COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Revised 08/01/2011
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
Complete and electronically submit your assessment report to your Department Chair/Coordinator/Director. As needed, please attach supporting documents and/or
a narrative description of the assessment activities in your course.
Course Outcomes
In the boxes below, summarize
the outcomes assessed in your
course during the year.
Outcome #1
Students will demonstrate
effective team participation
characteristics including:
cooperation, accountability and
group learning.
Assessment Measures
Assessment Results
Use of Results
Effect on Course
In the boxes below, summarize
the methods used to assess course
outcomes during the last year.
In the boxes below, summarize
the results of your assessment
activities during the last year.
In the boxes below, summarize
how you are or how you plan to
use the results to improve student
learning.
Based on the results of this
assessment, will you revise your
outcomes? If so, please
summarize how and why in the
boxes below:
Please see attached document.
Please see attached document.
Please see attached document.
The learning outcome statement
will read: Students will
demonstrate effective team
participation characteristics
including: cooperation,
accountability and group
learning.
Measure: Team performance will
be assessed in course using a tool
with a predetermined rubric
known to students. (Tools might
include reflective paper, peer
evaluations, or assessment of
individual components within a
team project).
Page 1
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
Course Outcomes
Outcome # 2
Students will illustrate personal
actions that have an impact on
supervision and demonstrate an
ability to develop skills that lead
to positive effects in
management.
Assessment Measures
Please see attached document.
Assessment Results
Please see attached document.
Page 2
Use of Results
Effect on Course
These results indicate that
students are able to begin at
double loop learning, particularly
if they have some prior
knowledge of the single loop
areas such as definition and rules.
It also appears that triple loop
learning is of great value and
could be further developed. It is
recommended that additional role
playing exercises be considered
in the course to allow students
the opportunity to implement
their knowledge and to have
positive results from the changes
that they identified in the initial
workshop.
The student learning outcome
will read: Students will illustrate
personal actions that have an
impact on supervision and
demonstrate an ability to develop
those skills that have a positive
effect in management.
Measure: Multiple opportunities
will be provided for students to
illustrate, implement, adapt and
re-apply knowledge of
supervision skills. Performance
will be graded using a rubric
known to students.
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
Course Outcomes
Outcome #3
Students will understand and
document managerial skills such
as scheduling, coaching, planning
and interviewing.
Assessment Measures
Please see attached document.
Assessment Results
Use of Results
Thirty-eight on-time portfolios
were graded at the end of the
course. The average grade for
the 38 submissions was a 72.8%.
Grades in the spring term were
significantly higher due to more
clarity (due to the above
assignment descriptions) than
grades in the fall. Students
missed a number of the
assignments for the fall term.
These results are indicative of the
need for a clear grading rubric. It
does appear that the clarified
assignment instructions led to
positive results in the spring
term. Again, referring to
learning outcome 1 and 2, the
lower level student is in need of
either very clear instructions with
very specific directions or an
ability to participate in classroom
exercises that enhance their
learning. The use of a portfolio
across all sections, even with
varied assignments and rubrics
will provide a unique way to
evaluate across sections in the
future for this course while
maintaining academic freedom.
Effect on Course
The student learning outcome
will read: Students will
understand and document
managerial skills such as
scheduling, coaching, planning
and interviewing.
Measure: A course portfolio of
selected assignments will be
completed and graded using a
rubric known to students.
Please enter your name and date below to confirm you have reviewed this report:
Title
Name
Date
Dean
Marie Murgolo-Poore
11/27/2012
Vice President of Academic Affairs and Student Services
John G Tuthill
12/6/2012
Department Chair/Coordinator/Director
Page 3
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
Assessment Measure for Learning Outcome 1
Reflective paper on personal activity in team situation based learning project.
Papers were reviewed to determine at which loop of learning students progressed; based on Argyris’ “triple-loop learning model”.
Papers were reviewed for key words that would define student learning at particular levels:
First loop understands the rules. Student papers were searched for words like “effective teams do”, “in good teams”. In other words, could students identify
characteristics of good team activity including cooperation, accountability and group learning?
Second loop learning is the ability to implement what is defined as the rules. Papers were reviewed for students to identify their and their team mate’s actions that
followed the rules. Our team was able to effectively manage our timelines (accountability), we discussed and decided upon a direction (cooperation), I or we
would do this differently in the future (group learning).
Third loop learning is the ability to question the validity of the rules within the context of the situation. Papers were reviewed for key words the indicated their
ability to understand the formal rules but to assess and determine their validity within the constraints of the existing project. Given the time constraints, or given
the ability to meet together we decided to do X.
