Assessment Report
July 1, 2009 – June 30, 2010
Program(s) Assessed: Psychology B.A., B.S., Minor
Assessment Coordinator: Martin P. Gooden, Ph.D.
I. Assessment measures employed
A. Learning objectives for both the Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) and Bachelor of Science
(B.S.) degrees were assessed via surveys. Psychology majors rated the degree to
which the curriculum provided opportunities to meet each learning objective.
Surveys were distributed in class to seniors taking their second capstone
(Psychology 487) course. Overall, 98 majors responded.
B. Program outcomes were assessed via surveys measuring enrollment in postgraduate education, employment status, and the application of knowledge of
psychology to their life experiences. Surveys were mailed to psychology
graduates following summer, fall, winter and spring graduation. Ninety-seven
graduates responded.
C. The degree to which students in advanced courses demonstrated previously
acquired knowledge, skills, and abilities was assessed via surveys administered to
faculty instructing advanced special topic research methods courses for 53 B.S.
students and the second capstone course for 129 seniors.
D. The degree to which the curriculum provided Psychology minors opportunities to
gain knowledge of psychology and to apply that knowledge was assessed via
surveys mailed to minors following graduation. Unfortunately, no minors
responded.
II. Assessment findings
A. Graduates earning either a B.A. or B.S. degree in psychology were asked to
indicate how much (1 = not at all through 5 = very much) the curriculum provided
opportunities to achieve each program learning objective (N=98).
Objective 1: Be familiar with current theory and research in diverse areas of
psychology.
Response: Nearly 93% of the respondents answered 4 or 5 (M=4.41, SD= 0.70)
indicating they agreed the curriculum provided opportunities to accomplish this
outcome. Mean comparisons from the previous year (2008-2009) indicate a nonsignificant increase (M=4.27, SD= 0.63, N=72), t(168)=1.34, p>.1.
Outcome 2: Have fundamental research design and mathematical/statistical skills
needed to understand psychological science.
Response: Nearly 91% of the respondents answered 4 or 5 (M=4.29, SD=0.84)
indicating they agreed the curriculum provided opportunities to accomplish this
outcome. Mean comparisons from 2008-2009 indicate no significant change
(M=4.12, SD= 0.74), t(168)=1.37, p>.1.
Outcome 3: Have skills in integrating and communicating about knowledge in
self-selected areas of psychology.
Response: Nearly 93% of the respondents answered 4 or 5 (M=4.56, SD=0.63)
indicating they agreed the curriculum provided opportunities to accomplish this
outcome. Mean ratings from 2008-2009 show a marginally significant increase
(M=4.38, SD= 0.67, N=72), t(167)=1.79, p<.08.
Outcome 4: Have skills in effective oral and written communication.
Response: Almost 92% of the respondents answered 4 or 5 (M=4.53, SD=0.65)
indicating they agreed the curriculum provided opportunities to accomplish this
outcome. Comparisons to mean ratings from 2008-2009 showed a marginally
significant increase (M=4.34, SD= 0.66, N=72), t(167)=1.87, p<.07.
Outcome 5: (applicable only to B.S., N=40): Have advanced research design,
mathematical/statistical, and computing skills needed to critically evaluate and
conduct research in a self-selected area of interest.
Response: Only 70% of respondents answered 4 or 5 (M=3.78, SD=1.10)
indicating they agreed the curriculum provided opportunities to accomplish this
outcome. Mean ratings from 2008-2009 reveal a non-significant decline (M=4.10,
SD= 0.74, N=31), t(69)=1.39, p>.1.
Suggestions for improvements:
Over this past year, performance in Learning Outcomes 1 through 4 has
improved, although this change was not statistically significant. The increases
were in contrast to the trends observed from the 2008 to 2009 academic year.
Learning Outcome 5, however, continues to decline. The drop on this objective
(from 2007-2008 levels (M=4.65)) suggests that student and teacher expectations
regarding the importance of these courses vary. An alternative approach to
delivering value based on statistical and computation skill development may be
warranted.
Similar to previous years, student comments continue to call for a wider array of
course offerings, particularly in the areas in which they might develop tangible
skills. Despite the frustrations, students want more hands on training in writing,
giving oral presentations, and statistics. “Real world” applications to the theories
and insights reflected in the curriculum would also be welcomed. Numerous
students expressed the need for more personally relevant course material. The
suggestion here was that students do not fully appreciate how they might apply
what they have learned from their courses. More practicum and research
opportunities may help to address these concerns. In addition, problem-centered
activities that require students to collaborate may also be helpful in getting
students to develop this appreciation.
Consistent with previous years, some student comments suggest a low interest in
the value of research methodology, computing courses, and math. This trend
appears to be reversing however. An examination of the number of students
enrolled within the major, and the distribution across the 2 degree-types (B.A. vs.
B.S.), has revealed a steady increase in the number of students electing to pursue
the more rigorous B.S. degree (see Table 1). From Fall 2006 to Fall 2010, the
number of B.S. majors rose an incredible 436%! During the same period, the
number of B.A. students declined by 24.6%. Clearly many more students are
taking an interest in the field.
Table 1.
Qtr/YR
B.A.
F06
F07
F08
F09
F10
410
329
279
259
309
B.A.
Intent
49
30
49
44
75
B.A.
Total
459
359
328
303
384
B.S.
61
157
234
299
327
B.S.
Intent
118
146
183
160
152
B.S.
