instructors had the opportunity to volunteer why they thought the writing sample was passing or not passing. Depending on the length of the writing, participants were able to discuss 2-4 writing samples per level. Each workshop addressed two levels. Finally, the writing samples, results, and comments were posted online.

Successes and Challenges

The greatest challenge was that because of our enormous program, which includes a high ratio of associate faculty that teach at various times and colleges, it was difficult to find a time when all faculty could attend. However, one of the successes was that instructors who could not attend the first session requested we devote our only all-program meeting to a norming session. Another success is that instructors regularly remark that they refer to the online documents. Finally, presenting at the Faculty Retreat was another success.

Materials

Norming samples, results, and instructor comments are located:

Level 2 resultshttp://elmo.shore.ctc.edu/esl/Level%202%20Norming.doc

Level 3 resultshttp://elmo.shore.ctc.edu/esl/Level%203%20Norming.doc

Level 4 and 5 resultshttp://elmo.shore.ctc.edu/esl/norming%20results.doc

Level 5http://elmo.shore.ctc.edu/esl/Level%205%20norming%20results%20winter05.doc

Level 6http://elmo.shore.ctc.edu/esl/norming%20results%20Level%206%20winter05.doc

Level 7 http://elmo.shore.ctc.edu/esl/academic%20norming/Norming%20099.doc

Level 8 http://elmo.shore.ctc.edu/esl/academic%20norming/Level%20100%20norming.doc

<<Return>>

Shoreline Community College 772004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

APPENDIX G

Project Title:

Faculty Retreat: General Education – Where Do We Go From Here?

Project Manager & e-mail address:

Tim Payne, Economics Professortpayne@shoreline.edu

Project Overview:

a) Preface: Gen Ed at Shoreline

General education (Gen Ed) affects the teaching and learning of every student at Shoreline. Over the last several years there has been considerable work by individuals and small groups to explore different avenues of Gen Ed. In the last year the Curriculum Committee has been guiding a process of establishing outcomes in the Gen Ed areas of Multicultural Understanding, Communication, and Quantitative/Symbolic reasoning. However, despite this work, there are still unanswered questions about the institutional direction for Gen Ed. While methods of implementing Gen Ed like outcomes assessment, curriculum transformation, and degree requirements are already being practiced here and there on campus, a college-wide plan for implementation does not seem ready. Gen Ed implementation should be influenced by the faculty, but up to this point there have been few opportunities for faculty to even begin the broad discussion necessary for success. The purpose of this project was not necessarily to make recommendations or decisions about the direction of Gen Ed, but was instead to help facilitate the conversations necessary to begin moving forward.

b) Project Objectives:

The specific objectives for the project were to provide:

1. an opportunity for a broad, cross-disciplinary, cross-divisional look at course outcomes to see how those outcomes fit with each other, and how they relate to Shoreline’s Gen Ed outcomes,

2. increased faculty understanding of student learning and outcomes-based assessment, and

3. an opportunity for a discussion of where General Education Outcomes are headed at Shoreline.

c) Project Participants:

The purpose of this project was to give an opportunity for faculty across many disciplines to explore the meaning and importance of student outcomes. The 2005 Faculty Retreat attracted 50 faculty from a variety of academic disciplines in both vocational/technical and academic transfer programs. In addition, two ASL (American Sign Language) interpreters were there to help facilitate conversations with our colleague Richard Jacobs. [A list of retreat attendees can be found in Appendix C at the end of this report.] The retreat allowed for constructive and creative dialog between faculty without the distractions and time limitations usually present on campus. By coming together at the same place and time, the physical boundaries that separate faculty from different academic disciplines were removed, allowing for constructive and collegial relations. This project was designed to take advantage of the unique opportunity offered by an extended retreat in order to create a broad-based interdisciplinary discussion of student learning outcomes and the role and direction of Gen Ed at Shoreline. The project team consisted of five people - Tim Payne (project coordinator), Pam Dusenberry, DuValle Daniel, Julie Kemp and Diana Knauf. The team’s primary objective was to create and facilitate a workshop that would engage a variety of faculty in exploring the fundamental meaning and importance of student learning outcomes. Together, we brainstormed ideas about how to make a Gen Ed learning activity that was fun, meaningful and “outside of the box”. I facilitated the group, and was responsible for planning meetings, communication among the group, handling the finances, preparing learning materials and handouts, procuring materials, and scheduling of the workshop. Twenty three faculty members participated in the workshop at the Faculty Retreat.

