Assessment of Learning Objectives by Faculty€¦ · assessed learning objectives as follows: Morteza Seddighin Assessment of Communication Course: M118-Finite Mathematics Semester:

1

ASSESSMENT REPORT

DIVISION OF NATURAL SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS

Academic year 2002

Assessment of Learning Objectives by Faculty

During this period some faculty in the division of natural science and mathematics

assessed learning objectives as follows:

Morteza Seddighin

Assessment of Communication

Course: M118-Finite Mathematics

Semester: Fall 2002

Instructor: Morteza Seddighin

Objective

The objective of this assessment was to measure the oral and written communication

skills of students in my M118 (Finite Math) course.

Assessment Tools

I measured these abilities in a variety of ways.

I used OnCourse in an innovative way to measure students’ mastery of

communication skills in mathematics. I uploaded qualitative quizzes and short

tests on OnCourse for students to take. These tests were not multiple choice and

students had to write short assays for each question without using any

mathematical notation, formula, or symbol. I examined students’ responses in a

variety of ways. I used the responses of individual students to measure the writing

skills of students individually. Each student received a score between 0 and 100

for the written part of the assessment. Also the use of OnCourse allowed me to

conveniently compile students’ responses and share it with the entire class. Please

note that when OnCourse compiles all responses, it protects anonymity of all

respondents. Therefore, while students can see the totality of responses, they can

not match responses with respondents. Sharing all responses with the whole class

generated more and more discussions and helped students develop skills of

effective communication.

2

At times I used overhead projector to display mathematical terms and asked

students to define those mathematical terms in layman’s language without using

any mathematical notation. When students respond to question in my classes I

asked them to speak load so that everyone could hear them. Students were graded

on their ability to communicate effectively in class.

On students’ group work assignments I always put questions that required writing.

Students were required to write their ideas down in layman’s language without

using any mathematical terminology.

Criterion and Inference

For each component (oral and written) communication the criteria was that 75 % of the

students receive a score of more that 70 (this criterion will be modified next time I will

teach the same course). The following are descriptive statistics and bar graphs for each

written and oral component

WRITTEN

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid Less than 75

5 22.7 22.7 22.7

More than or equal to

75

17 77.3 77.3 100.0

Total 22 100.0 100.0

3

WRITTEN

More than or equal tLess than 75

Pe

rce

nt

100

80

60

40

20

0

ORAL

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid Less than 75

7 29.2 31.8 31.8

More than or equal to

75

15 62.5 68.2 100.0

Total 22 91.7 100.0 Missing System 2 8.3

Total 24 100.0

4

ORAL

More than or equal tLess than 75Missing

Pe

rce

nt

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

As it is clear from the frequency tables above 77.3 % of students received a score of more

than 75 on the written part. However, 68.2 % of students received a score of more than 75 on

the oral part. When I teach M118 again in the future, I will spend more time to enhance

students’ oral communication skills to meet the current criteria on the oral part ( 75 percent

of students receive a score of more than 70). For the written part I will raise the bar and

change the criteria to 75 percent of students receive a score of more than 80.

The Outcome of Assessment Objectives in

Statistical Techniques (K300) Submitted by Mort Seddighin

Spring 2002

INTRODUCTION In the spring semester 2001, I put Diversity and Ethics among the measurable objectives in my syllabus for the course Statistical Techniques (K300). I believe that among all mathematics courses, statistics is the only one that deals intensely with issues of diversity and ethics. In fact, statistics is used as a research tool in almost all disciplines and as such ethical and diversity issues in this field are intertwined with those issues in all other disciplines Therefore, it is imperative that every student who takes this course learns about ethical and diversity issues in statistics. It is also vital that we measure students’ knowledge on these issues. The textbook that I currently use for this course is titled The Basic Practice of Statistics by David Moore, Second Edition. Fortunately, this book itself has a chapter which indirectly discusses diversity and ethical issues. To make sure that students have enough resources, I also provided them with copies of the standards of American Statistical Association on Ethics. I obliged students to study the materials related to ethics and diversity by informing them in advance that 15 percent of their scores on the second test was distributed on questions related to diversity and ethics. I had a

5

total of 18 students in my class. Table A below shows the scores of these students on diversity and ethics segments of the second test. The maximum possible score on diversity was 14. The maximum possible score on ethics was 16. The goal that I set for myself was to enhance the knowledge of students on ethics and diversity in a way that at least 75 percent of them score more the third quartile (fall in the upper 25 percentile) on each of these two objectives.

