Institutional Effectiveness Achievement Report
Management and Marketing: BBA Management 2014­2015 Institutional Effectiveness Achievements Report
Unit Head: Jill Austin
Reports to: College of Business
Mission:
Management and Marketing ­­ teaching ­­ connecting ­­ engaging ­­ expanding:
Teaching theory and applied business knowledge . . .
Connecting students with businesses, and businesses with students . . .
Engaging the business community thorugh service activities . . .
Expanding business knowledge through research . . .
Use of Prior Results : Held discussions to develop learning outcomes and unifying teaching theme for required business classes: MGMT 3610, 3620, MKT 3820, and BUAD 4980. Unifying theme is an attempt to
help students retain knowledge from the courses as well as to increase consistency of instruction
Student Learning Outcome:
Outcome 5: Management students will be
able to demonstrate knowledge of
fundamental concepts and theories in the
core areas of business.
Measure 1:
Major field test
Person(s)
Responsible:
department
chair
Completion
Date:
06/30/2015
Analysis of Results for Measure 1. Supporting Document(s):
(include strengths & weaknesses):
Results for business administration
majors is 144.2. Benchmark is 150. Not met. Future
Actions
:Describe
Program
Changes
(adding a
course,
assignment,
project,
etc.):
Student
competency
perceptions
indicates
need to
review
course
content and
how topics
are covered
in other
classes
(where
confidence is
not felt) ­­
and to
consider
whether more
courses in
some topics
are needed.
Future
Actions
:Describe
Assessment
Changes
(measures
such as
rubrics,
exams,
diagnostic
instruments,
etc.):
Future
Actions
:Describe
any
additional
resources
needed
(Leave blank
if no
additional
resources
are
needed.):
Measure 2:
Indirect measure ­ survey of students. Students reported they feel competent to
apply fundamental concepts of knowledge in
these areas: management and marketing. They feel least competent in economics. Person(s)
Analysis of Results for Measure 2:
Responsible: (include strengths & weaknesses):
Measure 1:
International Competencies Exam
Person(s)
Responsible:
department
chair
Completion
Date:
Use of Prior Results : Provided study sheet to students.
Student Learning Outcome:
Outcome 6: Management students will be
able to demonstrate knowledge of core
concepts and theories in the field of
international business management.
Completion
Date:
Analysis of Results for Measure 1.
(include strengths & weaknesses):
Pass rate was 85% in fall and 97 %
in spring. Benchmark is 90 % ­­
MET. Supporting Document(s):
Future
Actions
:Describe
Program
Changes
(adding a
course,
06/30/2015
assignment,
project,
etc.):
Faculty will
discuss
adding
specific
content for
required
courses in
the major to
enhance
coverage of
international
concepts.
Faculty will
re­work
questions
from the
exam to
reflect
changes in
the COB
core so the
exam can be
updated.
Future
Actions
:Describe
Assessment
Changes
(measures
such as
rubrics,
exams,
diagnostic
instruments,
etc.):
Review
questions in
MGMT and
MKT with
high error
rate and
revise as
necessary,
including
determining
how to help
the students
learn more
effectively. Future
Actions
:Describe
any
additional
resources
needed
(Leave blank
if no
additional
resources
are
needed.):
Measure 2:
Person(s)
Student perceptions of international knowledge Responsible:
department
chair
Analysis of Results for Measure 2:
(include strengths & weaknesses):
Only 53.9 % of students feel
competent in their international
knowledge. Completion
Date:
06/30/2015
Use of Prior Results : Writing assignments were added to MGMT 3610 Writing assignments were developed for MGMT 3620 and will be added to that course in fall 2015.
Student Learning Outcome:
Outcome 7: Management students will
demonstrate effective written and oral
communication skills appropriate to the field
of business.
Measure 1:
Person(s)
writing and oral communication assignments in Responsible:
BUAD 4980
faculty
teaching
BUAD 4980
Completion
Date:
06/30/2015
Analysis of Results for Measure 1.
(include strengths & weaknesses):
proficient in writing = 90.5 %
proficient in oral communications =
76.9 % ­ MET Supporting Document(s):
Future
Actions
:Describe
Program
Changes
(adding a
course,
assignment,
project,
etc.):
Implement
writing
assignments
and
assessment
in MGMT
3620
Develop a
plan for
including
more oral
presentations
in
department
courses and
implement.
Future
Actions
:Describe
Assessment
Changes
(measures
such as
rubrics,
exams,
diagnostic
instruments,
etc.):
Continue to
review rubric
for
consistency
of grading.
Future
Actions
:Describe
any
additional
resources
needed
(Leave blank
if no
additional
resources
are
needed.):
Measure 2:
indirect measure ­ perception of student of
competency Person(s)
Responsible:
department
chair
Completion
Date:
06/30/2015
Analysis of Results for Measure 2:
(include strengths & weaknesses):
perceived competency in writing = 90
% perceived competency in oral
communications = 74.9% student
perceptions are about the same
as skills indicate. Use of Prior Results : Increased the benchmark for this assessment to 80 % Compare results with results from previous year to determine impact of unifying theme and new learning outcomes. ­­ Additional work
needs to be done on this to determine learning. A survey was completed for MGMT 3610 and students’ perceptions were very high that this addition (strength finders) is useful to their learning.
Student Learning Outcome:
Outcome 8: Management students will be
able to propose and evaluate alternative
solutions for decision making.
Measure 1:
Evaluation of development of strategic
alternatives from BUAD 4980 project.
Person(s)
Responsible:
faculty
teaching
BUAD 4980
Completion
Date:
06/30/2015
Analysis of Results for Measure 1. Supporting Document(s):
(include strengths & weaknesses):
rubric score: 81 % proficient, 9.5 %
marginal, 9.5 % unacceptable. (New
benchmark = 80 %) MET Future Actions
:Describe
Program
Changes
(adding a
course,
assignment,
project, etc.):
A unifying theme
was added to this
course to
increase student
learning ­­ a
competition was
started in the
spring 2015
semester. Students worked
in teams to
present a case
analysis for
Verizon. First
presentation was
video and second
was for Verizon
employees. Prizes were
awarded from
Verizon. Plans
call for analysis
for a
different company
each semester.
Future Actions
:Describe
Assessment
Changes
(measures such
as rubrics,
exams,
diagnostic
instruments,
etc.):
In the next
academic year,
adjustments will
be made to the
pilot project initial
competition. Future Actions
:Describe any
additional
resources
needed (Leave
blank if no
additional
resources are
needed.):
Measure 2:
Indirect Measure ­ student perception of
competency in development of strategic
alternatives = 80.8 % felt competent. Person(s)
Responsible:
Department
Chair
Completion
Date:
06/30/2015
Report Date: Wed Aug 12 2015
16:57:28 CDT
Close
Analysis of Results for Measure 2:
(include strengths & weaknesses):
This is about the same
confidence as the results show.