CORE CURRICULUM PILLARS OF INTELLECTUAL ENGAGEMENT ASSESSMENT 2015 … · 2014. 4. 7. · 2015-16 2014-15 No Data* *Note: Pending pilot of QEP rubric (FA15). Critical Thinking and

1

CORE CURRICULUM

PILLARS OF INTELLECTUAL ENGAGEMENT ASSESSMENT 2015-16

USFSM Core Mission: Pillars of Intellectual Engagement

All undergraduate degree programs at USF Sarasota-Manatee develop in students the following Pillars of Intellectual Engagement communication, critical thinking, leadership, ethics, diversity, and community engagement. The “Pillars” competencies arise from the mission of USFSM and reflect the characteristics most sought by employers. At the upper level, students take at least three courses specifically focused on development of Pillars competencies.

Pillars of Intellectual Engagement Learning Outcomes

1. Communication: Students will communicate effectively by means of written and/or oral modalities.

2. Critical Thinking: Students will demonstrate the skills necessary to be proficient critical thinkers.

3. Leadership: Students will analyze and apply specific leadership theories or characteristics.

4. Ethics: Students will apply ethical perspectives and concepts to situations and justify the implications of their applications.

5. Diversity: Students will demonstrate and integrate an understanding of the complexity of elements important to various cultures,

groups, beliefs, and/or practices.

6. Community Engagement: Students will demonstrate and integrate understanding of a societal issue as the result of engagement outside the classroom (literal or virtual).

2

Means of Assessing Core Learning Outcomes: “Pillars of Intellectual Engagement”

Communication - Assignments in every degree program capstone have been designed by the faculty to provide opportunities for students to demonstrate competency in written communication. All capstones require students to complete a written assignment or research project. Student work is evaluated using a scoring rubric that defines characteristics of communication. Scale: (1) Far Below Expectations, (2) Below Expectations, (3) Meets Expectations, (4) Exceeds Expectations. Data on the communication outcome are pulled from these degree program’s assessment data. Communication is also measured through the ETS Proficiency Profile section on writing, which is used to assess General Education Outcome 2: Writing. Communication is also measured via a Graduation Survey. Each semester, Institutional Research & Effectiveness (IR) invites USF Sarasota-Manatee graduating seniors to take the Graduation Survey. Students indicate the extent to which their experiences at USF contributed to their growth and development in their ability to “communicate effectively (verbally, in writing, etc.)” by selecting 1 (None) to 5 (A Great Deal). Critical Thinking - Assignments in every degree program capstone have been designed by the faculty to provide opportunities for students to demonstrate competency in critical thinking. All capstones require students to complete a written assignment or research project. Student work is evaluated using a scoring rubric that defines characteristics of critical thinking. Scale: (1) Far Below Expectations, (2) Below Expectations, (3) Meets Expectations, (4) Exceeds Expectations. Data on the critical thinking outcome are pulled from these degree program’s assessment data. Critical Thinking is also measured through the ETS Proficiency Profile section on writing, which is used to assess General Education Outcome 3: Critical Thinking. Critical Thinking is also measured via a Graduation Survey. Each semester, Institutional Research & Effectiveness (IR) invites USF Sarasota-Manatee graduating seniors to take the Graduation Survey. Students indicate the extent to which their experiences at USF contributed to their growth and development in their ability “to critically analyze ideas and information” by selecting 1 (None) to 5 (A Great Deal). Leadership – A selection of upper-level courses distributed throughout all four colleges qualify as “Pillar courses” emphasizing leadership. A course that qualifies as a leadership Pillar includes the following outcome in its syllabus.

Leadership Outcome: Students will analyze and apply specific leadership theories or characteristics.

Assignments in leadership Pillar courses have been designed by the faculty to provide opportunities for development and measurement of competencies related to leadership. All leadership Pillar courses require students to complete the following assignment:

Leadership Essay: In a short essay of 300-500 words, analyze the hypothetical leadership problem provided, explain the challenges involved, and propose a solution.

At the end of each term, the instructor submits electronically to IR, clean, ungraded copies of the essays. Each essay contains a cover sheet identifying the Pillar course, the semester, and the original instructions given to the students. The IR staff creates a random sample from all leadership Pillar course submissions, renders them anonymous, creates a duplicate set, and sends the sample to members of the Core Curriculum Committee for scoring. Two members of the Core Curriculum Committee independently score the sample using a common rubric. Leadership

3

competencies are scored using the following scale: (1) Far Below Expectations, (2) Below Expectations, (3) Meets Expectations, (4) Exceeds Expectations. Ethics - A selection of upper-level courses distributed throughout all four colleges qualify as “Pillar courses” emphasizing ethics. A course that qualifies as an ethics Pillar includes the following outcome in its syllabus.

Ethics Outcome: Students will apply ethical perspectives and concepts to situations and justify the implications of their applications. Assignments in ethics Pillar courses have been designed by the faculty to provide opportunities for development and measurement of competencies related to ethics. All ethics Pillar courses require students to complete the following assignment:

Ethics Essay: In a short essay of 300-500 words, analyze the hypothetical ethical dilemma provided and propose a solution.

At the end of each term, the instructor submits electronically to IR, clean, ungraded copies of the essays. Each essay contains a cover sheet identifying the Pillar course, the semester, and the original instructions given to the students. The IR staff creates a random sample from all leadership Pillar course submissions, renders them anonymous, creates a duplicate set, and sends the sample to members of the Core Curriculum Committee for scoring. Two members of the Core Curriculum Committee independently score the sample using a common rubric. Ethics competencies are scored using the following scale: (1) Far Below Expectations, (2) Below Expectations, (3) Meets Expectations, (4) Exceeds Expectations. Diversity - A selection of upper-level courses distributed throughout all four colleges qualify as “Pillar courses” emphasizing diversity. A course qualifying as a diversity Pillar includes the following outcome in its syllabus.

Diversity Outcome: Students will demonstrate and integrate understanding of the complexity of elements important to various cultures, groups, beliefs, and/or practices.

Assignments in diversity Pillar courses have been designed by the faculty to provide opportunities for development and measurement of competencies related to diversity. All diversity Pillar courses require students to complete the following assignment:

Diversity Essay: In a short essay of 300-500 words, describe the manifestation of human diversity explored in this course, and discuss what you feel are the most important understandings related to diversity that you learned, explaining their significance in relation to the issue.

At the end of each term, the instructor submits electronically to IR, clean, ungraded copies of the essays. Each essay contains a cover sheet identifying the Pillar course, the semester, and the original instructions given to the students. The IR staff creates a random sample from all diversity Pillar course submissions, renders them anonymous, creates a duplicate set, and sends the sample to members of the Core Curriculum Committee for scoring. Two members of the Core Curriculum Committee independently score the sample using a common rubric. Diversity competencies are scored using the following scale: (1) Far Below Expectations, (2) Below Expectations, (3) Meets Expectations, (4) Exceeds Expectations.

4

Community Engagement – A selection of upper-level courses distributed throughout all four colleges qualify as “Pillar courses” emphasizing community engagement. A course qualifying as a community engagement Pillar includes the following outcome in its syllabus.

Community Engagement Outcome: Students will demonstrate and integrate understanding of a societal issue as the result of engagement outside the classroom (literal or virtual).

