2014-2015 Annual Program Assessment Report
Please submit report to your department chair or program coordinator, the Associate Dean of your College, and to james.solomon@csun.edu, director of
assessment and program review, by September 30, 2015. You may, but are not required to, submit a separate report for each program, including graduate degree
programs, which conducted assessment activities, or you may combine programs in a single report. Please identify your department/program in the file name for
your report.
College: Health and Human Development
Department: Kinesiology
Program:
Assessment liaison: Teri Todd
1.
Please check off whichever is applicable:
A. ___X_____ Measured student work.
B. _______ Analyzed results of measurement.
C. ________ Applied results of analysis to program review/curriculum/review/revision.
2.
Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s). On a separate sheet, provide a brief overview of this year’s assessment activities, including:
 an explanation for why your department chose the assessment activities (measurement, analysis, and/or application) that it enacted
 if your department implemented assessment option A, identify which program SLOs were assessed (please identify the SLOs in full), in which classes
and/or contexts, what assessment instruments were used and the methodology employed, the resulting scores, and the relation between this year’s
measure of student work and that of past years: (include as an appendix any and all relevant materials that you wish to include)
 if your department implemented assessment option B, identify what conclusions were drawn from the analysis of measured results, what changes to the
program were planned in response, and the relation between this year’s analyses and past and future assessment activities
 if your department implemented option C, identify the program modifications that were adopted, and the relation between program modifications and
past and future assessment activities
 in what way(s) your assessment activities may reflect the university’s commitment to diversity in all its dimensions but especially with respect to
underrepresented groups
 any other assessment-related information you wish to include, including SLO revision (especially to ensure continuing alignment between program
course offerings and both program and university student learning outcomes), and/or the creation and modification of new assessment instruments
Preview of planned assessment activities for next year. Include a brief description and explanation of how next year’s assessment will contribute to a
continuous program of ongoing assessment.
3.
Overview of Annual Assessment Projects:
The primary assessment project was to assess SLO 2, a second project was undertaken in conjunction with the College of HHD
to assess interns competence.
SLO 2
i) The Department of Kinesiology’s 5 year assessment plan outlined assessment activities for the current period. SLO 1 was assessed
in 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. The 5-year plan stipulated that SLO 2 should be assessed 2014-2015.
ii) Kinesiology has four options and one major (Athletic Training). Each option aligned their required undergraduate courses with the
Program SLOs. This year we measured SLO 1: Apply an integrated kinesiological approach to encourage the adoption of healthy and
physically active lifestyles, across diverse populations.
Program
Student Learning Outcomes (P-SLOs)
1. Apply an integrated kinesiological approach to encourage the adoption of healthy and
physically active lifestyles, across diverse populations.
Undergraduate
2. Apply evidence based practices to enhance the study of human
movement.
3. Demonstrate competent problem solving strategies through intentional practices.
4. Demonstrate knowledge of kinesthetic forms, processes and structures as they apply
to the personal expression and culture of human movement.
SLO 2 was assessed both indirectly and directly. To begin the assessment we wanted to better understand how SLO 2 is addressed in
Kinesiology courses. All faculty and lecturers were asked how they addressed SLO 2 in their courses and to provide examples on how
SLO 2 was evaluated. Instructors from 16 courses provided their syllabi and examples of how SLO 2 was addressed and evaluated.
Courses represented all levels ranging from 100 to 600, however only undergraduate courses were used in this analysis. In total 81
different undergraduate courses were offered by the Department of Kinesiology in the Spring 2015 semester, 34 of those courses were
2
100 level activity classes. The convenience sample included five 100 level activity courses and fifteen 200 to 400 level courses; there
was a mix of required and elective courses. Following is a list of courses from which information on SLO 2 was obtained.