d) Specific activities and processes

Faculty involved in the Faculty Retreat participated in several professional development workshops related to general education and outcomes assessment. Some examples are listed below:

“Risk-Free Norming Sessions”– Daina Smuidrins and Donna Biscay

How does your program come to a shared understanding of assessment? In this workshop, we will discuss norming sessions, go through the process ESL instructors use to assess writing, and discuss ways to adapt this technique to your discipline. Come experience this efficient, risk-free technique that leads to

consistent assessment practices.

“Getting the Best out of Online Discussions – What do we want, and how do we get it?”

– Julie Kemp and Amy KinselWorkshop to present and discuss strategies for structuring successful online discussions. Specific topics

include: asking the right questions; communicating expectations for participation (i.e., how much and when); dealing with disruptive students; and identifying the outcomes we want and ways to assess them.

“Black Skin, White Mask – Female Skin, Male Mask”- Ernest Johnson

This exercise explores and considers the ways in which psychological oppression systematically diminishes and inhibits the internally colonized (in this case people of color and women), rendering them

Shoreline Community College 792004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

culturally inauthentic, socially mute, and cognitively blind as to the causes and full dimensions of their oppression. We will utilize the framework of Augusto Baol’s Theater of the Oppressed (TO) to explore self-

disclosure and transformation through role plays that allow us to step out from behind our socially constructed masks in order to be more fully engaged in multicultural transformation.

“Writing Playshop” – Grace Rhodes

Playing helps us move beyond our typical roles, evoking creativity and humor we may forget to use in our academic worlds. We understand the power of humor and laughing in healing physical illness. Why not engage its energy in the classroom to accelerate student learning? Spend an hour thinking outside the

box and having fun with words with your colleagues. (No writing skills required!)

While retreat workshops such as these gave faculty the opportunity to discuss course outcomes and alternative methods of assessment, the specific focus of the team participating in this project was to create and facilitate a workshop exploring the basic questions surrounding student outcomes. The Faculty Retreat Schedule listed it this way:

The following is a more detailed description of the creation and operation of the workshop.

i. Planning

There were two primary components of planning for this project. This first was working with the Faculty Retreat Planning Committee and making sure that the goal of exploring Gen Ed and the larger retreat planning process were always in conjunction. This part of the project required me, as the project coordinator, to also play an active role on the Faculty Retreat Planning committee. In this process, consideration was given to offering a substantial number and variety of Gen Ed and assessment activities and scheduling them with a goal of broad participation. This goal was easily achieved due to the number and quality of workshops proposed as well as the cooperation of the Retreat committee members.

The second component of this project was to assemble a team of faculty to help create, plan and facilitate a workshop devoted to exploring Gen Ed outcomes. This started by asking for volunteers on the Faculty Listserv and working with Pam

“The SCC Super-Graduate: Building the Perfect Beast”

– Du Valle Daniel, Pam Dusenberry, Julie Kemp, Diana Knauf, and Tim Payne

Let’s get together and design a “super-student”! What does the ideal SCC grad look like? What do they know?

What can they do? How do we create them?

