CENTRAL NEW MEXICO COMMUNITY COLLEGE
ASSESSMENT REPORT
Due to SAAC by October 15
PART 1: CONTACT & PROGRAM IDENTIFICATION
Report Year and Contact Information:
2014-2015
Academic Year
Hope T. Ecksel
Contact Person
hecksel@cnm.edu
Email
505-224-4000x32123
Phone Number
Subject of this Assessment Report:
Program:
Sampleton Inputology
X Certificate
AA
Gen Ed Area:
AS
X AAS
Applicable to:
Discipline Area:
AA/AS
AAS
PART 2: EVIDENCE OF OVERALL PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS
Summary of Program Successes:
Sampleton Inputology saw a 12% increase in new enrollments during the past year, thought to be due in part to our new partnership with ComputaCorp. We
modified our curriculum to address the company’s key training concerns, and in return they implemented a scholarship to pay half of their employees’ tuition.
Because the ComputaCorp students bring to the classroom their job-related experiences, this partnership has enriched classroom discussions. We expect it to
ultimately lead to increased persistence, graduation, and job placement rates as well. Fall-to-fall persistence has been around 50% in recent years, graduation
around 38%, and we have set a goal to increase these to 60% and 45%, respectively, over the next three years. Graduate employment during the first 6
months following graduation hovers around 73%, and we hope to increase that to 85% within the next 5 years. We think these goals are reasonable due to the
growing demand for inputology skills in the field. Our program is uniquely prepared to fill this niche within New Mexico, and we hope that doing so might
attract more industry to the area.
Description and Evaluation of Recent Changes Made in Support of Student Learning:
The curriculum revisions implemented in the fall of 2014 appear to have been influential in increasing student success rates on the licensing exam. We only
have one year’s results so far, but we intend to monitor future results to see if the increase is sustained.
Assessment Report
Page 1 of 4
Last Revised 03/2015
PART 3: REPORT ON RECENT ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING
Student Learning Outcome(s) Assessed:
Classes/Cohorts Assessed:
To add rows: right –click in cell below and select “Insert,” “Insert Rows Above”
Apply compulary concepts to create a fully functional inputology program.
INPT 2033 and INPT 2041 (concurrent enrollment)
Resolve multi-layer output breakdowns through input revisions.
OTPT 2099
Coordinate multiple compulary strategies through collaborative caliperation.
INPT 1076, 1077, and 2011
Measurement Tool(s) Used:
Initial Achievement Target or Expectation:
Final exams
X
Group projects with peer evaluations
X
Indirect
X
Direct
Compulary inputology portfolio project
External
To add rows: right –click in cell below and select “Insert,” “Insert Rows Above”
Internal
Enter X’s for type of tool
X
We expected all INPT 2033 students to demonstrate at least 75%
implementation of compulary concepts through portfolio artifacts, with
70% of INPT 2041 projects resulting in fully functional programs.
X
Our initial achievement target was that 80% of students would correctly
identify solutions for output breakdowns on the OTPT 2099 final and that
70% of students would correctly answer the embedded output questions
on the INPT 1076, 1077, and 2011 finals.
X
We expected to see 95% of peer evaluation ratings on collaboration and
teamwork at the 3 or 4 level on a scale of 0-4.
Assessment Findings:
INPT 2033 students demonstrated a 79% success rate in implementation of compulary concepts through portfolio artifacts. However, only 65% of INPT 2041
projects resulted in fully functional programs. The results on the INPT 2041 projects may have been influenced by changes we had recently made in the
problems presented, which require prerequisite learning that is now part of the first-year curriculum (most of these students having completed the first year
under the old curriculum).
In OTPT 2099, 82% of students correctly identified solutions for output breakdowns on the OTPT 2099 final, but only 62% of students correctly answered the
embedded output questions on the INPT 1076, 1077, and 2011 finals.
We used a common peer evaluation rubric for group projects across all of the first-year courses and in INPT 2011, and we found that only 81% of the first-year
students rated received ratings of 3 or 4 and only 75% of INPT 2011 students received ratings of 3 or 4. We disaggregated the data to look for demographic
and course differences but found none.