Required courses
KIN 305
KIN 446
KIN 306
KIN 478
KIN 364
KIN 494
KIN 377
Elective courses
KIN 133
KIN 236
KIN 311
KIN 410
KIN137
KIN 242
KIN 313
KIN 417
KIN143
KIN 315
KIN 420
KIN 148
KIN 149
Instructors provided information on how SLO 2 was presented in the course. Additionally instructors were asked to provide
instructions and grading rubrics for activities used to evaluate student knowledge/performance in relation to SLO 2. A variety of
activities emerged which are summarized below:
COURSE LEVEL
Content Presentation Format
Activities
Evaluation
100 (Activity courses)
-
200
300
-
-
Direct instruction and
practice
Readings
Direct instruction
Direct instruction of
evidence-based
techniques
Theoretical constructs
through readings and
lecture
-
Performance
-
Skills evaluation
Written exam
-
Performance
Practical application of
evidence based
practices
Case studies
Class discussion
-
Skills evaluation
Practical exams
Practical application
Written exams
Written papers
requiring research
articles
Analysis of novel skill
acquisition
Written assignments
requiring synthesis and
-
400
-
Lecture
Readings
-
Case studies
Written assignments
-
3
-
Discussion
Small group activities
-
-
including analysis of
research and theories
Practical application
with pre/post
assessments
Program design
-
-
integration of research
and theory
Analysis of results of
practical application of
evidence based practice
Evaluation of program
design
This SLO was directly assessed though the evaluation of a short essay written by students in an upper division Kinesiology class KIN
477/478. An essay prompt was provided. This was a pilot project to assess the prompt, both from student understanding of the prompt
and if the prompt provided the information we need to assess if students have acquired knowledge in this area. The essays were scored
against a rubric designed to evaluate student knowledge, critical thinking, and written communication.
Essay Prompt: Explain the term ‘evidence-based practice’ and describe when you would use this type of practice. Please give an
example of using an evidence based practice including type of practice, setting used, and result.
The essays were assessed using a rubric designed to evaluate the following criteria: 1) synthesis of information pertaining to the
question, 2) validity of the information provided, 3) completeness of the answer, 4) quality of writing, and 5) flow within the essay.
The assessment was given to students as a readiness activity in two sections of KIN 477, a core course that is considered a capstone
course for Kinesiology. Sixty-eight essays were completed and scored. Each area of assessment was scored on a 3-point scale:
unacceptable (1), acceptable (2), or exemplary (3). Three Kinesiology professors volunteered to score the responses, they met and
reviewed the rubric. Scorers were given the opportunity to practice by reviewing several responses, this continued until 85% reliability
was obtained for all scorers. Graphs showing the percentage of students in each category for each criteria may be found in Appendix
A.
The analysis show that overall about 60 to 65% of the students had a reasonable concept of evidence-based practices [EBP] and
application of EBPs. Criteria 1 Synthesis of subject 11% of the students scored in the exemplary category, 51.5% acceptable, and
37.5% unacceptable. Analysis of content of the responses was similar with 15% of students providing exemplary responses, 47%
acceptable and 38% unacceptable. Completeness of answer showed the same pattern. Writing mechanics, quality and flow, showed
sightly more students in the exemplary and acceptable categories combined (quality of writing 75% and flow 66%).
4
Further analysis revealed several common errors in the responses which included: stating that EBPs were for medical use only;
misinformation on the origin of EBP, and situations in which EBPs should be used. These errors will be shared with instructors so
they may be addressed with students in the future. In reviewing syllabi and assignments is appears that EBPs are often taught
indirectly and students may not realize that they are learning about and using EBPs. In reality many, more than the 60% of students
use EBPs during laboratories and internships. Strategies to improve students understanding of the concept and use of EBPs may be
discussed with faculty.
This was a pilot assessment, the two part prompt was designed to find out if students could explain what an EPB was while the second
part was aimed towards application of EBPs. The first part of the essay prompt elicited knowledge of EBPs while the second part
focused on application. Students often answered the second part of the prompt with general applications, for instance “a doctor would
prescribe Tylenol to decrease the risk of stomach bleeding” instead of referring to their own practice or a technique learned in a
Kinesiology class. The prompt will be edited before further use to focus on the application of EBPs on kinesiology related practices.
Additionally instructors will be asked to outline activiites and evaluations that relate to specific SLOs on their syllabi. Though syllabi
were reviewed it was difficult to discern how SLO 2 was addressed and evaluated. Clarification in the syllabi will lead to the ability to
assess how SLOs are addressed and evaluated in a greater number of courses.
Comportment/Ethical/Cultural Competency Assessment
The CHHD assessment committee developed a survey to assess ethical and professional standards and cultural competencies. The
surveys were to be completed for students completing internships in their junior or senior years. Supervising precepts completed the
surveys. Forty-two surveys were completed for students in Kinesiology. The completed surveys were forwarded to the HHD College
assessment coordinators.