Dusenberry to identify faculty members with previous experience in outcomes and assessments. As a result, a team of Pam Dusenberry, Diana Knauf, Duvalle Daniel, Julie Kemp and Tim Payne was formed. After exchanging numerous ideas by email, the team met to brainstorm on Friday, February 18, and finalized a plan for the workshop. The goal was to reintroduce the idea and ideals of Shoreline’s Gen Ed in a way that would encourage faculty to re-engage with the topic and keep it more in mind as they create new courses and teach old ones. The team also discussed how to better clarify Gen Ed Outcomes versus degree requirements, since the two seemed to be mistakenly interchangeable in many faculty members’ minds. There was consensus that faculty needed some basic information about the difference between the two, which inspired the creation of the handout entitled “SCC General Transfer Degree Requirements and General Education Outcomes” [Appendix B] In discussion of this confusion, the group began to discuss student outcomes in a general sense, and began to look at them in other ways. It was clear to everyone that the outcomes should reflect what Shoreline wanted its students to take with them, but that was something not easily tied to particular disciplines or to specifically rigid outcome definitions.

After this general discussion, the team moved on to a discussion of how to engage faculty in the conversation about student learning outcomes. Some of the goals for the retreat were to articulate existing outcomes, to clarify the difference between outcomes and degree requirements, and to open a general conversation on how to work with and improve those outcomes. To this end, the group created a workshop activity that would attempt to bring the best out of the broad interdisciplinary group of faculty expected at the retreat.

ii. The Faculty Retreat Workshop

One of the team’s goals was to open up the question of General Education Outcomes for possible revisions and additions, as well as to reinforce the values expressed in the six existing outcomes. To that end, the workshop at the retreat was titled, “The SCC Super-Graduate: Building the Perfect Beast” Faculty participants were first directed to count off by “threes”, making sure that each of three groups formed had members of both professional/technical and academic transfer faculty. Each resulting group also had members from at least four academic divisions.

Next, participants were given an 8-foot long piece of butcher paper, several colored marking pens, and several tablets of sticky notes. Participants divided into groups with at least one member of the Outcomes Team in each group as facilitator. Each group was given the instruction sheet appearing below and turned loose. Without using the word “outcome,” participants were asked to think about all of the skills and qualities they wanted to see in students when they graduated from Shoreline. [The instruction sheet also appears in Appendix A]

Shoreline Community College 812004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

After a short brainstorming period, each group drew a life-sized “model student” on butcher paper by tracing a volunteer who agreed to temporarily “lie down on the job”. Then group members wrote the individual qualities of a “super-student” on sticky notes, one per quality or skill, and began sticking them on the paper model-student. After the groups had run out of ideas, they then grouped their ideas into larger categories, and were asked to redistribute the sticky notes on the model-student in a way that reflected skill-sets and values. Although a couple of faculty members made jokes about trying to fit the sticky notes into categories based on Shoreline’s current Gen Ed Outcomes, it was soon clear to all participants that faculty wanted to see much more than six outcomes from graduating students. It was also clear from the ways in which faculty placed the sticky notes on the student drawings that they felt that these qualities could not be separated from each other: what each group had created, without interaction with the other groups, was a picture of a whole and balanced person. A larger list of some of the traits of a “super grad” appears below.

Some of the Qualities of the SCC SuperGrad:

Curiosity / hunger for knowledgeAbility to distinguish details AND see big picture

Questioning authority

“The SCC Super-Graduate: Building the Perfect Beast"Du Valle Daniel, Pam Dusenberry,

Julie Kemp, Diana Knauf and Tim Payne Let's get together and design a "super-student"!  What does the ideal SCC grad look like?  What do they know?  What can they do?

Introduction and directions for exercise: Duvalle and Pam (5 min.)

Exercise (40 min.)

Start by tracing the outline of a “model student” on butcher paper.Next, brainstorm with your group. What are the traits or qualities of a “super-graduate”? What do they know? How do they think? What can they do? Traits and abilities should not be discipline specific, nor pertain to any particular course or instructor. Write these ideas on sticky notes (limit each to a few words). Next, arrange the different traits / abilities (sticky notes) on the “model student”. You are encouraged to place the traits in groupings that make sense to you. You may also use the markers to label the groupings and other available materials to embellish your creation.