Assignments in community engagement Pillar courses have been designed by the faculty to provide opportunities for development and measurement of competencies related to community engagement. All community engagement Pillar courses require students to complete the following assignment:

Community Engagement Essay: In a short essay of 300-500 words, describe the community engagement activity enabled by this course, and discuss insights related to diversity understand that the experience provided you personally, conclude by identifying what you feel will be your most lasting impression from the experience.

At the end of each term, the instructor submits electronically to IR, clean, ungraded copies of the essays. Each essay contains a cover sheet identifying the Pillar course, the semester, and the original instructions given to the students. The IR staff creates a random sample from all community engagement Pillar course submissions, renders them anonymous, creates a duplicate set, and sends the sample to members of the Core Curriculum Committee for scoring. Two members of the Core Curriculum Committee independently score the sample using a common rubric. Community Engagement competencies are scored using the following scale: (1) Far Below Expectations, (2) Below Expectations, (3) Meets Expectations, (4) Exceeds Expectations.

5

USF SARASOTA-MANATEE

ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT PLANNING RECORD 2015-16

ACADEMIC PROGRAM: USFSM Core Curriculum Pillars of Intellectual Engagement

Student Learning

Outcomes

Means of Assessment

Target Assessment Results

Communic

ation:

Students

will

communica

te

effectively

by means

of written

and/or oral

modalities.

Writing Proficiency Assessment,

samples from each capstone course

On a scale from 4 (exceeds expectations) to 1 (far less than expectations) the average performance rating from all student performances will be at least 3 (meets expectations).

PILLAR: COMMUNICATION

Year N Min Max Mean Median SD Inter-rater Agreement

2015-16

2014-15 No Data*

*Note: Pending pilot of QEP rubric (FA15). Critical Thinking and Communication outcomes will be assessed through the QEP.

IR to provide a table of the actual scores of the 2 scorers and the papers that produced differing scores of 2 or more by category or overall average. Assessment of Communication needs to have data from the degree programs that is using a common rubric.

6

Student Learning

Outcomes

Means of Assessment


ETS Proficiency Profile

Scaled Score at or above the comparative data mean

Skill Dimension

Cohort

Proficiency Classification

SLS* Year N Proficient Marginal Not

Proficient

Writing, Level 1 1107

FA15 72 71% 19% 10%

14-15 82 67% 30% 2%

13-14 90 72% 27% 1%

2122 SP16 36 83% 17% 0%


FA15 72 19% 43% 38%

14-15 82 16% 43% 41%

13-14 90 20% 44% 36%

2122 SP16 36 28% 50% 22%


FA15 72 15% 19% 65%

14-15 82 9% 20% 72%

13-14 90 11% 27% 62%

2122 SP16 36 14% 42% 44%

*SLS 1107 data includes only USFSM-FTIC student scores. SLS 2122 data includes only sophomore scores from 2016. Six are transfer students.

WRITING-SLS1107

Year N USFSM MEAN

Comparative Data MEAN Percentile

FA15

72 115.40 112.9 86th

2014-15

82 115.11 113.26 77th

2013-14

90 115.68 113.26 97th

WRITING – SLS 2122

Year N USFSM MEAN


SP16

36 116.92 112.90 92nd

7

Student Learning

Outcomes

Means of Assessment


Graduating Student Exit Survey

Using a scale of 1 (None) to 5 (A Great Deal), 90% of respondents will select either a 4 or a 5 in response to the following statement: “To what extent do you feel your experiences at USF contributed to your growth and development in your ability to communicate effectively (verbally, in writing, etc.).

My writing skills improved.

Year N

A Great Deal (5)

(4) (3) (2) None

(1) % 4 or

5 Mean SD

2015-16

2014-15 488 269 154 50 7 8 87% 4.4 0.85

Critical

Thinking:

Students

will

demonstrat

e the skills

necessary

to be

proficient

Critical Thinking Proficiency Assessment,

Samples from each capstone course

On a scale from 4 (exceeds expectations) to 1 (far less than expectations) the average performance rating from all student performances will be at least 3 (meets expectations).

PILLAR: CRITICAL THINKING

Year N Min Max Mean Median SD

2015-16

2014-15 No Data*

*Note: Pending pilot of QEP rubric (SP16). Critical Thinking and Communication outcomes will be assessed through the QEP. Assessment of Communication needs to have data from the degree programs that are using a common rubric.

8

Student Learning

Outcomes

Means of Assessment


critical

thinkers

ETS Proficiency Profile

Scaled Score at or above the comparative data mean

Skill Dimension

Cohort

Proficiency Classification

Critical Thinking

SLS* Year N Proficient Marginal Not

Proficient

1107

FA15 72 4% 26% 69%

14-15 82 2% 26% 72%

13-14 90 4% 17% 79%

2122 SP16 36 11% 28% 61%

*SLS 1107 data includes USFSM-FTIC student scores. SLS 2122 data includes sophomore

scores from 2016, the first year the ETS was given in this course. Six are transfer students.

CRITICAL THINKING – SLS 1107

Year N USFSM MEAN


FA15

72 113.68 109.70 93rd

2014-15

82 112.51 110.35 77th

2013-14

90 112.22 110.35 77th

CRITICAL THINKING – SLS 2122

Year N USFSM MEAN


SP16 Sophomores

36 113.61 110.50 86th

Graduating Student Exit Survey

Using a scale of 1 (None) to 5 (A Great Deal), 90% of respondents will select either a 4 or a 5 in response to the following statement: “To what extent do you feel your experiences at USF contributed to your growth and development in your ability to critically analyze ideas and information.

My critical thinking skills improved.

Year N

A Great Deal (5)

(4) (3) (2) None

(1) % 4 or 5 Mean SD

2015-16

2014-15 484 271 139 58 9 7 85% 4.4 0.87

Note: IR to provide a table of the actual scores of the 2 scorers and the papers that produced differing scores of 2 or more by category or overall average.

9

Leadership:

Students will

analyze and apply

specific leadership

theories or

characteristics.

Leadership Assessment,

Pillars course essay

Target mean is at least a 3 on 4-point scale.

PILLAR: LEADERSHIP

Year N Min Max Mean Median SD Rater

Agreement

Grasp of theory

24 1 4 2.5 3 1.2 50%

Cogent analysis

24 1 4 2.5 2 1.1 75%

Appropriate solution

24 1 4 2.1 2 1.2

71%

Fall 2015-16 Average 24 1 4 2.4 2.3 1.1 65%

2014-15 Average 11 1 4 2.8 3.0 0.9 N/A

Leadership 4 & 3 2 & 1

Grasp of theory 52% 48%

Cogent analysis 46% 52%

Appropriate Solution 33% 67%

Average 31% 69%

Ethics: Students

will apply ethical

perspectives and

concepts to

situations and

justify the

implications of

their applications.

Ethics Assessment,


Target mean is at

least a 3 on 4-

point scale.

PILLAR: ETHICS

Fall 2015 N Min Max Mean Median SD Rater

Agreement

Clear grasp 32 1 4 2.5 3 0.8 75%

Analysis cogent 32 1 4 2.5 3 0.8 81%

Appropriate solution 32 1 4 2.3 2 0.8 87%

FA15 Average 32 1 4 2.4 2.7 0.8 81%

2014-15 Average* 11 1 4 2.8 3 0.7 N/A

*Data reflects one evaluator.

