Dr. Dowlah
Professor of Economics
Department of Social Sciences
Analysis of Assessment Results
Assessment of ECON101 and ECON102
Spring 2014
I.
Sample Size
The Assessment Assignment (attached) was distributed to 45 students of two writing intensive sections of ECON101 and ECON102.
The Assignment was completed and submitted by 28 students. Response Rate: 62%. Sample Size 28.
II.
Assessment Results and Analysis
Table 1: Answers to Question- Type A (Multiple Choice Questions)
Questions
Sample Size
1.A
1.B
1.C
28
28
28
Score 0
(Incorrect)
0
8
2
Percentage of
total
0.0%
0.285%
0.071%
Score 1
(Correct)
28
20
26
Percentage
of total
100.00%
0.714%
0.928%
Table 1 demonstrates that a total of 28 students, 100% of the sampled population, answered questions 1.A correctly, and
71% answered question 1.B correctly, and 93% answered question 1.C correctly, indicating that overwhelming majority of the
sampled students have achieved, or exceedingly achieved, the learning objectives of the course, as far as this part of the
Assessment is concerned.
1|Dowlah
Table 2: Answers to Question-Type B (Short-Essay-Type Questions)
Questions
Sample
Size
Unsatisfactory
(1 point)
Percentage
of total
Satisfactory
(2 points)
Percentage
of Total
B.1
B.2
B.3
28
28
27
3
3
5
10.7
10.7
18.5
9
13
7
32.1
46.4
25.9
Highly
Satisfactory
(3 points)
9
6
8
Percentage
of Total
32.1
21.4
29.6
Excellent
(4
points)
7
6
7
Percentage
of total
Average
Score
25
21.4
25.9
2.71
2.53
2.33
Table 2 demonstrates that when asked when the government fixes price above the market equilibrium (Q#B.1), how that
might affect the market, about 11 percent of the sampled students answered unsatisfactorily, while the answers were satisfactory
for 32 percent, highly satisfactory for another 32 percent, and excellent for 25 percent. These results show that about 90 percent
of the sampled population demonstrated satisfactory to excellent levels of achievement in the learning the course objectives as
far as this Assessment question is concerned.
When asked if the government fixes price below the equilibrium (Q#B.2) how that might affect market equilibrium, about
11 percent of the sampled students answered unsatisfactorily, while the answers were satisfactory for 46.4 percent, highly
satisfactory for 21.4 percent, and excellent for 21.4 percent. These results show that about 90 percent of the student population
demonstrated satisfactory to excellent levels of achievement in the learning the course objectives as far as this question is
concerned. The fact that the percentages for highly satisfactory or excellent answers fell, compared with those of Q#B.1, may be
indicative of level of difficulties of this question.
When asked how a market could restore equilibrium when price is either above or below the equilibrium in the absence
of any government intervention (Q#B.3), 18.5 percent (almost one fifth) of the sampled students answered unsatisfactorily, while
the answers were satisfactory for 25.9 percent, highly satisfactory for 29.6 percent, and excellent for 25.9 percent. This shows that
about 81 percent of the student population demonstrated satisfactory to excellent levels of achievement in the learning of the
course objectives as far as this question is concerned. The fact that the percentages for highly satisfactory or excellent answers
fell, compared with those of Q#B.1 and Q#B.2, may be indicative of higher levels of difficulties with this question. At the same
time, it is also notable that compared with Q#B.1 and Q#B.2, the percentage of excellent answers was the highest for this question.
This suggests that those who understood this question, did so quite well.
The pattern of answers for all three multiple-choice questions demonstrate that the average all answers for first two
questions were above the average, while the average score for the last one was below average. In a scale of 1 to 4, the average
2|Dowlah
score will be 2.5. As Table 1 shows, the average score for Q#2.A was 2.71, the average score for Q2.B was 2.53, but the average
score for Q#2.C was 2.33. While the answers for first two questions indicate that an overwhelming majority of the sampled
students have achieved, or exceedingly achieved the learning objectives of the course, the answers for the third question
demonstrate that the achievement was less so. This also indicates that levels of difficulty for the third question could be much
higher for the sampled student population.
Table 3: Answers to Question-type C (Essay-type Questions)
Questions
Sample
Size
Unsatisfactory
(1 point)
Percentage
of total
Satisfactory
(2 points)
Percentage
of total
3.A
3.B
3.C
25
23
22
2
0
0
8.00
0.00
0.00
7
8
10
28.00
34.78
45.45
Highly
Satisfactory
(3 points)
7
7
6
Percentage
of Total
Excellent
(4 points)
Percentage
of total
Average
Score
28.00
30.43
27.27
9
9
6
36.00
39.13
27.27
2.92
3.17
2.82
Table 3 demonstrates that the sample size changed depending on the questions. Question #3A was answered by 25
students, of which 23 answered 3B as well and 22 students answered 3C as well. It appears that this has to do with level of studies
and difficulties involved in answering these questions. When asked to provide a brief background of the minimum wage legislation
in the United States (Q#3A), 8 percent of the sampled students provided unsatisfactory answer, while 28 percent provided
satisfactory, another 28 percent highly satisfactory, and 36% provided excellent answers. When asked to provide a critical
understanding of the consequences of the minimum wage legislation (Q3.B), 100% of those who answered the question provided
satisfactory to excellent answers, and the highest percentage (39%) gave excellent answers. When asked to provide graphical
analysis (demand and supply diagram with current state and future state of the labor market due to change in the minimum
wage)—Q#3.C—the number of students who answered the question dropped to 22, and about one third (27.27%) of them gave
their answers without graphical analysis, although most of them provided either satisfactory (45.45%) or highly satisfactory
(27.27%) answers.