Analysis and discussion facilitated by panel - Duvalle, Pam, Julie, Diana & Tim (30 min.).

Willing to take risks (within reason)A developed sense of humor

Appreciation of different culturesCreativity

ImaginationAble to listen to others and consider their opinions

Can move between either/or to seeing fine distinctionsAble to accept ambiguities

Ability to harmonize faith and reasonEnvironmentally responsible

Able to evaluate between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ sources of informationCritical thinker

Awareness of events outside their own worldLives globally

Understands scientific methodDevelops own sense of personal values

Is self-confidentIs able to communicate well with othersConsiders ethics when making decisions

Is a lifelong learnerOpen-minded

Lives a balanced lifeTakes care of herself (physically and mentally)

Writes good papersIs politically aware and active

Understands the difference between critique and criticizeConnects their learning to their lives

A readerSelf-evaluative

HonestMore than monolingual

Speaks wellValues and recognizes excellence in any area

ResponsibleA problem-solver

Wants to make a difference / help othersFocused, but not narrow

Empowered to act, speak, and changeRecognizes the value of asking questions

iii. Successes

Faculty from six divisions were represented, and all of them were eager to participate.

Shoreline Community College 832004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

Framing the discussion to avoid direct relation to Shoreline’s Gen Ed Outcomes was a good thing, in that faculty came up with all kinds of outcomes that were not included or easily put under the categories of the existing outcomes.

Faculty were all very attuned to forming a holistic picture of a perfect grad – it was not just about skill sets.

The process of putting individual skills and abilities into categories was noticeably different among the three groups of faculty involved in the workshop. One group placed things in distinct categories that were like (but beyond) the six Gen Ed Outcomes at Shoreline. Another group consciously refused to put things in categories, and showed the outcomes as independent and separate by sticking notes all over the model student. The third group felt that all of the outcomes are interrelated and part of making a more holistic student, and demonstrated this by attaching all of the sticky notes together in one pile.

As a part of the holistic focus, good citizenship at all levels of society was very important to all faculty.

Showing the importance of a well-rounded, well-balanced life came up in all of the groups.

During discussion, it was clear that faculty felt an obligation to model the kinds of behavior they wanted students to acquire – service, citizenship, ethical behavior, environmental and social awareness, etc.

Faculty at the workshop indicated that they would like to continue the conversation, and several people mentioned that they thought that it might be time to address the apparent discrepancies in the existing Gen Ed Outcomes and the ones teachers considered equally important.

Perhaps most importantly, faculty from across campus all had very similar ideas of how the perfect grad should look.

At the Faculty Retreat, faculty showed an interest in learning at workshops on teaching, learning and assessment; session topics included criteria for evaluating on-line discussions, qualities or traits we hope Shoreline graduates develop, new ideas for interdisciplinary courses, how deaf and hearing people communicate differently, among others. Faculty are using the ideas in their classes now and talking about what they learned and how they are teaching differently.

The value of other retreat activities, such as workshops creating community through humor, stories, play and exploration, should not be underestimated. No one involved doubts the power of such activities in creating an atmosphere in which broad issues like Gen Ed can be explored.

Having the time and space to talk and laugh together benefited the college tangibly: faculty built trust by playing and learning together; they built respect by learning more about each others’ disciplines and classroom approaches. Trust and respect will be the basis for repairing a damaged campus climate.

iv. Current Issues/Concerns:

There was a general desire to offer the workshop again, so that more faculty could be involved. One suggestion that had strong support was that Shoreline move forward from these workshops and link them to a more specific discussion

of how to relate the outcomes to what faculty actually wanted to see in the students. One way of doing this would be to offer a series of Professional Development workshops for interested faculty. Another way would be to set up a committee, but this was generally felt to be a less effective way of encouraging faculty participation and best using the expertise that Shoreline’s faculty.