Ethics 3 & 4 2 & 1

Concepts 58% 42%

Analysis 58% 42%

Conclusions 48% 52%

Average 42% 58%

10

Diversity:

Students will

demonstrate and

integrate an

understanding of

the complexity of

elements

important to

various cultures,

groups, beliefs,

and/or practices.

Diversity Assessment,


Target mean is at least a 3 on 4-point scale.

PILLAR: DIVERSITY


Agree-ment

Clear grasp 29 1 4 3.0 3 0.7 100%

Relevance communicated 29 1 4 2.9 3 0.8 90%

Significance communicated 29 1 4 2.9 3 0.7 100%

FA15 Average 29 1 4 2.9 3 0.7 97%

2014-15 Average 10 1 3.8 2.9 3 0.8 N/A

Diversity 4 & 3 2 & 1 Grasp of Key issues 74% 26%

Makes Connections

69% 31%

Significance 78% 22%

Average 62% 38%

Community

Engagement:

Students will

demonstrate and

integrate

understanding of

a societal issue as

the result of

engagement

outside the

classroom.

Community Engagement Assessment,


Target mean is at

least a 3 on 4-

point scale.

PILLAR: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT


Agree-ment

Effectively presented 36 1 4 2.6 3 0.9 86%

Clear insight 36 1 4 2.5 2 0.8 92%

Clear significance 36 1 4 1.7 2 0.8 92%

FA15 Average 36 1 4 2.3 2.2 0.7 90%

2014-15 Average 10 1 4 2.7 3.0 0.9 N/A

Engagement 4 & 3 2 & 1

Experience 53% 47%

Insights 43% 57%

Significance 14% 86%

Average 18% 82%

11

Use of Results for Core Curriculum Pillars of Intellectual Engagement Improvement

1. Communication: Students will communicate effectively by means of written and/or oral modalities.

Core Curriculum

Committee Comments:

Up through the 2015-2016 academic year, the Core Curriculum Committee has not directly reviewed assessment data

on Communication and Critical Thinking Pillars as they are assessed in the capstone courses and thus included in

program assessment. The committee will begin to collect assessment data on Communication and Critical Thinking

next academic year (2016-2017). This collection will not take the place of capstone assessments but will provide the

committee with the necessary information to continuously improve all six Pillars of Intellectual Engagement. This

collection will utilize the Incredi-Bull Critical Thinking rubric, which will assess both critical thinking and

communication, in tandem with newly developed communication assessments for written, oral, and multi-media

presentations.

At the lower-level, USFSM students demonstrate considerable performance on communication measures, scoring

above the comparative data mean on the ETS Proficiency Test. Still, there is room for improvement. The committee

recommends and will further explore college-level recognition for students who score above a designated benchmark

on the ETS proficiency test.

The 2014-2015 assessment plan indicated the pursuit of an alternative method of assessment. The committee, in

consultation with Institutional Research, believes that the ETS is both well-regarded nationally and ideal for our

unique student population and curriculum. As such, we will continue to use the ETS proficiency profile at the lower-

level.

Curricula Changes: General Comment A: Newly developed assessment procedures will drive curricular changes; further, these curricular

changes will also further drive rubric/assessment development.

General Comment B: The committee will work with faculty teaching courses within the Communication and Critical

Thinking Pillars to help expand curricular understanding of communication (i.e., oral, written, multi-media).

Changes to the Assessment

Process:

General Comment 1: The CCC will reach out to Capstone faculty regarding the committee’s desire to have the

Communication and Critical Thinking assessment data pass through the committee, as it currently does not.

General Comment 2: New rubrics have been developed to encourage more rigor. Because of the institutional

commitment to Incredi-Bull critical thinking (and the Core Curriculum Committee’s regard of the inter-relatedness of

communication with critical thinking), each pillars course will assess communication and critical thinking in addition

to their other designations (i.e., diversity and engagement or leadership and ethics).

General Comment 3: The committee will recommend that faculty administering the ETS proficiency profile in their

courses administer it at the beginning of the semester for entry-point students (i.e., SLS 1107) and at the end of the

semester for exit-point students (i.e., SLS 2122). Further, the committee will work with Institutional Research to

move toward an electronic ETS assessment to help improve student interest and performance (as has been

demonstrated in the Watson-Glaser online assessment).

12

2. Critical Thinking: Students will demonstrate the skills necessary to be proficient critical thinkers.

Core Curriculum

Committee Comments:

Up through the 2015-2016 academic year, the Core Curriculum Committee has not directly reviewed assessment data

on Communication and Critical Thinking Pillars as they are assessed in the capstone courses and thus included in

program assessment. The committee will begin to collect assessment data on Communication and Critical Thinking

next academic year (2016-2017). This collection will not take the place of capstone assessments but will provide the

committee with the necessary information to continuously improve all six Pillars of Intellectual Engagement. This

collection will utilize the Incredi-Bull Critical Thinking rubric, which will assess both critical thinking and

communication, in tandem with newly developed communication assessments for written, oral, and multi-media

presentations.

At the lower-level, USFSM students demonstrate considerable performance on critical thinking measures, scoring

above the comparative data mean on the ETS Proficiency Test. It is important to note that scoring above the

comparative mean still positions USFSM student performance at a marginal level. The committee believes the

university-wide focus on Incredi-Bull Critical Thinking will help improve student performance on critical thinking

measures. The committee recommends and will further explore college-level recognition for students who score

above a designated benchmark on the ETS proficiency test.

The 2014-2015 assessment plan indicated the pursuit of an alternative method of assessment. The committee, in

consultation with Institutional Research, believes that the ETS is both well-regarded nationally and ideal for our

unique student population and curriculum. As such, we will continue to use the ETS proficiency profile at the lower-

level.

Curricula Changes: General Comment A

General Comment B


Process:

General Comment 1

General Comment 2

General Comment 3

13

3. Leadership: Students will analyze and apply specific leadership theories or characteristics.

Core Curriculum

Committee Comments:

Student performance in Leadership has not met the desired target. Assessment efforts reveal that more than 2/3 of

students performed at a marginal or insufficient level. This performance is especially noteworthy given that inter-rater

agreement for leadership assessment is quite low. Together, these further confirm the committee’s initial concerns

that leadership pillars courses were not addressing leadership topics and concepts with the necessary level of depth

and breadth. The newly developed leadership and ethics rubrics should help further guide the exploration of

leadership in these pillars courses. These new rubrics should also help improve inter-rater agreement.


General Comment C: There are noted gaps in the curriculum. The committee acknowledges these gaps and proposes

the newly developed rubrics/assessment procedures as a first step in improving curriculum.

General Comment D: It is clear that work submitted for assessment is not students’ best work. The committee

acknowledges that the current assessment procedures were unnecessarily limiting with a prescribed 300-500 word

essay. The committee proposes the newly developed rubrics/assessment procedures as a first step in remedying this

issue, as these new procedures allow instructors to submit student work without any prescribed/limiting format. This

new format will help improve curriculum by revealing how the Pillars of Intellectual Engagement echo throughout

the curriculum in a variety of different ways and with different outcomes.


Process:

General Comment 2

General Comment 4: The assessment tools currently used are not working as is. The committee acknowledges the

weaknesses of these tools (which pre-date many of the members of the committee) and proposes the newly developed

rubrics/assessment procedures as a first step in improving assessment efforts and results.