Student # Diversity Ethics

(Table A)

ANALYSIS

1. Diversity The frequency table below (Table B) shows that I have achieved my own goal for diversity. In fact, about 84 percent of students more than the third quartile score. DIVERSIT

Frequency

Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid 10.00 3 15.8 16.7 16.7

12.00 8 42.1 44.4 61.1

14.00 7 36.8 38.9 100.0

Total 18 94.7 100.0

1 12 16

2 14 14

3 14 16

4 14 12

5 12 14

6 12 14

7 12 14

8 14 16

9 12 16

10 12 16

11 10 16

12 10 12

13 14 16

14 12 16

15 14 16

16 10 14

17 14 16

18 12 14

6

Missing System 1 5.3

Total 19 100.0

(Table B) Table C below shows the descriptive statistics for the distribution of scores on diversity. Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

DIVERSIT 18 10.00 14.00 12.4444 1.46417

Valid N (listwise)

18

(Table C)

Figure A below is the histogram of scores on diversity.

DIVERSIT

14.013.012.011.010.0

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.46

Mean = 12.4

N = 18.00

(Figure A)

2. Ethics The frequency table below (Table D) shows that I have achieved my own goal for ethics. In fact, about 84.2 percent of students scored more than the third quartile score. ETHICS

Frequency

Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative Percent

Valid 12.00 2 10.5 11.1 11.1

14.00 6 31.6 33.3 44.4

16.00 10 52.6 55.6 100.0

7

Total 18 94.7 100.0

Missing System 1 5.3

Total 19 100.0

(Table D) Table E below shows the descriptive statistics for the distribution of scores on ethics.

Descriptive Statistics

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

ETHICS 18 12.00 16.00 14.8889 1.40958

Valid N (listwise)

18

Figure B below is the histogram of scores on ethics

ETHICS

16.015.014.013.012.0

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Std. Dev = 1.41

Mean = 14.9

N = 18.00

(Table B)

3. Comparative Analysis

Table E below shows that the correlation between the scores on Ethics and Diversity is only .253.

Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

1 .253 .064 .006 1.45999

8

a Predictors: (Constant), ETHICS

(Table E)

The box-plot below (Figure C) shows that students who new more about ethics new less

about diversity. This of course does not mean that my students believe that diversity is in

contrast with ethics. It simply means that I have to spend more time in the future to focus

on diversity issues in this course.

1062N =

ETHICS

16.0014.0012.00

DIV

ER

SIT

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

16

2

(Figure C)

Table F below shows other relevant comparative statistics about these scores.

Coefficients

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Model B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) 8.526 3.756 2.270 .037

ETHICS .263 .251 .253 1.048 .310

a Dependent Variable: DIVERSIT (Table F)

9

CONCLUSION The data suggests that I have accomplished the goal that I set for myself in statistics last semester. However, I believe that a higher percentage of students should score more than the third quartile score on each of these two categories. To increase the percentage of students who score high in these two categories I will take the following steps in the future

Provide students with more resources on diversity and ethics

Spend more class time discussing issues of ethics and diversity.

Markus Pomper

Class: Math Ml26 (Trigonometry) Semester: Spring 02

Section: L364

Learning Objective: Communication

Instructor: Markus Pomper

Implementation of learning objective: This course provides students with knowledge about the trigonometric functions and their applications. Throughout the semester students have been trained to explain their work in words and to provided interpretations to mathematical modeling problems,

Instrument of assessment: As a measure of assessment for this learning objective, several problems on homework sets, exams and the final exam were analyzed. On the adjoining table, these are labeled Comml - Comm4.

• Comml. The student uses English language and formulas to explain how to set up an applied problem. Assessment is based on providing explanations how formulas are obtained to set up the problem.

• Comm2. Same as Comml.