The first part of the survey included 40 statements is related to HHD SLO 1 Ethical and Professional Standards. The survey seeks
information on aspects of comportment, work habits, professional demeanor, conflict resolution skills, leadership skills, and effective
communication, as well as ethical competencies. The second part of the survey is related to HHD SLO 2 Cultural Competencies.
There are nine statements related to cultural competence. The survey can be found in the Appendix B. Precepts were asked to rate the
degree to which the student intern met that statement using a 5-point scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5).
The majority of responses were in the strongly agree and agree categories. Interestingly 31% of the precepts reported that interns were
not expected to apply principles of evidence-based practice when making professional decisions and solving problems nor engage in
5
sound scientific inquiry or critical analysis (SLO 1 Questions 1 & 2) in their settings. The majority of precepts rated all items in the
comportment section as strongly agree (5) for forty-seven percent (47%) of the surveys, an additional 34% of the surveys received a
mix of strongly agree (5) and agree (4) ratings on all statements. However precepts indicated that 17% of the interns had some degree
of difficulty with certain comportment items. Precepts reported problems (1-3 on scale) most frequently with punctuality and
dependability followed closely with lack of initiative, problems complying with dress code and maintaining an appropriate workplace
appearance, and willingness to consider and accept constructive criticism and feedback. When compared to the survey results of
2013-2014 there is a slight improvement with fewer comportment problems reported. Additionally there was improvement in the item
about inappropriate use of technology, with only one precept indicating a problem for one intern.
Survey results were positive with regards to the HHD Ethical Code. Seventy-eight percent of the completed surveys rated the students
in the highest category (Strongly Agree 5) for all statements under the Ethical section and 22% in category 4, Agree.
Precepts rated the interns favorably for cultural competency. Eighty-two percent of surveys were completed with strongly agree (5)
for all cultural competency items. An additional 14% of surveys were completed with strongly agree and agree (4-5). Only four
percent of the surveys indicated some difficulty in the cultural competence area. As with the Professional and Ethical Standards
section the results from this year show a slight improvement from 2013-2014.
Overall the survey results are favorable. Faculty, specifically the internship coordinator, will be made aware of potential problem areas
which may addressed prior to the start of the internship. The internship coordinator was given this information last year and addressed
the issues during mandatory internship meetings. Though the improvements were slight they are meaningful as the majority of the
intern sites are consistent over the years, so the change can be attributed to intern performance.
6
Appendix A:
Kinesiology SLO 2 Assessment Results
Synthesis of Subject
100
R
P
e
e
s 50
r
o p
c
f o
e
0
n
n
sUnacceptable
Acceptable
t
Exemplary
…
Validity of Facts
R
P
e
e
s
r
o p
c
f o
e
n
n
s
t
…
Completeness of Answer
R
e
P
s
e
p
r
o
o
c
f
n
e
n
s
t
e
s
100
50
0
Unacceptable
Acceptable
Exemplary
100
50
0
Unacceptable
Acceptable
Exemplary
Quality of Writing
R
e
P
s
e
p
r
o
o
c
f
n
e
n
s
t
e
s
100
50
0
Unacceptable
Acceptable
Exemplar
7
Flow
R
P
e
e
s
r
o p
c
f o
e
n
n
s
t
…
100
50
0
Unacceptable
Acceptable
Exemplary
8
Appendix B: HHD Assessment of Ethical and Professional Standards and Cultural Competence Frequencies, Spring 2015
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
STRONGLY
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT AGREE
AGREE
STRONGLY AGREE
NOT APPLICABLE
1. Applies principles of an evidence based practice when
making professional decisions and solving problems.
2. Engages in sound scientific inquiry and critical analysis.
2
5
18
15
2
5
18
15
3.
1
6
33
2
SLO 1: ETHICAL AND PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS
DISAGREE
PRACTITIONER’S CODE
Demonstrates the codes of conduct expected at the work site.