General Comment 5: As General Comment D above notes, the Core Curriculum Committee will now accept a

variety of assignments and assessment artifacts, including essays, oral presentations (recorded), and multi-media/arts-

based projects. The committee believes the newly developed rubrics/assessment procedures will further strengthen

the value of the Pillars of Intellectual Engagement and highlight innovative pedagogical practices at USFSM. The

committee acknowledges that these new assessment procedures will likely present a few issues that need to be

addressed, especially in terms of the breadth collection of assessment artifacts. In collaboration with Institutional

Research, the committee proposes these new assessment procedures be piloted over the 2016-2017 academic year,

with an understanding that best practices in assessment allow for iterations and adjustments in the pursuit of

continuous improvement.

14

4. Ethics: Students will apply ethical perspectives and concepts to situations and justify the implications of their applications.

Core Curriculum

Committee Comments:

Student performance in Ethics has not met the desired target. Assessment efforts reveal that more than half of

students performed at a marginal or insufficient level. This performance is especially noteworthy given that inter-rater

agreement for leadership assessment is quite high. This suggests that the assessment plan was relatively clear but that

curricular regard to ethics had not been clearly defined. The newly developed leadership and ethics rubrics should

help further guide the exploration of ethics in these pillars courses, while also strengthening our assessment efforts.

The committee has spent considerable time this academic year further researching, defining, and clarifying ethics as it

fits within USFSM’s Pillars of Intellectual Engagement.


General Comment C

General Comment D


Process:

General Comment 2

General Comment 4

General Comment 5

15

5. Diversity: Students will demonstrate and integrate an understanding of the complexity of elements important to various cultures, groups, beliefs,

and/or practices.

Core Curriculum

Committee Comments:

Student performance in Diversity has met the benchmark target or higher. Assessment efforts reveal that more than

half of students performed at a benchmark or higher level. This performance is especially noteworthy given that inter-

rater agreement for leadership assessment is quite high. This suggests that the assessment plan was relatively clear

and that curricular regard to diversity has been relatively well defined. The newly developed diversity and community

engagement rubrics should help further guide the exploration of diversity in these pillars courses, while also

strengthening our assessment efforts. The committee has spent considerable time this academic year further

researching, defining, and clarifying diversity as it fits within USFSM’s Pillars of Intellectual Engagement. The

committee has no interest in further defining and unnecessarily limiting an understanding of diversity and will leave it

open for interpretation in hopes that students (and faculty) will interpret it in innovative, creative, and provocative

ways. Further, the Core Curriculum Committee will collaborate with the newly formed Chancellor’s Advisory

Council on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion to ensure consistent regard to diversity across all areas of the university.


General Comment C

General Comment D


Process:

General Comment 2

General Comment 4

General Comment 5

16

6. Community Engagement: Students will demonstrate and integrate understanding of a societal issue as the result of engagement outside the

classroom.

Core Curriculum

Committee Comments:

Student performance in Community Engagement has not met the desired target. Assessment efforts reveal that more

than 3/4 of students performed at a marginal or insufficient level. This performance is especially noteworthy given

that inter-rater agreement for leadership assessment is quite high. This suggests that the assessment plan was

relatively clear but that curricular regard to community engagement had not been clearly defined. The newly

developed diversity and community engagement rubrics should help further guide the exploration of community

engagement in these pillars courses, while also strengthening our assessment efforts. The committee is interested in

making the community engagement process more robust, as initial results indicate a relatively liberal use of the term

“engagement.” The Core Curriculum Committee will collaborate with the newly formed Community Engagement

Committee to ensure consistent regard to community engagement across all areas of the university.


General Comment C

General Comment D

General Comment E: The committee believes that the idea of community engagement needs to be clearly defined at

the institutional level. Results suggest that students in community engagement courses are not engaging at the level

often regarded as necessary by leading national authorities (i.e., Carnegie). The committee will work with the

Community Engagement Committee and the relevant curriculum sub-committee to ensure a clear definition is set in

place for all faculty teaching community engagement courses to ensure appropriate rigor. The committee proposes the

newly developed rubric/assessment procedures will also further strengthen faculty understanding of community

engagement, as these new procedures provider stricter guidelines for benchmark and above performance in

community engagement.


Process:

General Comment 2

General Comment 4

General Comment 4a: Related to General Comment 4 above, the committee has included specific

benchmarks within the rubric to help further drive curricular change. Newly developed rubrics indicate that

performance at benchmark must necessarily involve significant effort in community engagement, to include

the planning, execution, and reflection process.

General Comment 5

17

Summary of Improvement Initiatives to Be Pursued in the Coming Academic Year Since the hiring of a new Core Curriculum Coordinator and Assessment Coordinator in 2015, the Core Curriculum Committee has purposefully put at the forefront

our assessment efforts. We acknowledge that prior assessment efforts were sufficient (and well-regarded by SACSCOC) but not at the level of rigor we believe

necessary to demonstrate the incredible significance of the USFSM Core Curriculum. Through both micro- and macro-level analyses, the committee compiled a

series of recommendations and revisions to the assessment procedures, which we have demonstrated above. In sum, these include:

o Revisions to the Assessment Process: Artifacts Currently, all assessments within the Core Curriculum use the same artifact—a 300-500 word essay (1 essay per pillar; 2 essays total per

pillars course). The prompts for these essays were developed by a previous iteration of the Core Curriculum Committee. Our analysis of

these essay prompts (and their corresponding rubrics) reveals that the prompts are unnecessarily limiting and not clearly defined enough to

allow for student excellence. In response to this concern, the committee will allow faculty to submit any substantive assignment for

assessment, pending it fits the defined assessment criteria. To help further define these criteria, we have developed new rubrics which will

be used to score artifacts.

o Revisions to the Assessment Process: Rubrics Submitted with this assessment plan are copies of our old (i.e., current) assessment rubrics as well as copies of our newly developed

rubrics. As can be quickly evidenced, these new rubrics are much more robust and further define both the criteria and thresholds of

performance. We hope this will be prescriptive enough to help set a framework for the correlated pillar(s) of intellectual engagement while

also opening up the possibilities for greater pedagogical freedom. We have also developed these rubrics in hopes that faculty will share

them with their students to strengthen the quality of submitted work. These new rubrics all include strains of the Incredi-Bull Critical

Thinking rubric, echoing the Core Curriculum Committee’s commitment to a strong, cohesive, and complimentary core curriculum. These

rubrics have already been well-received by both faculty evaluators and external reviewers. Further, both the Core Curriculum Coordinator

and the Assessment Coordinator from Institutional Research will be presenting on these rubrics at the SACSCOC national conference this

December. We strongly believe these new procedures will greatly enhance the curriculum at USFSM.

o Greater Data Collection Currently, the Core Curriculum Committee does not collect data on Communication and Critical Thinking, as these two pillars are only

assessed in capstone courses. However, it is the committee’s firm belief that this is not a best practice, as the committee only oversees 2/3

of the core curriculum (i.e., 4 of the 6 Pillars of Intellectual Engagement). While capstone courses will still utilize communication and

critical thinking data in their assessment, the Core Curriculum Committee will solicit data from these two pillars beginning AY 2016-2017

so that it can ensure full accountability for the entire Core Curriculum. The committee will not prescribe changes to capstone courses, as

they are deeply tied to program-specific outcomes. However, this data must necessarily also come to the Core Curriculum Committee.