Assessment Report
Page 2 of 4
Last Revised 03/2015
Analysis and Interpretation of Assessment Findings:
Given the potential misalignment of the measure used and this years’ student preparation (described above), we are not concerned about this graduating
cohort’s ability to apply compulary concepts to create a fully functional inputology program. The faculty had observed through their interactions with the
students in INPT 2041 and INPT 2099 that the students grasped the compulary concepts well enough but lacked practice in practical application at the INPT
2041 level, practice which they later got in INPT 2099.
The lower-than-expected performance on the embedded test questions, all of which involved problem solving through application of concepts and skills,
appears to be a result of gaps in students’ understanding regarding caliperation. While this might be expected at the INPT 1076 level, we think students should
have had sufficient exposure to caliperation inputs by the time they reach INPT 2011 to solve those problems. We reviewed our course curriculum in INPT
1077 and identified a source of confusion in the chapter that bridges caliperation inputs and outputs.
We anticipated that peer ratings would be inflated due to reluctance to give classmates critical feedback, so these lower than expected ratings suggest that
our students are not adequately applying the collaborative skills we are emphasizing as industry basics. We considered the possibility that classroom dynamics
or unintended cues from instructors were causing students to rate their peers more harshly than the instructors would have, but the instructors’ perception
was that the peer ratings closely corresponded to their own observations of the group dynamics. In many instances, instructors had reason to believe that the
bulk of the work was completed by just one or two of the group members.
Action Plan in Support of Student Learning:
The faculty who teach INPT 1076 will develop supplemental materials and include an additional problem-solving activity to reinforce the bridging of
caliperation inputs and outputs. We will follow up with the same assessment next year to see if the changes result in higher next-level performance in INPT
2011.
We are making additional course changes to include training in industry-related collaboration skills, using a scaffolded model that will engage students in
increasingly demanding team problem-solving activities. We will follow up with the same peer evaluation instrument next year to see if the students are doing
a better job of internalizing this competency.
Recommendations, Proposals, and/or Funding Requests:
The program faculty have observed that the integration of formative assessment activities prior to assignment of group activities reinforces collaborative skill
application. To better facilitate the type of formative assessments that the faculty want to use and better document the results, funding for a clicker system is
requested.
Assessment Report
Page 3 of 4
Last Revised 03/2015
PART 4: EMBEDDED OUTCOMES
Critical Thinking and Life Skills/Teamwork Development within Programs:
a) Please describe how Critical Thinking assessment is embedded within your program assessment.
b) Please describe how Life Skills/Teamwork assessment is embedded within your program assessment.
a) Critical thinking skills are most directly embedded in the program outcome “Resolve multi-layer output breakdowns through input revisions,” which is
assessed in OTPT 2099, using problem-solving activities on a final exam.
b) Life skills and teamwork are fundamental to students’ ability to coordinate multiple compulary strategies through collaborative caliperation, which we assess
through peer evaluations and final exam performance in multiple courses.
PART 5: ASSESSMENT CYCLE PLAN (Copy and paste from original plan if unchanged)
Cycle Years:
Plan Description:
2014-2019
In alignment with the CNM vision of changing lives and building community, Sampleton Inputology aims to produce graduates who are fully
prepared to enter and contribute productively to the growing demands for innovation and leadership within the inputology industry. Our
assessment approach, therefore, focuses on measuring proficiency in problem-solving ingenuity and collaboration as well as industry concepts
and skills. We are updating our assessment plan to include two additional years of assessment related to collaboration.
Student Learning Outcomes:
1.
Apply compulary concepts to create a fully
functional inputology program.
When Measured:
Where Measured:
How Measured:
2014-15, 2015-16 and
2016-17
INPT 2033 and 2041 and
internships
Compulary inputology portfolio project and
supervisor evaluations in internships (which
will begin in 2016-17 with ComputaCorp)
2. Resolve multi-layer output breakdowns through
input revisions.
2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 OTPT 2099 and INPT 2333
and 2018-19
Final exams
3. Coordinate multiple compulary strategies through
collaborative caliperation.
2014-15, 2015-16, 2017-18 INPT 1076, 1077, 2011,
and 2018-19
2141, 2151, and 2090
Group projects with peer evaluations
4. Create original, innovative solutions that relate to
inputology industry problems. (Degree only)
2016-17, 2017-2018 and
2018-19
Capstone projects, summative portfolio
review, oral exam, and employer survey
Assessment Report
Page 4 of 4
OTPT 2299 and INPT 2399
and employer mailing
Last Revised 03/2015