• Comm3. The student is asked to solve a triangle in the context of an applied problem. The assessment evaluates the students ability to explain in words the relationship between the involved lengths and the angles.

• Comm4. The student is asked to discuss the various types of problems (solving equations, evaluating expressions and verifying identities) studied over the course of the semester and explain in words the objective and the strategy for each of the different types of problems.

• CommS. The student is asked to solve an applied problem that involves solving right triangles in order to determine distances and traveling times. The assessment

10

measures the student's ability to explain how information is used to determine the unknown quantities.

Scores for each criterion are 0 - not evident or no data; 1 - partially mastered; 2 - fully mastered. Several examples of assessed student work are included. Expectation of assessment:

1. It is expected that 80% of students show at least partial competency in each one of the assessment criteria.

2. At least 70% of students demonstrate full competency in at least one of the assessment criteria.

3. At least 60% of students demonstrate full competency in at each category.

Outcome of assessment: Expectation 2 is not met for criteria Comml and Comm3. The reason may be that the

assessment was done at an early date in the semester. The later assessment shows that students' performance did improve over the course of the semester. All other criteria are met.

Class: Math Ml26 (Trigonometry) Semester: Spring 02

Section: L364

Learning Objective: Depth of Knowledge


Implementation of learning objective: This course provides students with knowledge about the trigonometric functions and their applications. Important analytic techniques, solving equations and proving identities are discussed. The course also discusses applied techniques such as solving oblique triangles with the laws of sine and cosine.

Instrument of assessment:

As a measure of assessment for this learning objective, several problems on homework sets, exams and the final exam were analyzed. On the adjoining table, these are labeled Depth 1 - Depth 4.

• Depth 1. The student is asked to evaluate a trigonometric function using the double angle formula cos(2x) = 2 cos(x) -1 . Assessment is based on the correct application of the formula, and the proper use of the given value for cos x to determine cos 2x.

11

• Depth 2. The student is asked to solve oblique triangles. Assessment is based on the correct application of the laws of sine and cosine. This includes explaining why only one solution exists (or explicitly producing two solutions).

• Depth 3. The student is asked to prove several trigonometric identities. The objective is to use a succession of known identities to establish that the right and left hand side of the identity to be proved are indeed equal.

• Depth 4. The student is asked to find all solutions to a conditional equation involving trigonometric functions. Assessment is based on the student applying valid equivalence transformations, explaining major steps, determining all solutions by adding suitable multiples of the period, and verifying the answer in order to eliminate extraneous solutions.


1. It is expected that 80% of students show at least partial competency in each one of

the assessment criteria.

2. At least 70% of students demonstrate full competency in at least one of the

assessment criteria.


Outcome of assessment: All expectations are met.

Class: Math M216 (Calculus II) Semester: Spring 02

Section: L365



Implementation of learning objective: This course is for mathematics majors and secondary education majors. Some computer science majors take this course as an elective. The learning objective is implemented in two strands:

1. To communicate mathematical results among mathematicians, 2. To communicate mathematical results to a non-mathematician. To emphasize the

importance of proper communication, at least 20% of possible homework credit was assigned for communication and 50% of the points on the final exam were given for providing explanations.


12

As a measure of assessment for this learning objective, several problems on homework sets, exams and the final exam were analyzed. On the adjoining table, these are labeled Comml, Comm2, CommS and Comm4.

• Comml and Commla. Assessment the student's ability to explain in words the relationship between rate of change of volume and volume itself. Comml was assessed early on in the semester and Commla on the final exam.

• Comm2. Assessment of the students ability to explain the connection between rate of change and derivative.

• Comm3. The student must determine a numerical approximation for a definite integral and explain why the obtained value is a bad approximation.

• Comm4. Students are asked to visually represent how volume is determined for various solids of rotation. Assessment is based on the student's ability to draw the solid and a typical washer/disk or cylindrical shell used in the integration.

• CommS. Students make a coherent argument using the radius of convergence of a power series. Assessment is based on the student's ability to express the relationship between radius of convergence of a power series in x and the radius of convergence of a power series with the same coefficients involving x2.