We believe these improvement initiatives, to begin August 2016, are significant and necessary to further improve the Core Curriculum at USFSM. It is important

to note that these initial steps—while necessary—are done out of a desire for continuous improvement and not in response to any noted institutional or external

review concerns. As such, we will regard each phase of this improvement initiative plan as a pilot, understanding that multiple iterations, revisions, and

clarifications will likely be necessary in the years to come. We look forward to further strengthening the Core Curriculum at USFSM and further enhancing the

Pillars of Intellectual Engagement through these revised assessment procedures.

18

Regional Vice Chancellor’s Response

The Regional Vice Chancellor has read and reviewed the 2015-2016 assessment plan. Overall, this plan is good with a few notes to consider:

The ETS Proficiency Profile results (p. 6) seem to indicate that student performance is moving in the wrong direction (1% not sufficient in 2013-2014; 2%

not sufficient in 2014-2015; 10% not sufficient in FA2015). The Core Curriculum Committee needs to have a plan for improvement.

In the provided draft rubrics, the language on the “Communication” rubric might be strengthened through quantifiable descriptors (instead of ‘multiple,’

‘some,’ and ‘little’)

Core Curriculum Response

The Core Curriculum Committee thanks the RVC for providing input on this year’s assessment data. In response to the two points noted above:

At its final 2015-2016 AY meeting, the CCC recommended exploring options for dean- or college-level distinction for high performance on the ETS. The

incoming 2016-2017 AY CCC will further explore this option next year.

Although it appears that performance is declining on the ETS proficiency profile, it is important to note that the concerns above are in regard to data on

incoming freshman (students who have not yet taken any part of the USFSM Core Curriculum). The CCC anticipates continued improvement will be

evidenced as we compare this metric to the SLS 2122 ETS assessment.

The CCC committee has sought input from faculty teaching in and outside of the Core Curriculum and determined that including a specific number of

sources (i.e., “quantifiable” descriptors) would render them less widely accessible across a wide number of courses. The CCC will seek input on this from

faculty as they pilot these rubrics next academic year.

2015-2016 Assessment Plan Appendices

Rubric Development

Please see attached for:

1. Previous rubric drafts

2. Newly developed (pilot) rubrics

Pillar: DIVERSITY Core Curriculum Rater: __________________________ Term/Academic Year: __________________

Learning Outcome: Students will demonstrate and integrate understanding of the complexity of elements important to various cultures, groups,

beliefs, and/or practices.

Essay instructions: In a short essay of 300-500 words, describe the manifestation of human diversity explored in this course, and discuss what you feel are the most important understandings related to diversity that you learned, explaining their significance in relation to the issue.

Score Key:

4 Exceeds expectations

3 Meets expectations

2 Less than expectations

1 Far less than expectations

Rater: Please rate samples provided using the Score Key above, and return your form to Institutional Research and Effectiveness (C321). While the rubric

allows for a sample of size 12, the sample you are scoring may be smaller or larger. Rows can be removed or added as needed to fit the sample size.

Sample Number

Grasp Of Key Issue(s) For This Particular Diversity Topic Is

Clear

The Relevance Of Diversity To The Course Content Is

Communicated The Significance Of Diversity Is

Communicated Average

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12 Approved Core Curriculum Committee Rubric, 1-14-15

Pillar: COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Core Curriculum Rater: __________________________ Term/Academic Year: __________________

Learning Outcome: Students will demonstrate and integrate understanding of a societal issue as the result of engagement outside the classroom (literal or virtual).

Essay instructions: In a short essay of 300-500 words, describe the community engagement activity enabled by this course, and discuss insights

related to diversity understanding that the experience provided you personally, conclude by identifying what you feel will be your

most lasting impression from the experience.

Score Key:







Sample Number

The Engagement Experience Is Presented Effectively

How the Experience Led to Insights Is Clear

The Significance of the Experience to the Course

Content is Clear Average

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11


Pillar: LEADERSHIP Core Curriculum Rater: __________________________ Term/Academic Year: __________________

Learning Outcome: Students will analyze and apply specific leadership theories or characteristics relevant to this course.

Essay instructions: In a short essay of 300-500 words, analyze the hypothetical leadership problem provided, explain the challenges involved, and propose a solution.

Score Key:







Sample Number

Grasp Of Leadership Theories And Characteristics Is Evident Analysis Is Thorough And Cogent Posed Solution Is Appropriate Average

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11


Pillar: ETHICS Core Curriculum Rater: __________________________ Term/Academic Year: __________________

Learning Outcome: Students will apply ethical perspectives and concepts to situations and justify the implications of their applications.

Essay instructions: In a short essay of 300-500 words, analyze the hypothetical ethical dilemma provided and propose a solution.

Score Key:







Sample Number

Grasp Of Ethical Concepts Is Evident Analysis Is Thorough And Cogent Posed Solution Is Appropriate Average

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11


DRAFT - Pillars Diversity & Community Engagement Rubric (5-4-16)

University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee’s Pillars rubrics were developed by the Core Curriculum Committee, a team of faculty representing each of the colleges, through a

process that examined existing campus rubrics, the AAC&U VALUE Rubrics, related documents and research for each of the learning outcomes and incorporated extensive feedback

from faculty experts and staff. The Pillars rubrics are modelled after both the AAC&U VALUE Rubrics and USFSM’s Incredi-Bull Rubric, developed by our faculty and staff QEP Steering

Committee for SACSCOC Reaffirmation in 2016. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning. The utility of the rubric is to provide

a framework of expectations and a common language for our undergraduate-level Pillars.

Definitions*

In accordance with AACU Intercultural Knowledge and Competence & Civic Engagement VALUE Rubrics (AACU 2010):

Diversity is “a set of cognitive, affective, and behavioral skills and characteristics that support effective and appropriate interaction in a variety of cultural contexts.”

Community Engagement is “working to make a difference in…our communities and developing…knowledge, skills, values and motivation to make that difference. It means promoting

the quality of life in community. In addition, [it] encompasses actions wherein individuals participate in activities of personal and public concern that are both individually life

enriching and socially beneficial to the community.”

Framing Language*

This rubric is intended to assist Pillars faculty to both develop and evaluate assignments aligned with USFSM’s mission to demonstrate student learning about diversity and

community engagement, and to communicate those learning objectives with students as well. The goal of this Core Curriculum Pillars Assessment is to evaluate using a rubric

whether students have the intellectual tools to interact effectively and appropriately in a variety of cultural contexts and values the role of community engagement in improving

quality of life for individuals and communities. Recognizing that quality academic work requires critical thinking and communication skills, the Core Curriculum Committee created

an assessment structure with comprehensive and intersectional rubrics that allow Pillars faculty and evaluators to use the same framework (critical thinking and communication)

across all six, broad areas of our Core Curriculum. Therefore, an assignment demonstrating diversity and community engagement is also evaluated for critical thinking and

communications skills.

Rubric Glossary

In accordance with the AACU VALUE Rubric for Intercultural Knowledge and Competence (AACU 2010):

Culture: All knowledge and values shared by a group.

Cultural differences: the differences in rules, behaviors, communication and biases, based on cultural values that are different from one’s own culture.

Cultural rules and biases: Boundaries within which an individual operates in order to feel a sense of belonging to a society of group, based on the values shared by that

society or group.

Elements important do different cultures: History, values, politics, communication styles, economies, or beliefs and practices.