Two sections taught by a single instructor was used to evaluate this year as the official MCO was not filed and thus learning objectives were not consistent across
all sections. This is being resolved as part of this course assessment process. MCOs indicating outcome changes were approved on October 16 in Faculty Senate.
A total of fifteen, on time, papers were reviewed several months after the end of the course.
Results for Learning Outcome 1
After reviewing the fifteen papers, twenty-seven specific instances were found where the student in their reflection mentioned a particular rule of working in teams
(communication, leadership, accountability, delegation). All papers had a minimum of one clear rule that they illustrated in their paper. Three of the papers were
from a fast track course. These students had a minimum of two rules per paper. This shows differences between the requirements for fast track and traditional
program. Students in the traditional program tended to focus on a single specific area of teamwork, whereas fast track students tended to explore multiple aspects
of teamwork.
Page 4
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
After reviewing the fifteen papers, twenty specific instances were found where the students in their reflection mentioned a specific instance of implementing a rule.
Examples included taking on a leadership role, initiating communication, delegating assignments, and working together to meet the requirements of the
assignment. All fast track papers again explored multiple forms of “doing things right”. Five of the traditional course papers did not display any second loop
learning. These papers were focused on what the rules were. Interestingly, the students that focused solely on rules tended to list multiple rules, but were unable
to then document instances of applying those rules or adapting those rules to the context of the course.
After reviewing the fifteen papers, there were thirteen instances where the student in their reflection mentioned an adaptation to the rules to accommodate the
context in which they resided. All of the fast track students mentioned adapting to the utilization of technology in lieu of face to face meetings. Their discussions
included comments on the amount of time that it took to adjust, to why the adjustment worked and were able to relate the adaptation to the changing constraints of
the way business is changing today. The primary adaptation within the traditional course was to not having weekly meetings and having their group change
constantly. While fast track students were comfortable with the level of ambiguity with the assignment, the majority of traditional course papers mentioned a
discomfort with the level of knowledge provided regarding the assignment.
Assessment Measure for Learning Outcome 2
Students participated in a single course workshop on reflexivity. Reflexivity is the skill set whereby students can examine a situation: past, present or current;
positive or negative; real or fictional and revise that situation for better performance with increasing positive returns to learning. After completing the exercise,
students were asked to write a paper reflecting on their experience. These papers were reviewed against the Argyris triple loop learning model. At single loop,
student papers were reviewed for key words such as: considered, reframe, and reflecting. At second loop level papers were reviewed for student’s recount of
situations where they either had in the past, or since the workshop, used the power of reflection and reframing to achieve better results. At the third loop level
papers were reviewed for instances where the student could explain their own actions, how those actions had led to the results they achieved and what they would
change to achieve desired results in the future. In this way student’s identified their actions in creating an outcome and were then asked to determine how they
would change those actions to change the results in the future.
Results for Learning Outcome 2
A total of thirty-three on time papers were reviewed from two traditional sections. After reviewing the following results were discovered.
There were twenty-five specific instances where students provided a definition of reflexivity, the practice of reflection or a specific area of the workshop exercise.
These papers tended to be written more in an essay format and students appeared to use the define it; explain it model as a way to explore the exercise from class.
Page 5
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
In those cases where the definition was a part of meaningful reflection it tended to be a self-definition and not one that had been derived from an external source of
information.
There were thirty-four specific instances where students were able to discuss their past experiences or recent (since the workshop) experiences and how their use of
reflexivity led to a positive result as opposed to a negative result. It appears to have been easier for students to achieve double loop learning without displaying
single loop learning as they were building from a physical activity that everyone in the class had participated in. As far as a writing exercise, the inability to
provide context for the reader could be improved. As far as a supervisory exercise, in many cases student’s demonstrated a change in their perception of the role
and impact of assumptions on their professional careers. This was often true whether the student utilized a personal encounter or a professional encounter. It
appears that it is significantly easier to achieve second loop, application level learning using a workshop format. To insure that this second loop learning is built
upon a strong foundation definition and cognition activities should precede any workshop like this one.
There were fourteen specific instances where students were able to illustrate how their actions were responsible for the outcome of the situation and how based on
this experience they would now more carefully review the assumptions that they hold prior to interacting with others. The development of this skill is critical to the
development of strong supervisors, particularly in dealing with a diverse workforce. The development of triple loop learning within this learning outcome is of
more importance than the other learning outcomes.