1. It is expected that 90% of students show at least partial competency in each one of the assessment criteria.

2. At least 80% of students demonstrate full competency in at least one of the assessment criteria.



Class: Math M216 (Calculus II) Semester: Spring 02 Section: L365 Learning Objective: Ethics Instructor: Markus Pomper

Implementation of learning objective: This course is for mathematics majors and secondary education majors. Some computer science majors take this course as an elective. Ethical issues are discussed when the opportunity arises; this only happens several times during the course of one semester.

13

Instrument of assessment: Students are asked to write an essay of a topic of their choice and discuss how ethical issues arise in the life of a working mathematician. Several suggestions, such as decoding of PGP and statistical sampling versus census headcount were given. The assessment considers the following criteria:

1. Is there a connection between the topic of discussion and mathematics; 2. Does the student sufficiently explain this connection; 3. Does the student identify the ethical components of the topic.

Scores for each criterion are 0 - not evident or no data; 1 - partially mastered; 2 - fully mastered. Several examples of assessed student work are included.

Expectation of assessment: 1. It is expected that 90% of students show at least partial competency in the

assessment criterion. 2. At least 60% of students demonstrate full competency in the assessment criterion.


Class: MathM301 (Linear Algebra) Semester: Spring 02

Section: L366



Implementation of learning objective: This course is for mathematics majors. The learning objective is implemented in two

strands: 1. To communicate mathematical results among mathematicians, 2. To communicate mathematical results to a non-mathematician. To emphasize the

importance of proper communication, at least 20% of possible homework credit was assigned for communication and 50% of the points on the final exam were given for providing explanations.

Instrument of assessment: As a measure of assessment for this learning objective, several problems on homework sets, exams and the final exam were analyzed. On the adjoining table, these are labeled Comml, Comm2, Comm3 and Comm4.

• Comml and Comm4. Students are asked to write a single-step argument. They must explain what the words 'consistent' and 'homogeneous' mean in the context of systems of linear equations and must infer that a homogeneous system of linear

14

equations is consistent. Assessment is base on the students' ability to explain why the system is consistent given that it is homogeneous. Assessment Comml was done during the first week of classes, whileComm4 was on the final exam.

• Comm2. Students are given a problem where they have to balance a chemical equation. Assessment is based on the students' ability to describe how a system of linear equations is obtained from the unbalanced chemical equation, and how (once this system is solved) the solution is used to balance the chemical equation. In particular, students must that the smallest all-integer solution to the system of equations is used to balance the chemical equation.

• CommS. Students are asked to prove basic properties of matrices involving eigenvectors and eigenvalues. Assessment is based on the students' ability to translate the meaning of statements like 'x is an eigenvector of A corresponding to eigenvalue X into a corresponding mathematical statement like 'Ax — Ax' and vice versa.

Scores for each criterion are 0 - not evident or no data; 1 - partially mastered;

2 - fully mastered.

Several examples of assessed student work are included.

Expectation of assessment: 1. It is expected that 90% of students show at least partial competency in each one of

the assessment criteria. 2. At least 80% of students demonstrate full competency in at least one of the

assessment criteria. 3. At least 60% of students demonstrate full competency in at each category.


Class: Math M301 (Linear Algebra) Semester: Spring 02

Section: L366



Implementation of learning objective: This course is for mathematics majors. Depth of knowledge is provided throughout the duration of the semester. The course provides students with an introduction to Linear Algebra and to abstract mathematical reasoning.


15

As a measure of assessment for this learning objective, several problems on homework sets, exams and the final exam were analyzed. On the adjoining table, these are labeled Depth 1 - Depth 7.

• Depth 1. The student is asked to make a coherent mathematical argument. They are asked to show that for a n n x n matrix A, det^"1) = (det A)'1. Assessment is based on the students' ability to use known fact about matrices, such as the identity A A' = I and to structure the argument such that one fact follows from the previous one.

• Depth 2. Students are asked to determine whether a given set of vectors is a basis for a certain vector space, and what the dimension of the span is. Assessment is based on the students' ability to verify that a certain set of vectors spans a given vector space and whether that set is linearly independent.

• Depth 3. Students are asked prove basic facts about the basis of a vectorspace. Assessment is based on the student's ability to determine why a given statement is true and how this follows in generality from definition of basis.