The pattern of answers to this question indicates that although the level of difficulty may be higher, students are willing
to learn materials that directly affect their lives. Only 8 percent students gave unsatisfactory answers when they were asked to
provide a brief background of the minimum wage legislation, and 100% of the sampled students provided satisfactory answers
when asked about the consequences of the minimum wage legislation. At the same time, about one third of the sampled students
3|Dowlah
failed to provide any graphical analysis of the problem—indicating that the sampled students might not be doing well with the
course objectives of graphical analysis.
The overall average scores of this question, however, indicate that the performance of the sampled students have been
above average as far as this question is concerned. For Q#3.A, the average score was 2.92, for Q3.B, the average score was 3.17,
and for Q#3.C, the average score was 2.82. Such average scores indicate that overall, an overwhelming majority of the sampled
students have achieved, or exceedingly achieved, the learning objectives of the course, as far as this part of the Assessment is
concerned. The average scores for this question also demonstrate that students are willing to learn course materials better when
they relate to their lives directly.
III.
SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS
An overwhelming majority of the sampled students demonstrated that they have achieved, or exceedingly achieved, the
learning objectives of the course as far as those are related to this Course Assessment. Students were given three sets of
questions—three multiple-choice questions, three short essay-type questions, and three essay-type questions. In respect to
multiple-choice questions, 100% of the sampled population answered questions 1.A correctly, 71% answered question 1.B
correctly, and 93% answered question 1.C correctly—indicating that they achieved the learning objectives earmarked for this
section.
For the category of short-essay-type questions, the average scores were 2.71 for Q#2.A, 2.53 for Q2.B, and 2.33 for Q#2.C,
indicating that the sampled population demonstrated above-average performance in respect to first two questions, but their
scores fell below average for the third question in this section. With the exception of Q#2.C, it can be concluded that an
overwhelming majority of the sampled students have achieved, or exceedingly achieved, the learning objectives of this course, as
they related to this part of the assessment. It is also clear that the difficulty level for the sampled students was much higher for
Q#2.C.
In the category of essay-type questions, the sampled students demonstrated above average performance for all three
questions–the average scores were 2.92, 3.17, and 2.82. Once again, the patterns of answers to this question demonstrate that
overall an overwhelming majority of the sampled students have achieved, or exceedingly achieved, the learning objectives of the
course, as far as this part of the assessment is concerned. Of course, sample size dropped remarkably for the essay-type question,
especially for the graphical analysis (Q#3.C), but above average performance overall for this rather difficult question do indicate
that students may be more comfortable in learning even more difficult course materials when they directly relate to their lives.
4|Dowlah
IV.
AREAS OF CONCERN AND SUGGESTIONS
The findings of the Assessment clearly indicate that students have been achieving the General Education and Individual
Learning Outcomes earmarked for this course, that is, they are capable of using analytical reasoning to identify issues or problems
and evaluate evidence in order to make informed decisions, and they are capable of demonstrating so by using the Supply and
Demand Analysis to evaluate the consequences of government policies on society’s allocation of resources through clear written
explanation and graphic analysis. Obviously, about one third of this student population failed to provide any graphical analysis of
the question presented before them.
Secondly, the sampled student population did much better with multiple-choice questions than with the questions that
asked for written explanation. Both questions 2 and 3 asked the students to explain their answers in writing, but Question 3 asked
for more critical analysis. As the level of difficulty increased, several students didn’t even answer question #3, and those who did
answer, about one third did so without providing any graphical analysis.
These findings do indicate that instructors should strive harder to emphasize more in-class writing assignments, explain
graphs and graphical analysis more passionately, and relate the class-room materials to real life developments. At the same time,
whether the course objectives, broadly identified in the General Education and Individual Learning Objectives, are attainable or
not in a community college setting need to be examined as well.
V.
FUTURE PLANS TO ADDRESS AREAS OF CONCERN
This Assessment has brought forth some good understandings of the course materials and how the students are achieving
the General Education and Individual Learning Objectives by learning these materials. This Assessment showed that as far as the
Demand and Supply analysis is concerned, an overwhelming majority of the students are achieving the goals rather satisfactorily.
They are, indeed, capable of using analytical reasoning to identify issues or problems and evaluate evidence in order to make
informed decisions, and they are, to a large extent, capable of evaluating the consequences of government policies on society’s
allocation of resources. The findings of the Assessment also indicate that instructors of ECON101 and ECON102 should strive hard
in the future to emphasize more in-class writing assignments, explain graphs and graphical analysis more passionately, and relate
the class-room materials to real life developments.
The findings of the Assessment, however, do not encompass materials of the whole course of ECON101 or ECON102 or
the whole set of learning objectives of goals of these courses. It is rather narrowly focused on the very basic concepts of Economics,
5|Dowlah
which, by the way, is integral part of both ECON101 and ECON102. Similar assessments should be conducted for these courses by
focusing on more advanced materials of these courses in order to assess whether the students are achieving overall general
education and individual learning objectives earmarked for these courses, and whether such goals and objectives can be achieved
in a community college setting.
6|Dowlah