Faculty need to be additionally informed about the college-wide outcomes (Gen Ed Outcomes or GEOs) and further engaged in how they are realized in teaching, learning and assessment. Given some lack of knowledge and disinterest in the GEOs, one workshop group proposed that the GEOs be reviewed and updated, articulating their purpose more effectively. This way students and faculty would have a better understanding of the outcomes and how they reflect Shoreline’s values and goal of helping to create lifelong learners.

Another important consideration is the relationship between distribution requirements, GEOs, and program and course outcomes. What learning do we expect of students when they earn 15 credits of Humanities or Social Science classes? Can our expectations be codified in distribution area student learning outcomes? If so, we should do it. Then we can see better how the divisions contribute to college-wide GEOs.

v. Challenges

The broad challenges faced by the college involve unanswered questions about Gen Ed implementation at Shoreline. Perhaps the most basic issue underlying the General Education discussion is how Gen Ed outcomes are to be implemented institutionally. There are at least three basic models which could be enacted either separately or together: infusion/curriculum transformation, outcomes assessment, and graduation requirements. The infusion model would take the route of transforming the curriculum of each and every class across campus. Infusion of Gen Ed outcomes is a desirable but necessarily an involved and lengthy process. For this to really work, it will require substantial faculty time for professional development and curriculum transformation, and will require a strong institutional commitment of resources to support the time and effort needed to train existing faculty and to hire new faculty with the appropriate skills. The experiences gained from this workshop enable faculty to explore a variety of outcomes for their students, and there seemed to be something in it for everyone, regardless of course or discipline. Such a process of exploring the range of possible student outcomes seems to be an important step to take before addressing the assessment of those outcomes and the establishment of degree requirements.

Implementing Gen Ed through graduation requirements for specific courses to fulfill each of the Gen Ed outcomes would seem to be a process that would logically follow a broad examination of learning outcomes and curriculum transformation. However, SCC is already relying on graduation requirements to demonstrate three of the six Gen Ed outcomes - Communication, Multicultural and Quantitative Reasoning. But at the present time, three Gen Ed outcomes – Information Literacy, Global Awareness, and General Intellectual Ability - have not been associated with graduation requirements.

Shoreline Community College 852004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

This brings up a question: should each of the six Gen Ed outcomes be treated in the same way?

If the answer is yes, then the college would need to create three new graduation requirements. With no other changes in our current graduation requirements, this would greatly increase the credits needed for graduation and time to completion of degrees for students. We all know that will never fly. If something is to be added to Shoreline’s graduation requirements, then something else would have to be dropped or substituted, and the most obvious choices would be our present divisional distribution requirements. Some say that general education was the original intent when distribution requirements in Math/Science, Humanities, Social Sciences and Intra-American Studies were created. Maybe the time has come to rethink how distribution requirements work.

One possibility for preserving our existing distribution requirements is that present distribution requirements could include classes designated as meeting Gen Ed outcomes. For example, the “Information Literacy” outcome could be met as part of meeting the Science, Social Sciences, Intra-American Studies or Humanities distribution requirements. For example, an IL-Information Literacy Gen Ed requirement could state that “each student must take at least 5 credits of IL-Information Literacy designated classes as part of one of the existing distribution requirements”. This same process could be used for the GA-Global Awareness outcome, again by providing a list of GA designated courses that could include classes from any of the four distribution requirements.

But where do we put “GI-General Intellectual” outcomes? Maybe this outcome should be treated differently from the others. There are at least two models working on campus already that might fulfill this requirement: capstone courses and Interdisciplinary (IDS) courses. There might be general faculty support for these as ways to fulfill a GI requirement, but if we are going to create a “capstone course” or IDS graduation requirement, the school needs to support the development of a sufficient number of qualified classes in order to adequately meet student demands. Otherwise we will be back to the problem we had several years ago with the Integrated Studies requirement. [For those of you needing a historical review, the college used to require students to take ”integrated studies” classes in order to graduate. While well intentioned, the cart was placed before the horse, and the school found itself without an adequate number of qualified classes to meet student demand. To address this shortage, the bar was lowered to make a larger list of classes that no longer lived up to the original intent. Faculty overwhelmingly voted to remove this requirement several years ago, with an understanding that a new-improved Gen Ed proposal would be enacted, which created the Gen Ed situation we have now.]

