Goal 2
Objective 2.1 - Develop, align, and review program learning outcomes to assure a cohesive curricular
and co-curricular experience that enhances student learning.
Progress on Objective 2.1
1. Program learning outcomes1 have been developed and approved for all academic
programs with the exception of the Associate of Arts Degree (the Curriculum Committee
has established a taskforce to develop a set of proposed outcomes for the A.A. Degree
which will then be presented to the Curriculum Committee, Faculty Council and the
College Learning Council).
2. In Destination 2009, 11 program learning outcome assessment plans were developed
and implemented in the Spring of 2010. Student artifacts were collected and assessed
on May 6, 2010. The academic programs or General Education discipline areas involved
in this work include:
 Speech (General Education)
 Comp 1 (General Education)
 Humanities (General Education)
 Mathematics (General education)
 Science (General Education)
 U.S. Government (General Education)
 Accounting Technology (A.S. Degree)
 Medical Office Administration (A.S. Degree)
 Office Administration (A.S. Degree)
 Building Construction and Technology (A.S. Degree)
 Computer Information Technology (A.S. Degree)
 Architecture (A.A. Pre-Major)
Faculty Assessment Coordinators representing General Education Disciplines and A.S.
Program areas are currently working with the Learning Evidence Team to support the
implementation of these plans in Spring 2011. The implementation process will include
the documentation of the assessment process in WEAVEonline.
3. In Destination 2010, 27 program learning outcomes assessment plans were developed
and will be implemented in the Spring of 2011 – additional program areas or disciplines
1
Program Learning Outcomes - The measurable behaviors or performances that students will be able to
demonstrate at the completion of an academic program of study. (Program Learning Outcomes are often
confused with Program Outcomes – Program Outcomes maybe indirect measures of student learning but they are
primarily measures of program effectiveness such as completion or graduation rates, academic performance at
transfer institutions, job placement rates, etc.)
are working on revised assessment plans based on lessons learned from the
implementation and assessment of plans in the Spring of 2010. The A.S. Programs or
General Education disciplines areas involved in this work include:
 Speech (General Education)
 Comp 1 (General Education)
 Humanities (General Education)
 Mathematics (General Education)
 Science (General Education)
 U.S. Government (General Education)
 Sociology (General Education)
 Librarians (Contributing to General Education)
 Digital Media for Video & Motion Graphics (AS Degree)
 Entertainment Design & Technology (AS Degree)
 Film Production Technology (AS Degree)
 Graphics Technology (AS Degree)
 Music & Sound Technology (AS Degree)
 Accounting Technology (AS Degree)
 Medical Office Administration (AS Degree)
 Office Administration (AS Degree)
 Paralegal Studies (AS Degree)
 Building Construction Technology (AS Degree
 Dental Hygiene (AS Degree)
 Diagnostic Medical Sonography (AS Degree)
 Emergency Medical Services Technology (AS Degree)
 Radiography (AS Degree)
 Respiratory Care (AS Degree)
 Landscape and Horticulture Technology (AS Degree)
 Computer Information Technology (AS Degree)
 Architecture (A.A. Pre Major)
 Dance Performance (A.A. Pre Major)
 Theater, Drama/Dramatic Arts (A.A. Pre Major)
4. The Learning Assessment Committee (under the direction of the College Learning
Council) has developed a Program Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan Template
(attached). The template was tested during Destination 2010 and is now being
considered by the Faculty Council and the College Learning Council for draft approval.
The template is based on best practice literature in learning outcomes assessment and
will bring greater consistency to assessment planning, implementation and discourse at
Valencia. A flow chart has also been developed for both Academic Affairs and Students
to guide the development, approval and implementation of assessment plans
(attached).
5. The Faculty Council has recently developed, approved and presented for Board of
Trustee approval a new plan for the Institutional Effectiveness component of the Faculty
Compensation Plan. The new plan (attached) is focused on the development of
program learning outcome assessment plans, plan implementation and use of results for
improvement. The basic language of the plan is below.
By May 13, 2012, all academic programs (list attached) will have implemented
an assessment plan that has been approved by the Learning Assessment
Committee (LAC). Approval of each assessment plan will be based on principles
of good assessment practice determined by the Assessment Plan Template
developed by the LAC and approved by the College Learning Council.
In order for the faculty, collectively, to be eligible to receive the
Institutional Effectiveness (IE) component that is in addition to their normal
salaries in Fall 2012, 90% of all of the academic programs (listed below) must
have developed faculty approved improvement plans. These improvement plans
will be based on the learning assessment data compiled from each academic
program’s assessment plan.
Objective 2.2 - Increase the percentage of students writing at the college level.
No baseline data for this objective is currently available
Progress on Objective 2.2
1. In the Fall of 2006, Faculty teaching Gordon Rule Writing reinforcement classes
approved a common outcome for the writing component of their classes –
“Students will demonstrate college-level writing.” At the same time the faculty
approved the use of the Learning Evidence Team Rubric for Written Communication
as standard for assessing college level in their classes (attached).
2. In the Spring of 2007 faculty teaching English agreed to abandon the use of the exit
exam for ENC1101 and replace it with a common assessment of college-level writing
using approved rubric for Written Communication (see attached). Their articulated
rationale for the new process is below.
Based on the premise that discipline based assessment activities at Valencia
should be consistent from one campus to the next, we have done away with the
exit exam for ENC 1101.
In order to promote the continuous improvement of our program, we propose a
college-wide assessment activity in which a pool of randomly selected papers
would be holistically scored once a year by full and part-time faculty. This
process would allow for substantive conversations among faculty and within
departments on strategies to improve the quality of the work our students are
doing. Our hope is that this process will serve as a model for a similar
assessment process for Gordon Rule courses and allow us to better track the
progress of our students.
3. The process described above has been attempted over the past 4 years with varying
degrees of success and the process has served as a model for other disciplines
including Gordon Rule Humanities classes. The implementation of the new process
has raised a variety of questions needing further reflection before agreement can be
reached about the nature of student ability. These questions include:




The relationship between rubric score and grades.
Expectations about student performance at the conclusion of ENC1101 (the
first college writing class a student takes at Valencia.
The kinds of assignments capable of allowing a student to demonstrate
college level writing.
The role of research and appropriate documentation in a college level
paper.