Total
179
303
417
459
479
Total
638
662
745
762
863
Ratio B.S. to
B.A. Majors
12.95%
32.30%
45.61%
53.58%
51.42%
Ratio B.S. to
B.A. Total
28.06%
45.77%
55.97%
60.24%
55.50%
Some of the reasons for the growth of the undergraduate program may be the
efforts of the Psychology Undergraduate Program (PUP) Office. In addition to
serving the advising needs of existing students, the PUP office team actively
recruits students from within and outside of the university. Through the many
outreach initiatives sponsored by the College of Science and Math as well as the
University, the psychology department plays a prominent role in the promotion of
psychology to prospective students. As a STEM discipline, psychology is
promoted as a diverse field that sits at the intersection of all facets of human
expression. Whether the topic is mental health or human performance,
intelligence or creativity, whether the application is business, criminal justice,
military preparedness, or intergroup conflict the connections from psychology to
many areas of human endeavor carries a very persuasive appeal to the undecided
student. The PUP office team is not only equipped to help the department attract
more students, they are an important resource in helping students identify areas
where they might pursue their respective interests in the field (e.g., graduate
school, employment)
The PUP office continues its alliance with the undergraduate student
organizations, Psi Chi (the Psychology Honor Society) and the Psychology Club.
Student members of these organizations and PUP office staff collaborate on a
number of activities including recruiting events, hosting workshops, graduate
student and faculty panels, colloquia, and professional conferences.
B. Findings regarding B.A. and B.S. program outcomes based on the postgraduation survey.
Graduate School Enrollment (N=97): 6.25% reported they are currently enrolled
in or have been admitted to a graduate program or a professional school. This
figure represents a significant decline from those who reported being admitted to
a graduate program in the 2008-2009 calendar year (30% from a total N=28),
z=3.16, p<.05.
Employment (N=97): 8.24% reported they had received and accepted an
employment offer. Although this percentage represents a decline from the 20082009 calendar year (18% from a total N=28), it is not statistically significant
(z=1.02, p>.3).
Application of Knowledge (N=95): 72% answered 4 or 5 (M=3.97 SD=1.03)
indicating they agreed they have been able to apply their knowledge of
psychology to the issues they have confronted in education, employment, and
interpersonal relations. A comparison of the mean ratings from 2008-2009
indicate that the increase is not statistically significant (M=3.66, SD= 1.17, N=29),
t(122)=1.37, p>.1.
C. Findings regarding learning outcomes based on faculty rating the degree (1=
not at all; 3= satisfactory; 5=excellent) to which each student demonstrated
specific knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSA) acquired in previous courses.
Faculty instructing five advanced special topics methods courses rated B.S.
students.
KSA 1: Be able to design a sound psychological study (N =53).
Response: Faculty rated 73.58% of the students as 4 or 5 indicating they had
sufficiently met this objective (M=4.16, SD=.78). Comparisons to mean ratings
from 2008-2009 showed no change (M=4.22, SD= .79, N=52), t(103)=.39, p>.7.
KSA 2: Be able to analyze data (N = 53).
Response: Faculty rated 69.81% of the students as 4 or 5 indicating they had
sufficiently met this objective (M=4.00, SD = .65). Comparisons to ratings from
2008-2009 showed no change (M=4.07, SD= 0.83, N=11), t(103)=.48, p>.6.
KSA 3: Ability to communicate findings effectively (N = 54).
Response: Faculty rated 66.67% of the students as 4 or 5 indicating they had
sufficiently met this objective (M=4.02, SD =.79). Comparisons to ratings from
2008-2009 showed no change (M=4.13, SD= .92, N=52), t(104)=.66, p>.5.
Faculty instructing 16 capstone courses rated students taking their second
capstone class (N= 126).
KSA 1: Have knowledge of current theory and research in diverse areas of
psychology
Response: Faculty rated 75.61% of the students as 4 or 5 indicating they had
sufficiently met this objective (M=4.15, SD= 0.60). Comparisons to ratings from
2008-2009 showed no change (M=4.14, SD= 0.72, N=108), t(232)=.16, p>.8.
KSA 2: Fundamental skills in critically evaluating theoretical concepts, research
design, and data analysis.
Response: Faculty rated 75.19% of the students as 4 or 5 indicating they had
sufficiently met this objective (M=4.08, SD = 0.71). Comparisons of mean
ratings from 2008-2009 indicate no change, (M=3.94, SD= 0.82, N=108),
t(232)=1.4, p>.1.
KSA 3: Effective communication skills including skills for writing literature
reviews and empirical research reports following the American Psychological
Association Manual of Style, and skills for participating in seminars and making
oral presentations following accepted standards for scientific conferences.
Response: Faculty rated 77.95% of the students as 4 or 5 indicating they had
sufficiently met this objective (M=4.08, SD= 0.74). Comparisons to mean ratings
from 2008-2009 indicate no significant change (M=4.08, SD= .78, N=108).
D. Findings for the psychology minor. *
Objectives: Graduates earning a minor in psychology were asked to indicate how
much (1 = not at all through 5 = very much) the curriculum provided
opportunities to be familiar with current theory and research in self-selected areas
of psychology. They were also asked to indicate how much (1 = not at all
through 5 = very much) they had been able to apply their knowledge of
psychology to issues in education, employment, and interpersonal relations.
Unfortunately, none of the minor students returned surveys.
III. Program improvements
In its fifth year of existence, the Psychology Undergraduate Program Office
continues its active involvement with campus and community resources to enrich
the academic, research, and practicum opportunities available to undergraduate
students.
IV. New assessment developments
Plans are underway beginning in Fall 20010 to administer all assessment student
surveys electronically. Our expectation is that this will significantly minimize
costs, time, a low response rate, and errors.