There are hopeful signs that the efforts currently underway (under the guidance of the Curriculum Committee) to create criteria for outcomes in Communication, Multicultural Understanding, and Quantitative/Symbolic Reasoning are not falling into the trap that “Integrated Studies” fell into years ago. The fate of other Gen Ed outcomes already adopted by the college, as well as student outcomes envisioned by faculty who participated in this workshop, are at this time far less certain.

Appendix A:

Shoreline Community College 872004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

“The SCC Super-Graduate: Building the Perfect Beast"Du Valle Daniel, Pam Dusenberry,

Julie Kemp, Diana Knauf and Tim Payne Let's get together and design a "super-student"!  What does the ideal SCC grad look like?  What do they know?  What can they do?

Introduction and directions for exercise: Duvalle and Pam (5 min.)

Exercise (40 min.)

1. Start by tracing the outline of a “model student” on butcher paper.2. Next, brainstorm with your group. What are the traits or qualities of a

“super-graduate”? What do they know? How do they think? What can they do? Traits and abilities should not be discipline specific, nor pertain to any particular course or instructor. Write these ideas on sticky notes (limit each to a few words).

3. Next, arrange the different traits / abilities (sticky notes) on the “model student”. You are encouraged to place the traits in groupings that make sense to you. You may also use the markers to label the groupings and other available materials to embellish your creation.

Analysis and discussion facilitated by panel - Duvalle, Pam, Julie, Diana & Tim (30 min.).

Appendix B:SCC General Transfer Degree

Requirements and General Education Outcomes

SCC Distribution Requirements SCC Gen Ed Core Requirements

[6 credits req. by ICRC]

SCC General Education Outcomes

No requirements from State or SCC State Requirements(ICRC) SCC Requirements

Human-ities

15 credits

Social Science

15 credits

Math-Science

15 credits

Intra-Amer. Stud.

ENG 101/102Comm.

10 credits

Quantit./Symbol.

PE3

Multi-cultural3 credit

Commun-ication

Quantitative Reasoning

General Intellectual

Ability

Information Literacy

Global Awareness

MulticulturalUnder-

standing

Appendix C

Faculty Retreat 2004-2005 Attendees

Shoreline Community College 892004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report

1. Baer, Emma2. Biscay, Donna3. Bogart, Steve4. Brian, Julieanne5. Daniel, DuValle6. David, Rachel7. Deming, Venus8. Dodd, Chip9. Duerenberger, Paul10. Dusenberry, Pam11. Dyksterhuis, Carol12. Fisher, Chris13. Forst, Linda14. Harkness, Ed15. Harkness, Linda16. Hayden, Robert17. Honey, Nikki18. Houghton, Matt19. Hunt, Kathie20. Idiart, Jeannette21. Jacobs, Richard22. Johnson, Ernest23. Joly, Claire24. Kemp, Julie25. Kinsel, Amy26. Knauf, Diana27. LaFountaine, Ken28. Landon, Christine29. Lawson, Kenny30. Lindenmeyer, Linda31. Lynch, Kathleen32. McCutcheon, Bruce33. Parks, Gary34. Pasquale, Pam35. Payne, Tim36. Reddin, Jim37. Rhodes, Grace38. Saldin, Josie39. Sandven, Lauren40. Savage, Nirmala41. Shields, Bob42. Smuidrins, Daina43. Sparks, Susan44. Spitz, Bruce45. West, Art46. Steinmetz, Mayumi

47. Wilson, Lauren48. Winslow, Jane49. Wolff, Troy50. Zimmers, Brooke51. Interpreter # 1 (Robbi Crockett)52. Interpreter # 2

<<Return>>

Shoreline Community College 912004-05 Student Learning Assessment Projects Final Report