• Depth 4. Students are asked to determine the matrix representation of a given linear transformation. Assessment is based on the students' ability use the correct procedure to determine the matrix representation.

• Depth 5. Students are asked to determine the transition matrix for a change of basis (from a basis vi, V2, VT, to the standard basis of .ft3 and vice versa). Assessment is based on the student's ability to correctly determine the transition matrices.

• Depth 6. Students are asked to diagonalize a square matrix. Assessment is based on the student's ability to determine a basis of eigenvalues, and employ transition matrices to represent the matrix in diagonal form.

Scores for each criterion are 0 - not evident or no data; 1 - partially mastered; 2 - fully mastered. Several examples of assessed student work are included.

Expectation of assessment: 1. It is expected that 90% of students show at least partial competency in each one of

the assessment criteria. 2. At least 80% of students demonstrate full competency in at least one of the

assessment criteria. 3. At least 60% of students demonstrate full competency in at each category.


Class: Math Ml 19 (Brief Calculus)

Semester: Fall 02 Sections: L409,

L610, L611 Learning Objective:

Communication

16

Implementation of learning objective:

The necessity to communicate how a given problem is solved has been an integral part of

the entire course. Every homework assignment contained a "Problem Solving" Problem, ie,

a problem in which students had to explain in detail how the problem was solved.


In this assessment, I consider Problems 3 and 4 of the final exam. Both problems are text

problems. The student must first derive a mathematical problem before a solution can be

obtained.

The assessment is based on the following criteria:

1. The student can communicate the use of variables when setting up text problems. In

particular, demonstrates proficiency in this objective if he/she correctly determines

the unknown quantities, and explains their meaning in the context of the given

problem.

2. The student can communicate what information from the text is used to obtain a

certain equation. In particular, the student must be able to communicate what

information is used to derive the objective for constrained maximization problems;

what information is used to derive the constraints; he/she must be able to distinguish

between objective and constraint.

3. The student can interpret the result of

a computation in the context of the problem and can communicate this result, hi

particular, the student must be able to answer the question that was posed based on

the results of computation.

Scores for each criterion are 0

- not evident or no data;

1 - partially mastered;

2 - fully mastered.

Expectation of assessment:

1. 80% of the students should show at least partial mastery in each assessment criterion.

2. 80 % of the students should show full mastery in at least one of the assessment

criteria.

3. 60 % of the students should show full mastery in each category.

Outcome of assessment: Average scores

range are 1.3.

Expectation 1 is met: 81% of all students show partial mastery on each criterion.

Expectation 2 is met. 81% of all students show full mastery in at least one criterion.

Expectation 3 is not met. Full mastery is showed by between 50% and 56% of the students

in all categories.

17

Class: Math Ml 18 (Finite Math)


L609, L636





the entire course. Every homework assignment contained a "Problem Solving" Problem, ie,

a problem in which students had to explain in detail how the problem was solved.


In this assessment, I consider Problems 1-3 of the final exam. Both problems are text

problems. The student must first derive a mathematical problem before a solution can be

obtained.


1. The student can communicate the use of variables when setting up text problems. In

particular, demonstrates proficiency in this objective if he/she correctly determines

the unknown quantities, and explains their meaning in the context of the given

problem.

2. The student can communicate what information from the text is used to obtain a

certain equation of inequality. In particular, the student must be able to communicate

what information is used to derive the objective for linear programming problems;

what information is used to derive the constraints; he/she must be able to distinguish

between objective and constraint.

3. The student can interpret the result of a computation in the context of the problem

and can communicate this result. In particular, the student must be able to answer

the question that was posed based on the results of computation.

Scores for each criterion are

0 - not evident or no data;


2 - fully mastered.




criteria.


Outcome of assessment: Scores range from 1.1 to 1.5. Students often ignore the necessity to explain the meaning of the variables they are going to use (Item 1, score is 1.1). Students do a decent job explaining

18

the equivalence transformations in GauB-Jordan and Simplex methods. (Item 3, Score is 1.5).