Suspends judgment in valuing their interactions with culturally different others: Postpones assessment or evaluation (positive or negative) of interactions with people

culturally different from one self. Disconnecting from the process of automatic judgment and taking time to reflect on possibly multiple meanings.

*Framing language and definitions to be refined in conjunction with the Diversity and Community Engagement Committees.

DRAFT - Pillars Diversity & Community Engagement Rubric (5-4-16)

Commit- ments

Interacts effectively and appropriately in a variety of cultural contexts Values the role of community engagement in improving quality of life for individuals and communities

Descrip. → Prof.Levels ↓

Applies knowledge of own culture and multiple worldviews, including elements important to members of other cultures.1(AACU 2010)

Develops respect and openness toward multi-cultural perspectives

Participates in a community engagement experience outside of the classroom

Assesses the impact of engaging in the community

4

Articulates INSIGHTS into own cultural rules and biases while demonstrating a SOPHISTICATED understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of other cultures. ADJUSTS to cultural differences to avoid misunderstanding. (AACU 2010)

Asks COMPLEX questions about other cultures, seeks out and articulates answers that reflect multi-cultural perspectives. Suspends judgment in valuing her/his understanding of culturally different others. (AACU 2010)

Provides DETAILED evidence of ONGOING community engagement activities. Describes what she/he has learned about her or himself as it relates to a REINFORCED and CLARIFIED sense of commitment to community. Generates NEW ideas and aspires to be a catalyst for change. (AACU 2010)

Demonstrates LEADERSHIP in ongoing community engagement activities, accompanied by REFLECTIVE insights about the aims and accomplishments of collaborative actions and future commitments. (AACU 2010) CONNECTS how their personal knowledge and skills support addressing social issues and serving others. (Hatcher 2011)

3

Recognizes new perspectives about own cultural rules and biases and demonstrates ADEQUATE understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of other cultures. (AACU 2010)

Asks DEEPER questions about other cultures and seeks out answers. STARTS to suspend judgment in valuing her/his understanding of culturally different others. (AACU 2010)

Provides evidence of an ONGOING experience in community engagement activities and describes what she/he has learned about her or himself as it relates to a growing sense of commitment to community (AACU 2010)

Demonstrates engagement in an ongoing community experience through insights about the aims and accomplishments of one’s own actions. Demonstrates COMMITMENT to working actively within community contexts. (AACU 2010) Identifies how her/his personal knowledge and skills could be applied to improving society. (Hatcher 2011)

2 Identifies own cultural rules and biases with SOME understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of other cultures. (AACU 2010)

Asks SIMPLE questions about other cultures. Expresses openness but has DIFFICULTY suspending judgement. MAY show willingness to change own biases. (AACU 2010)

Evidence suggests involvement in community engagement activities is OCCASSIONAL or periodic. Actions and involvement are generated ONLY from expectations of course requirement. (AACU 2010)

Begins to reflect or describe how her/ his actions MAY benefit individual(s) or communities. (AACU 2010) BEGINS to identify how her/his knowledge or skills that connect to social issues or serving others now and in the future. (Hatcher 2011)

1

Shows MINIMAL awareness of own cultural rules and biases and a LITTLE understanding of the complexity of elements important to members of other cultures. (AACU 2010)

States LITTLE interest in learning more about other cultures with DIFFICULTY suspending own judgement or UNAWARE of own biases. (AACU 2010)

Provides LITTLE evidence of her/his experience in a community engagement activity or reflects on a prior (not current) activity. (AACU 2010)

Shows LITTLE internalized understanding of her/his aims or effects in engaging in the community. Shows LITTLE commitment. (AACU 2010) DOES NOT mention how her/his knowledge and skills connect to social issues or serving others. (Hatcher 2011)

1 Reprinted [or Excerpted] with permission from Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of

American Colleges and Universities.

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

Ad

equ

ate

Bel

ow

Far

Bel

ow

https://www.aacu.org/publications-research/publications/assessing-outcomes-and-improving-achievement-tips-and-tools-using

DRAFT – USFSM Pillars Leadership & Ethics Rubric (5-4-16)



from faculty experts and staff. The Pillars rubrics are modelled after both the AAC&U VALUE Rubrics and USFSM’s Incredi-Bull Rubric, developed by our faculty and staff QEP Steering

Committee for SACSCOC Reaffirmation in 2016. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning. The utility of the rubric is to provide

a framework of expectations and a common language for our undergraduate-level Pillars.

Definition

Successful leaders influence others in a desired direction using task-oriented and interpersonal skills as well as ethical perspectives/concepts for decision making which maximize

organizational success without compromising personal and professional behaviors consistent with quality practice.

Framing Language

This rubric is intended to assist Pillars faculty to both develop and evaluate assignments aligned with USFSM’s mission to demonstrate student learning about leadership and ethics,

and to communicate those learning objectives with students as well. The goal of this Core Curriculum Pillars Assessment is to evaluate using a rubric whether students have the

intellectual tools to become successful and ethical leaders. Recognizing that quality academic work requires critical thinking and communication skills, the Core Curriculum

Committee created an assessment structure with comprehensive and intersectional rubrics that allow Pillars faculty and evaluators to use the same framework (critical thinking and

communication) across all six, broad areas of our Core Curriculum. Therefore, an assignment demonstrating leadership and ethics is also evaluated for critical thinking and

communications skills. In an effort to provide appropriate language for assessing the assignment when evaluating ethical issues, the Incredi-Bull Critical Thinking Rubric has been

elaborated to reflect discipline-specific language for ethics.

Rubric Glossary

Task-oriented skills: planning, organizing and managing/controlling.

Interpersonal skills: awareness, organization, professional demeanor & appearance, confidence, communication skills, commitment, contributions, collaboration, integrity

(responsibility, respect, and reliability), trust, self-reflection, etc.

In accordance with the AACU VALUE Rubric for Ethical Reasoning: 1

Core beliefs: fundamental principles that consciously or unconsciously influence one’s ethical conduct and ethical thinking. Even when unacknowledged, core beliefs shape

one’s responses. Core beliefs can reflect one’s environment, religion, culture or training. A person may or may not choose to act on core beliefs.

Ethical perspectives/concepts: the different theoretical means through which ethical issues are analyzed, such as ethical theories (e.g., utilitarian, natural law, virtue), ethical

concepts (e.g., rights, justice, duty) or professional codes of ethics.

Complex, multi-layered (gray) context: The sub-parts or situational conditions of a scenario that bring two or more ethical issues into the mix/problem/context for student’s

identification.

Cross-relationships among issues: Obvious or subtle connections between/among the sub-parts or situational conditions of the issues present in a scenario (e.g.,

relationship of production or corn as part of climate change issue).

1 Reprinted [or Excerpted] with permission from Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of

American Colleges and Universities.


DRAFT – USFSM Pillars Leadership & Ethics Rubric (5-4-16)

Commit- ments

Demonstrates leadership skills

to influence others

Develops ethical maturity

Formulates vital questions and problems clearly

(Recognizing)

Gathers and assesses relevant information

(Understanding)

Identifies relevant assumptions, alternatives, and implications

(Applying)

Comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions

(Evaluating)

4

Demonstrates COMPREHENSIVE knowledge of significant and relevant task-oriented and interpersonal skills to influence others in a desired direction.

Discusses IN DETAIL both core beliefs and articulates the origin of the core beliefs with depth and clarity.

