Luisa García-Conde
Assessment Institute Fall 2014
Assessment Report
Foreign Language and Literatures Department
Spanish-315 Readings in Contemporary Spanish American Literature
General Education Objective
General Education objectives #3:
Course Learning Outcome
Learning Outcome #2:
B. Use analytical reasoning to identify issues
or problems and evaluate evidence in order to
make informed decisions.
C. Become familiar with some of the social, philosophical
and cultural issues present in modern Latin American
literature.
I. Assessment Activity
Tools
The attached rubric (Liberal Arts Academy Assessment Rubric Spring 14) has been designed to evaluate how
well students have achieved the LS 315 course learning outcome #2 C, and the relevant general education
learning outcome #3 B.
II. Assignments
The students were asked to write a well-organized essay about Malinalli - a key historical figure in Latin
American history - by analyzing the novel Malinche, by Laura Esquivel.
Malinalli, better known as “La Malinche,” is considered a person of interest in studying the Conquest of
Mexico, due to her close relationship with Hernán Cortés. Malinalli, a Mexican indian, became Cortés’
interpreter, advisor, mediator, teacher, and lover. Because of her role in aiding the conquistadors, Malinali
has been considered by many a traitor to her people, a symbol of “mestizaje” and a woman who took a
controversial ethical stance.
In the essay, students had to form an opinion on Malinalli’s decisions within her social and historical context.
The students had to demonstrate the ability to evaluate Malinalli’s character in the novel, and defend their
opinions using evidence from the text.
III. Grading Rubric
The rubric attached was employed to evaluate the students’ achievement. It is a four-point rubric with specific
criteria and points to evaluate each composition. The assessments were based on the following aspects:
1. The students’ identification and description of the issue, on
2. The students’ position or thesis statement on the issue, and
3. The students’ development and evidence to demonstrate their specific position on the issue. The highest
score is 16 points.
Page 1
General Education Objective: Use analytical reasoning to identify issues or problems and evaluate evidence in
order to make informed decisions in writing
Score
ISSUE/
PROBLEM
STUDENT’S
PERSPECTIVE
(THESIS/
ARGUMENT)
DEVELOPMENT
EVIDENCE
Page 2
4
3
2
1
Issue/problem is
identified,
stated clearly and
described
comprehensively,
delivering all relevant
information necessary
for full understanding.
Issue/problem is
identified,
described, and
clarified so that
understanding is not
seriously impeded by
omissions.
Issue/problem is
identified but
description leaves
some terms
undefined,
ambiguities
unexplored,
boundaries
undetermined, and/or
backgrounds
unknown.
Issue/problem is
identified without
clarification or
description.
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is
surprising and
imaginative, taking
into
account the
complexities of the
issue.
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is
stated and takes into
account the
complexities of the
issue.
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is
stated, but is
simplistic
and obvious.
Specific position
(perspective,
thesis/hypothesis) is
stated but may be
vague, ambiguous, or
unclear.
Uses relevant and
compelling content
(personal examples,
sources, data) to
illustrate
comprehensive
understanding of the
issue/problem
addressed.
Uses relevant content
to
illustrate a coherent
understanding of the
issue/problem
addressed.
Uses content to
illustrate some
understanding of the
issue/problem
addressed.
Uses content to
illustrate little to no
understanding of the
issue/problem
addressed.
Information is taken
from multiple sources
with
enough
interpretation/evaluat
ion to develop
a comprehensive
analysis or synthesis.
Information is taken
from multiple sources
with
enough
interpretation/evaluat
ion to develop a
coherent analysis or
synthesis.
Information is taken
from multiple sources
with
some
interpretation/evaluat
ion, but not enough to
develop a coherent
analysis or
synthesis.
Information is taken
from source(s)
without
any
interpretation/evaluat
ion.
IV. Summary and analysis of the assessment results
Student
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Class Score
Possible
Issue / Problem
4
2
4
3
4
4
4
4
3
4
3
4
4
3
4
Student's Perspective
3
1
4
2
3
4
3
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
3
Development
3
1
3
1
2
4
2
3
2
1
3
4
4
4
2
Evidence
3
2
2
1
2
4
2
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
54
60
90%
48
60
80%
39
60
65%
37
60
62%
Table 1.
Table one shows the break-up of scores of the 15 students in the class. The scores are totaled at the bottom to show
“class score” by category of task. We can quickly notice that the class performed best in identifying the issue/problem.
Grade
81.3%
37.5%
81.3%
43.8%
68.8%
100.0%
68.8%
87.5%
62.5%
62.5%
68.8%
93.8%
93.8%
87.5%
75.0%
Page 3
Deviation From
The Mean
7.1%
36.7%
7.1%
30.4%
5.4%
25.8%
5.4%
13.3%
11.7%
11.7%
5.4%
19.6%
19.6%
13.3%
0.8%
The table to the left shows the class grades. The class average was a 74.2% or a C. The
standard deviation from this average was 18%, which is very high; indicating a great
deal of variance in the student grades. Initially, this could show that the assignment was
neither too easy nor too difficult. However, the sample size is very small.
Distribution of Grades
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F
Distribution of Scores
12
10
10
8
7
7
6
6
6
4
4
4
4
4
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
Issue / Problem
Student's Perspective
Outstanding (4)
Satisfactory (3)
Development
Needs Improvement (2)
Evidence
Unsatisfactory (1)
Outstanding (4)
Satisfactory (3)
Needs Improvement (2)
Issue / Problem
10
4
1
Student's
Perspective
6
7
1
Development
4
4
4
Evidence
1
6
7
Unsatisfactory (1)
0
1
3
1
Score
The table and graph above illustrate the distribution of the class scores by category. A majority of the students, 10 out of
15, demonstrated an outstanding score (4) in issue/problem. Students’ perspective is good, the majority of the students
are satisfactory and 6 of them are outstanding, development is varied and the area of evidence needs improvement.
V. Discussions and future plans
Overall the assessment results are satisfactory. The average score was 74.2%, which falls between the ranges of 74-76 a
C (satisfactory). Nevertheless, a follow-up discussion of the assessment tool is advisable and the assessment should be
repeated next semester to have a larger representation of students assessed.
Students’ performance in the areas of “Development”, and especially in “Evidence”, indicates that the majority did not
investigate from different sources in order to develop the issue and illustrate a comprehensive understanding of the
issue/problem addressed. To improve this outcome, a review and practice of research skills learned in previous courses
should be introduced in the syllabus.
Page 4