Expectation 1 is not met: Only 65 % of all students show partial mastery on Criterion 3. The reason for the low performance is that students must correctly solve a mathematical problem, before they can give an interpretation. Students who did not succeed in solving

the problem will not get credit for this criterion. Expectation 2 is not met. Only 70% of all students show mastery in at least one

assessment criterion. Expectation 3 is not met. Only 33% of all students can fully explain how they set up a

problem and what the meaning of the variables are (Criterion 1). In criteria 2 and 3, students approximately 60% demonstrate full mastery of the objective

Class: Math M311 (Calculus III)

Semester: Fall 02

Sections: L423, K246





the entire course. Students were asked to explain each step using correct mathematical

notation, explanations by sentences or drawings.


In this assessment, I consider Problems of the final exam. It is evaluated whether the

student can communicate ideas in a symbolic way, in written English, or by using a

graph.


1. The student can express him/herself accurately in a symbolic way.

2. The student can express ideas from mathematics in English sentences.

3. The student can express ideas using graphical methods.




2 - fully mastered.


1. 80% of the students should show at least partial mastery in each assessment

criterion.

19


criteria.


Outcome of assessment:

Scores range from 1.2 to

3.0.

All expectations are met.

Class: Math M311 (Calculus III)


K246 Learning Objective: Depth



Depth of knowledge in this upper-division mathematics course is demonstrated by the

ability of students to perform complicated tasks, such as determining the volume of a

complicated solid using triple integrals and using a suitable coordinate system; and by

demonstrating the ability to properly argue with concepts like the e-5-definition of limits of

functions and the definition of differentiability of functions.


In this assessment, I consider Problems of the final exam.


1. The student determine the volume of the solid obtained by removing two

cylindrical holes centered at (1,0) and (-1,0) with radii r = 1 from a sphere with

radius R = 2 and centered at the origin. Full mastery is demonstrated by completely

describing the solid, the region of intersection with the x-y-p\ane and arguing that

the computation indeed yields the correct volume.

2. The student is asked to provide the correct e-5-definition of limits of functions of

two variables and is then asked to prove several limit laws (sum and constant

multiple) using this definition. Full mastery is demonstrated by explaining the

correct choice of 5 given a particular 6.

3. The student is given several false statements involving differentiability of functions

of several variables; the student must provide a counterexample that illustrates why

the statement is false. Full mastery is demonstrated by explaining why the

counterexample satisfies all the hypotheses but fails to meet the conclusion of the

statement.




2 - fully mastered.

20




criteria.


Outcome of assessment: Scores range from 1.2 to 3.0.

Expectation 3 is not met. Only 50% of the students fully master the problem involving counterexamples for differentiability of functions of several variables. All other expectations are met.

Class: Math Ml 18 (Finite Math)

Semester: Summer 02

Sections: L070




This is a mathematics course for non-math majors. Depth of knowledge for this group of

students is determined by being able to perform solve linear programming problems, use

the Gauss-Jordan elimination method to solve systems of linear equations and to determine

probability using combinatorics.


In this assessment, I consider Problems 1-4 of the final exam.


1. The student chooses the correct method to solve linear programming problems. Full

mastery is shown by the student choosing the correct method in both problems (1

and 2); partial mastery is shown by choosing the correct method in at least one case.

2. The student performs the algorithm he/she chose correctly. In this case, it does not

matter whether the algorithm actually solves the problem, as long as it is performed

correctly.

3. The student is able to perform the Gauss-Jordan method and is able to interpret the

result using free and lead variables. Partial mastery is shown by performing the

algorithm correctly and bringing the matrix into row-reduced form. Full mastery is

shown by correctly interpreting the row-reduced matrix.

4. The student should be able to determine basic probabilities using combinatorics. For

full mastery, the student use correct formulas in three problems to correctly

determine probabilities of two of the three given events. Partial mastery is shown

determining at least one of the probabilities.

21

Scores for each criterion are 0 -

not evident or no data;


2 - fully mastered.




criteria.

3. 60% of the students should show full mastery of each assessment criterion.

Outcome of assessment:

Average scores range from 1.8 to 1.9.

Expectation 1 is met: At least 82% of the student show at least partial mastery in each

criterion.

Expectation 2 is met: All students fully master at least one expectation.