COMPORTMENT CODE: DRESS & APPEARANCE
4. Complies with workplace dress codes
5. Maintains an appropriate workplace appearance
2
9
33
2
4
33
4
COMPORTMENT CODE: WORK HABITS
9
6. Is punctual (arrives and departs on time) and has regular
(vs. irregular) attendance
7. Shows initiative and can begin/complete tasks
effectively with minimal direction
8. Is dependable and completes tasks and deadlines in a
timely manner
9. Adheres to agency/organization policies, rules, and
regulations (e.g. works within boundaries set by
supervisor and/or management; adheres to chain of
command for problems and decision making)
10. Demonstrates appropriate use of technology (cell phone
use, texting, email, etc.)
11. Has ability to adapt to changing demands (copes well
with unexpected problems/pressures)
1
1
17
26
2
3
12
24
4
4
16
22
2
10
28
4
17
25
9
35
16
28
2
1
COMPORTMENT CODE:
PROFESSIONAL DEMEANOR/RAPPORT
12. Has a pleasant, positive demeanor
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
STRONGLY
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT
AGREE
AGREE
STRONGLY
AGREE
NOT
APPLICABLE
DISAGREE
13. Demonstrates appropriate rapport with clients
14. Demonstrates an appropriate rapport with colleagues &
coworkers.
15. Is willing and able to work cooperatively and effectively
with others.
16. Demonstrates willingness to consider & accept
constructive criticism and feedback.
17. Is able to accept and implement instructions and/or
suggestions offered by supervisor
HUMAN RELATIONS CODE:
CONFLICT RESOLUTION SKILLS
1
12
18
2
6
32
8
34
2
8
31
1
5
34
13
10
18. Controls ones emotions and behaviors in a conflict
situation.
4
15
19
19. Listens attentively to other opinions or views.
6
16
16
20. Shows respect of others.
6
31
4
18
14
22. Establishes a dialogue to negotiate.
6
14
17
23. Focuses on what can be done to resolve conflict.
5
16
16
4
9
26
25. Demonstrates commitment to the mission, goals and
vision of the workplace.
26. Establishes healthy lines of communication.
2
10
29
1
20
19
27. Motivates and inspires others.
1
19
17
1
28. Empowers others.
1
19
17
1
21. Effectively explains one’s opinion or view.
3
HUMAN RELATIONS CODE: LEADERSHIP SKILLS
24. Shows initiative in taking on new responsibilities.
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
STRONGLY
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT
AGREE
AGREE
STRONGLY
AGREE
NOT
APPLICABLE
DISAGREE
HUMAN RELATIONS: EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION
SKILLS
29. Ensures others feel heard and understood.
1
13
19
6
11
30. Responds appropriately to nonverbal cues.
1
14
18
5
31. Is aware if others understand what they need to know.
1
14
24
32. Is articulate and exchanges information that others can
understand.
2
15
24
33. Uses correct grammar in all verbal and non-verbal
correspondence.
1
7
19
13
34. Follows protocol that is designed to benefit others.
11
20
9
35. Shows strict adherence to HIPPA regulations to
maintain confidentiality and privacy of others.
5
35
36. Follows protocol when seeking informed voluntary
consent.
4
20
37. Does not engage in fraud, deceit, or misrepresentations.
4
37
38. Does not engage in harassment or inappropriate sexually
related behaviors with others.
4
37
39. Does not engage in conflicts of interest.
4
37
40. Does not engage in practices that could harm others.
4
37
ETHICAL CODE
16
12
SLO 2: CULTURAL COMPETENCIES
1
2
3
4
5
N/A
STRONGLY
DISAGREE
SOMEWHAT AGREE
AGREE
STRONGLY AGREE
NOT APPLICABLE
DISAGREE
1. Does not discriminate against others.
2
39
2. Treats others with dignity and respect.
2
39
3. Recognizes and acts upon cultural factors that affect
health and well-being of others.
2
24
4. Demonstrates ability to interact effectively with people
of different cultures.
2
39
2
37
1
6. Demonstrates ability to assess one’s cultural biases and
assumptions for all cultural contexts.
3
22
16
7. Demonstrates knowledge of evidence based literature
regarding the potential cultural disparities in the health
and well-being of culturally diverse individuals and
families.
4
21
15
8. Exhibits caring, compassion and empathy.
3
38
9. Effectively communicates in a culturally competent
4
39
5. Engages with community partners to promote a healthy
environment and healthy behaviors for all cultural
contexts.
1
15
13
manner.
14