Assessment Measure for Learning Outcome 3
At the conclusion of the course, students were asked to complete a portfolio of their assignments during the course. Assignments included:
Module 1 Assignments:
Develop two schedules:
Schedule One: Take a Calendar for the Five Weeks of the Term and outline all of your activities and assignments. Please be sure to include on your daily schedule
your study time, personal time, sleep, everything that you will need to accomplish. Review textbook pages 139-140 specifically.
Schedule Two: Based upon the information on Stephen Covey’s Seven Habits for Success and Patrick Lencioni’s The Three Big Questions for a Frantic Family
and Silos, Politics and Turf Wars, develop your top three strategic priorities. From these three priorities, develop a weekly schedule that color blocks your time.
Your schedule should highlight study/school time, work time, personal time and should reflect your top three priorities which should also be on your schedule.
(Please see instructor example in resources section).
Page 6
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
Module 2 Assignments:
RISK: I know it seems silly, but it will be fun and will possibly kill two birds with one stone (you can play with your family). During the week play a minimum of
two games of RISK. You can play the live board game with friends and family, play it on Playstation or you can play the game online for free at Pogo.com. You
must play against at least 3 other players, real or computer simulated. As you play the game think about the decisions you are making and keep a journal of the
decisions and why you made them. From this exercise, you will need to write a three page paper reflecting on your experience with the development of strategy.
(Three pages in my world have 1” margins, single spaced, indented paragraphs, Times New Roman 12 Point font). When you first played the game what did you
do, as you played the game more how did your decision making change. How do you think the game of Risk relates to the “real world?”
Module 3 Assignments:
Please review the simulation based exercise in your module 3 folder. You may begin this assignment early – please note that this assignment has due dates over
the course of the remaining modules. Please prepare your time accordingly.
At the end of Day 28 please submit a two page (single spaced, 1 inch margins, Times New Roman 12 point font) reflection on the experience of working with your
team. What worked, what didn’t, did you take a leadership role or did you let someone else lead? What would you change in the future to improve the outcome
for your team?
Module 4 Assignments:
Complete the Reflexivity exercise by watching the videos. Please be sure to follow the instructions of the videos, which will require you having a partner. This
exercise will ask you to remember and to delve into a previous experience where you had an interpersonal interaction that had a less than satisfactory experience.
The more personal of an experience the better the exercise will work. Further, you will need to pick a partner who is NOT the person you had the interaction with.
Someone not involved in the interaction at all will be your best bet.
Once you have completed the exercise in its entirety, you will need to write a one – two page reflection (this means single space, one inch margins, Times New
Roman 12 point font) of your experience with the reflexivity exercise. What did you learn about yourself, about your assumptions about the way the world works,
about communicating with others?
Module 5 Assignments:
In this concluding module, you are being asked to reflect on the changes that education makes upon you personally and to ask yourself what are the resistances to
change that you are experiencing and how to overcome those. To do this, complete the following:
Page 7
COURSE ASSESSMENT REPORT (CAR)
Course Prefix, Number and Title: MGT 171-Supervision
Division/Unit: School of Business and Entrepreneurship
Submitted by: Melanie Lawler
Contributing Faculty:
Academic Year: 2011-2012
1 – Review and revise your module assignments from each of the first 4 modules
A. For module 1 please review and revise schedule 2 for the upcoming term and write a brief paragraph on how the schedules impacted your performance
this term.
B. For module 2 review and revise, based on feedback, your reflection from playing RISK (if you have a chance play RISK again to see how your
decision making models have changed and include in your revised reflection).
C. For Module 3 review your Day 14 statement on teams, revise based on comments and also based on your reading on change management would you
now change what you would do to improve the team’s performance?
D. For module 4 revise the reflexivity reflection based on comments. Please consider how your own resistance to change impacted your engagement with
the exercise. If you look back at your columns, would you change your reframe now?
2 – Finally, in a two page (1 inch margins, single spaced, Times New Roman 12 point font) final reflection discuss the three most important things that you have
learned from the experience of this course and what do you think you will remember in 20 years?
Student final portfolios were graded by a single instructor. As it was a new assignment this year, it was difficult to determine the consistent rubric for the
assignment. However, the instructor was looking for the following items within each portfolio:
1. Were all part of the portfolio completed?
2. Did the student revise the first four modules based upon instructor feedback (improve the grammar, review again their assumptions, and challenge their
schedules?
3. Does the final paper illustrate that the student has accomplished the learning objectives of the course? Can the student document the supervisory skills that
they have learned in the course?
4. Does the student allow that their perceptions have changed (was the student open to change)?
Page 8