Expectation 3 is met: At least 76% of the students have fully mastered each expectations.

Peggy Branstrator

Assessment Plan for Environment and Life

ETHICAL

1. Students will be able to identify and explain the ethical viewpoints held by environmentalists and

those that oppose them.

methods:

1. Students will correctly answer a course-embedded objective or essay question

50% of all students by the end of the first month of L108

70% of all students by the end of L108

2. Students declaring a minor in environmental studies will include examples of their answers to these questions or papers discussing ethical issues in their portfolio

3. End of semester survey

70% of all students surveyed will respond that they learned at least a moderate amount about ethical issues

DIVERSITY

2. Students will be able to explain at least one of the following:

the historical role of indigenous people in preserving biological diversity in various parts of the

world.

sustainable natural resources practices of at least one non-western or non-industrial culture.

the connection between the economic, educational and political status of women and human

population growth.

the concept of environmental justice and the disproportionate siting of environmental hazards in

minority neighborhoods

methods:



22

2. Students declaring a minor in environmental studies will include examples of their answers to these questions or papers discussing diversity in their portfolio


70% of all students surveyed will respond that they learned at least a moderate amount about other cultures or the status of women.

Examples of course-embedded assessment questions

For the last several years there has been a debate in Indiana about allowing logging in the Hoosier National

Forest. Explain the philosophy and ethical arguments (worldview) of the groups and individuals proposing

logging and those against it.

A few years ago wolves were reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park, nearly 100 years after the last

wolf was killed. Explain the philosophy and ethical arguments (world view) of those reintroducing wolves

to places where they used to be.

Human population growth is highest in countries and cultures where women have little access to

educational or economic resources. (true/false).

In the last 50 years the standard of living of the poorest countries has risen so much that the gap between

the rich and the poor has narrowed significantly. (true/false).

40% of the world’s people live in a). Africa b). Asia c). Europe d). North America e). South America

When comparing the literacy rates between various countries we find that:

a. Countries where female literacy rates are high have lower birth rates than countries where literacy

rates are low.

b. Countries where literacy rates are low have low birth rates and countries where literacy rates are

high have high birth rates.

c. There is no correlation between literacy rates and birth rates.

d. You can’t make any statement about birth rates and literacy because no one has studied it.

23

Data collection

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey

-ethical

met survey-

multicultural

spring

2000

58% (19/33)

Jan

90% (27/30)

April

93% (28/30)

April

100%

(22/22)

86% (19/22)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey

-ethical

met survey-

multicultural

fall 2000 45 % by

Sept 18

95% (19/20)

Oct 25

95% (19/20)

Dec 4

69% (9/13) 62% (8/13)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey -

ethical

met survey-

multicultural

spring

2001

MC=89%(24/27)

Essay=37% (10/27)

Feb 14

MC=96%

(26/27)

Feb 14

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey -

ethical

met survey-

multicultural

fall 2001 Essay = 85%

(11/13) Dec 5

93% (14/15) 87% (13/15)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course

embedded multicultural

end

met survey -

ethical

met survey-multicultural

spring

2002

essay = 85% Mar 21 - 34/40

MC = 45% Mar 21- 18/40

97% 32/33

79% 26/33

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


24

fall 2002 Essay- 94%

Dec11(15/16)

100% Dec 9 (23/23)

100% Dec 9 (23/23)

spring 2003 and summer 2003 – data not collected

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


fall 2003 90% (27/30) Oct 22 100% (23) 97% (21)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


Spring

2004

MC = 88% (14/16)

essay=85% (12/14) Mar 17

Zoology Assessment Data

Writing Assessment – Learning objective #3 Communication

Year library reports

acceptable

experiment

reports

acceptable

other

(collection, skins,

(multimedia)

fall 1999 9/11 = 81% 6 - not done

fall 2000 10/11 = 91% 1 - acceptable 3 – not done

Fall 2001 9/10 = 90% 3/4 = 75%%

Assessment Plan for Environment and Life

ETHICAL

1. Students will be able to identify and explain the ethical viewpoints held by environmentalists and

those that oppose them.

methods:


50% of all students by the end of the first month of L108


2. Students declaring a minor in environmental studies will include examples of their answers to these questions or papers discussing ethical issues in their portfolio


70% of all students surveyed will respond that they learned at least a moderate amount about ethical issues

DIVERSITY

2. Students will be able to explain at least one of the following:

the historical role of indigenous people in preserving biological diversity in various parts of the

world.