Clearly identifies and describes significant ethical issue(s) present in complex, multilayered (gray) contexts and recognizes cross-relationships among issues, with relevant reasoning/explanation of the significance.

Names, defines and explains the details of ethical perspectives used with appropriate depth and breadth while also supporting assertions with precise and relevant quotes, statistics, and/or research.

Develops all relevant and alternate positions by applying ethical perspectives accurately, noting inherent assumptions and biases (fairness). Discusses implications with CONSIDERABLE sensitivity to other perspectives.

Provides clear logic in recommending an ethical position on the issue(s) based on chosen ethical perspectives and an accurate, COMPREHENSIVE analysis of options.

3

Demonstrates ADEQUATE knowledge of both task-oriented and interpersonal skills to influence others in a desired direction.

ADEQUATELY discusses details of both core beliefs and ADEQUATELY articulates the origin of the core beliefs.

ADEQUATELY identifies and describes significant ethical issue(s) present in complex, multilayered (gray) contexts and recognizes cross-relationships among issues, with ADEQUATE reasoning/explanation of the significance.

ADEQUATELY names, defines and explains the details of ethical perspectives used while also ADEQUATELY supporting assertions with relevant quotes, statistics and/or research.

ADEQUATELY develops relevant and alternate positions by applying ethical perspectives, noting inherent assumptions and biases (fairness). Discusses implications with ADEQUATE sensitivity to other perspectives.

Provides an ADEQUATE ethical position on the issue(s) based on chosen ethical perspectives and an ADEQUATE analysis of options.

2

Demonstrates knowledge of SOME task-oriented and interpersonal skills to influence others in a desired direction.

States SOME core beliefs in detail and/or articulates SOME origins of the core beliefs.

Identifies and describes BASIC and OBVIOUS ethical issue(s) (what is legal/illegal or acceptable/ unacceptable) and recognizes SOME of the complexities or interrelationships among the issues.

Names, defines and/or explains SOME of the details of the ethical perspectives used. Only supports SOME assertions with relevant quotes, statistics, and/or research.

Develops SOME positions by applying ethical perspectives, noting SOME assumptions and/or displaying SOME bias. Discusses implications from own perspective with SOME sensitivity to other perspectives.

Provides an ethical position on the issue(s) based on SOME use of ethical perspectives and provides an SOME analysis of options.

1

Demonstrates knowledge of FEW task-oriented and/or interpersonal skills to influence others in a desired direction.

States FEW core beliefs and/or articulates FEW the origins of the core beliefs.

Recognizes BASIC and OBVIOUS ethical issue(s) (realizes something is not “right”) and recognizes FEW or NO complexity or interrelationships. (Sees issues mostly in “black and white” terms.)

Names, defines or explains FEW or NONE of the details of ethical perspectives used. Supports FEW or NONE assertions with relevant quotes, statistics and/or research.

Develops FEW positions by applying ethical perspectives clearly. Presents FEW or NO other positions and/or displays BIAS. Own position and/or other positions are UNCLEAR.

Provides an ethical position on the issue(s) based on FLAWED use of ethical perspectives and/or LITTLE or NO analysis of options.

Bel

ow

A

deq

uat

e

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

Far

Bel

ow

DRAFT - Pillars Communication Rubrics (5-4-16)



from faculty experts and staff. The Pillars rubrics are modelled after both the AAC&U VALUE Rubrics and USFSM’s Incredi-Bull Rubric, developed by our faculty and staff QEP

Steering Committee for SACSCOC Reaffirmation in 2016. The rubrics are intended for institutional-level use in evaluating and discussing student learning. The utility of the rubric is

to provide a framework of expectations and a common language for our undergraduate-level Pillars.

Definitions*

Written Communication: In accordance with AACU Written Communication VALUE Rubrics (AACU 2010), “is the development and expression of ideas in writing. Written

communication involves learning to work in many genres and styles. It can involve working with many different writing technologies, and mixing texts, data, and images. Written

communication abilities develop through iterative experiences across the curriculum.”

Oral Communication * Phil, please develop

Multimedia Communication

Framing Language

This rubric is intended to assist Pillars faculty to both develop and evaluate assignments aligned with USFSM’s mission to demonstrate student learning about forms of

communication, and to communicate those learning objectives with students as well. The goal of this Core Curriculum Pillars Assessment is to evaluate using a rubric whether

students have the intellectual tools to become effective communicators. Recognizing that quality academic work requires critical thinking and communication skills, the Core

Curriculum Committee created an assessment structure with comprehensive and intersectional rubrics that allow Pillars faculty and evaluators to use the same framework (critical

thinking and communication) across all six, broad areas of our Core Curriculum. Therefore, an assignment demonstrating communication skills is also evaluated for critical thinking

and additional Pillars.

Rubric Glossary

In accordance with the AACU VALUE Rubric for Written Communication (AACU 2010):1

Content development: The ways in which the text explores and represents its topic in relation to its audience and purpose.

Context of and purpose for writing: The context of writing is the situation surrounding a text: who is reading it? Who is writing it? Under what circumstances will the text

be shared or circulated? The purpose for writing is the writer’s intended effect on an audience. Writers might want to persuade or inform; they might want to report or

summarize information; they might want to work through complexity or confusion, etc.

Disciplinary conventions: Formal and informal rules that constitute what is seen generally as appropriate within different academic fields, e.g. introductory strategies, use

of passive voice or first person point of view, expectations for thesis or hypothesis, expectations for the kind of evidence and support that are appropriate to the task at

hand, use of primary and secondary sources to provide evidence, and support arguments and to document critical perspectives on the topic.

Genre conventions: Formal and informal rules for particular kinds of texts and/or media that guide formatting, organization, and stylistic choices, e.g. lab reports,

academic papers, poetry, webpages, or personal essays.

1 Reprinted [or Excerpted] with permission from Assessing Outcomes and Improving Achievement: Tips and tools for Using Rubrics, edited by Terrel L. Rhodes. Copyright 2010 by the Association of American Colleges and

Universities.



Written Communication1

Content Structure Delivery Commit- ments

Develops context, audience and purpose-focused content

Presents a well-structured line of reasoning Controls syntax and mechanics to support meaning


Develops and provides evidence from multiple, credible sources, with careful consideration given to audience, purpose and context.

Demonstrates an understanding of content through careful and planned organization, presentation, formatting and stylistic choices.

Uses language that conveys meaning to readers including appropriate word choice, syntax and mechanics.

4 Applies audience, purpose and content analysis in CREATIVE and STRATEGIC ways to focus all elements of the work; SKILLFULLY cites high-quality, credible, relevant sources to accomplish a specific outcome.

Demonstrates DETAILED attention to and SUCSSESSFUL execution of a WIDE RANGE of conventions particular to the discipline or task including organization, presentation, formatting, and stylistic choices.

GRACEFUL language that SKILLFULLY communicates meaning to readers with CLARITY and FLUENCY, and is virtually ERROR-FREE.

3 Content demonstrates CAREFUL audience, purpose and context analysis; CONSISTENTLY and ADEQUATELY cites credible, relevant sources to explore ideas and shape the whole work.

Demonstrates CONSISTENT use of IMPORTANT conventions particular to the discipline or task including organization, presentation, formatting and stylistic choices.

STRAIGHTFORWARD language that CONSISTENTLY conveys meaning to readers with clarity; FEW errors.

2 SOME consideration given to audience, purpose and context; SOME sources cited may LACK credibility or relevance; SOME content may not be fully supported by clear citations.

Follows SOME expectations required by the discipline or task for basic organization, presentation, formatting and style.

Language GENERALLY conveys meaning to readers, although writing MAY include SOME errors in word choice, syntax and mechanics.

1

Audience, purpose and context show LITTLE consideration; Many sources cited LACK credibility or relevance; Source citations NOT CLEARLY documented.

NO clear system for organization, presentation, formatting and/or style.

Language impedes meaning because of MANY significant errors in word choice, syntax and mechanics.

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

Ad

equ

ate

Bel

ow

Far

Bel

ow


Oral Communication

Content Structure Delivery Commit- ments


Presents a well-structured line of reasoning

Delivers an effective presentation


Develops and provides orally cited, multi-sourced evidence, with careful consideration given to audience, purpose and context.

Demonstrates an understanding of content through careful and planned organization in the presentation process.

Articulates planned and professional work on a topic. Demonstrates a commitment to intellectual property through meaningful and salient oral delivery.

4 Applies audience, purpose and content analysis in CREATIVE and STRATEGIC ways to focus all elements of the work; SKILLFULLY (and orally) cites high-quality, credible, relevant sources to accomplish a specific outcome.

WELL-STRUCTURED organizational pattern is CLEARLY and THOUGHTFULLY observed; Points are clearly delineated; ENGAGING and CREATIVE transitions; Main points are WELL BALANCED.

Speaker is POLISHED and CONFIDENT; ENGAGING use of vocal dynamics; EFFECTIVE and CREATIVE use of language; Maintains STRONG eye contact; Speaks extemporaneously; Uses body movement to ENHANCE meaning; SEAMLESS use of notes.

3

Content demonstrates CAREFUL audience, purpose and context analysis; CONSISTENTLY and ADEQUATELY cites credible, relevant sources to explore ideas and shape the whole work.

CONSISTENT organizational pattern is observed; Points are delineated; DEVELOPED transitions; Main points are BALANCED.

Speaker is PREPARED and PROFESSIONAL; APPROPRIATE use of vocal dynamics; ATTENTIVE use of language; Maintains GOOD eye contact; Speaks extemporaneously; Demonstrates CONTROL over body movement; Uses notes APPROPRIATELY.


Organizational pattern is SOMETIMES observable; Points evident but SOME are not delineated; Some transitions not used consistently; SOME main points LACK balance.

Speaker is PREPARED; Speaker is AUDIBLE but further clarity and dynamism needed; ATTEMPTS to look at listeners regularly; ATTEMPTS to speak extemporaneously; Demonstrates NON-DISTRACTING body movements; MODERATELY dependent on notes.

1

Audience, purpose and context show LITTLE consideration; Many sources cited LACK credibility or relevance; Source citations NOT CLEARLY documented.

UNCLEAR organizational pattern, including UNBALANCED or UNOBSERVED main points and transitions.

Speaker NOT fully prepared or professional; NOT clearly audible; Multiple ISSUES with vocal dynamics; POOR eye contact; UNCLEAR speaking style; DISTRACTING or NON-EXISTANT body movement; Overly DEPENDENT on notes.

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

Ad

equ

ate

Bel

ow

Far

Bel

ow


Multimedia Communication Content Structure Delivery Commit- ments


Designs well-structured multimedia environments

Moderates technical challenges fluently


Develops and provides evidence from multiple, credible sources, with careful consideration given to audience, purpose and context.

Demonstrates an understanding of content through careful and planned organization, presentation, formatting and stylistic choices.

Demonstrates ease in preventing and resolving technical difficulties when delivering project content through multimedia platforms.

4 Applies audience, purpose and content analysis in CREATIVE and STRATEGIC ways to focus all elements of the work; SKILLFULLY (and orally) cites high-quality, credible, relevant sources to accomplish a specific outcome.

Audience can progress INTUITIVELY throughout entire project in a LOGICAL path to find information; Multimedia elements and enhancements are used to AUGMENT the learning experience; CAREFUL attention is given to balance, proportion, innovation, and creativity.

Project presented is POLISHED and PROFESSIONAL without technical problems; No error messages evident; All sound, video, imagery and other content is embedded in an engaging manner and works ERROR FREE; All buttons and navigational tools SIMPLIFY the flow and/or organization of content.

3

Content demonstrates CAREFUL audience, purpose and context analysis; CONSISTENTLY and ADEQUATELY cites credible, relevant sources to explore ideas and shape the whole work.

Audience can navigate through the entire project with minimal instruction; Multimedia elements and content intersect to deliver a consistent message; Multimedia elements and enhancements are used APPROPRIATELY.

Project runs SMOOTHLY with MINOR technical problems; No significant error messages; All sound, video, imagery, and other content is APPROPRIATELY embedded within the presentation; ATTENTIVE use of buttons and navigational tools facilitate the flow of content.


Audience can navigate through the project but NEED OVERSIGHT or significant instruction; Multimedia elements and content SOMETIMES do not support each other; SOME multimedia elements or elements are not fully effective in conveying the message.

Project runs with SOME minor technical problems; SOME Sound, video, imagery, and other content is not all embedded within the presentation; SOME buttons and navigational tools may not facilitate flow of content.

1

Audience, purpose and context show LITTLE consideration; MANY sources cited LACK credibility or relevance; Source citations NOT CLEARLY documented.

Navigation is CONFUSING or does not work; NO careful consideration given to multimedia elements and consistent content. NO multimedia elements or elements are INAPPROPRIATE.

Project presented with SEVERAL significant technological PROBLEMS; Sound, video, imagery and other content NOT fully presented due to technological error; FEW buttons or navigations tools facilitate the flow of content.

Co

mp

reh

ensi

ve

Ad

equ

ate

Bel

ow

Far

Bel

ow

CRITICAL THINKING RUBRIC Rater: _____________________________________

Rater: Please rate samples provided using the Scoring Key above, and return your form to Institutional Research and Effectiveness (C321). Rows can be removed or added as needed.

CT Commitments: 1. Formulates vital questions and

problems clearly

2. Gathers and assesses relevant information

3. Identifies relevant assumptions,

alternatives, and implications

4. Comes to well-reasoned conclusions

and solutions

5. Communicates reasoning effectively

“Meets Expectations” Criteria → Sample # ↓

Clearly identifies significant question(s)/ topic(s) and provides relevant reasoning/ explanation the significance.

Supports assertions using precise and relevant quotes, theories, statistics, research and/or other careful analytic processes of appropriate depth and breadth.

Identifies the approach taken, noting the inherent assumptions and any biases (fairness). Establishes the relevance of the approach and discusses resulting implications.

Provides clear logic based on accurate information in support of conclusions, recommendations, and/or solutions.

Presents in written or oral format a clear and concise line of reasoning that is organized, complete, well-thought out, and consistent with disciplinary standards.

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

Draft Rubric 10/26/2015

Scoring Key:

1 Far less than expectations; 2 Less than expectations; 3 Meets expectations; 4 Exceeds expectations

Documents

CORE CURRICULUM PILLARS OF INTELLECTUAL ENGAGEMENT ASSESSMENT 2015 … · 2014. 4. 7. · 2015-16 2014-15 No Data* *Note: Pending pilot of QEP rubric (FA15). Critical Thinking and