25

sustainable natural resources practices of at least one non-western or non-industrial culture.

the connection between the economic, educational and political status of women and human

population growth.

the concept of environmental justice and the disproportionate siting of environmental hazards in

minority neighborhoods

methods:



2. Students declaring a minor in environmental studies will include examples of their answers to these questions or papers discussing diversity in their portfolio


70% of all students surveyed will respond that they learned at least a moderate amount about other cultures or the status of women.

Examples of course-embedded assessment questions

For the last several years there has been a debate in Indiana about allowing logging in the Hoosier National

Forest. Explain the philosophy and ethical arguments (worldview) of the groups and individuals proposing

logging and those against it.

A few years ago wolves were reintroduced into Yellowstone National Park, nearly 100 years after the last

wolf was killed. Explain the philosophy and ethical arguments (world view) of those reintroducing wolves

to places where they used to be.

Human population growth is highest in countries and cultures where women have little access to

educational or economic resources. (true/false).

In the last 50 years the standard of living of the poorest countries has risen so much that the gap between

the rich and the poor has narrowed significantly. (true/false).

40% of the world’s people live in a). Africa b). Asia c). Europe d). North America e). South America

When comparing the literacy rates between various countries we find that:

a. Countries where female literacy rates are high have lower birth rates than countries where literacy

rates are low.

b. Countries where literacy rates are low have low birth rates and countries where literacy rates are

high have high birth rates.

c. There is no correlation between literacy rates and birth rates.

d. You can’t make any statement about birth rates and literacy because no one has studied it.

26

Data collection

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey

-ethical

met survey-

multicultural

spring

2000

58% (19/33)

Jan

90% (27/30)

April

93% (28/30)

April

100%

(22/22)

86% (19/22)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey

-ethical

met survey-

multicultural

fall 2000 45 % by

Sept 18

95% (19/20)

Oct 25

95% (19/20)

Dec 4

69% (9/13) 62% (8/13)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey -

ethical

met survey-

multicultural

spring

2001

MC=89%(24/27)

Essay=37% (10/27)

Feb 14

MC=96%

(26/27)

Feb 14

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

1st month

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

end

met survey -

ethical

met survey-

multicultural

fall 2001 Essay = 85%

(11/13) Dec 5

93% (14/15) 87% (13/15)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


spring

2002

essay = 85% Mar 21 - 34/40

MC = 45% Mar 21- 18/40

97% 32/33

79% 26/33

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


27

fall 2002 Essay- 94%

Dec11(15/16)

100% Dec 9 (23/23)

100% Dec 9 (23/23)

spring 2003 and summer 2003 – data not collected

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


fall 2003 90% (27/30) Oct 22 100% (23) 97% (21)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


Spring

2004

MC = 88% (14/16)

essay=85% (12/14) Mar 17

94% (15/16) 94% (15/16)

Semester

& year

met course

embedded

ethical

mid-term

met course

embedded

ethical

end

met course

embedded

multicultural

mid-term

met course


end

met survey -

ethical


Fall 2004 80% (8/10)

Essay Nov 16

100% (10/10)

12/8/04

100%(10/10)

12/8/04

Zoology Assessment Data

Writing Assessment – Learning objective #3 Communication

Year library reports

acceptable

experiment

reports

acceptable

other

(collection, skins,

(multimedia)

fall 1999 9/11 = 81% 6 - not done

fall 2000 10/11 = 91% 1 - acceptable 3 – not done

Fall 2001 9/10 = 90% 3/4 = 75%

Fall 2002

Fall 2003 8/9 = 89% ½ = 50% 1- not done

Fall 2004 1- not done

28

Documents

Assessment of Learning Objectives by Faculty€¦ · assessed learning objectives as follows: Morteza Seddighin Assessment of Communication Course: M118-Finite Mathematics Semester: