Academic Year of Report: 2010 - 2011
Department: Family and Consumer Sciences
College: CEPS
Program: Recreation and Tourism
Introduction
Students who graduate with a major or minor from the Recreation and Tourism Program are prepared to enter a profession which builds community, develops economies, and promotes sustainability. As of June 2011, the
Recreation and Tourism Program had approximately140 majors and 35 minors, similar to the previous year.
From Fall 2010 through Summer 2011, there were 47 degrees (Bachelor of Science in Recreation and
Tourism) granted in two specializations, Recreation Management, and Tourism Management.
This is the 4 th
program assessment to be submitted to the Office of Undergraduate Studies. In the first, June
2008, the RT Program report noted that an assessment system was just being developed, following a visit by external reviewers. The 2008 – 09 year was reported thoroughly in the June 15, 2009 Report and that assessment system was followed and built upon in 2010, using five objectives. Those five objectives are set out again in this 2010-2011 report, and therefore we are able to offer some comparative data from both one year and two years previously. While it is understood that not all objectives need to be reviewed every year, we are continuing to do so again this year. However, the strategies are more focused. During 2011-12, the
RT faculty is reassessing objectives, criteria, and reporting format. Faculty feel that programmatic goals that deal more directly with employer needs merit attention.
Some required courses within RT are “FCSG” (Family and Consumer Sciences General) which are undertaken by students in other majors within the Department that require similar competencies. While there were 5 FCSG courses implemented in Fall 2009, this experiment was not considered successful for all courses in all programs. As of a year later (2010-11), Recreation and Tourism is the only program utilizing all 5 courses (FCSG 220, 230, 320, 379, 419).
Faculty in Recreation and Tourism 2010-2011 were: Full-time tenured/tt: Dorothy Chase, Ken Cohen, Barb
Masberg totally in RT, and Rob Perkins (part RT, part FCSG). Adjuncts were Jeff Hagler and Jodi Hocter.
Table 1 shows ongoing assessment methods. Table 2 contains the five (5) objectives used in assessment beginning 2008-09, 2009-2010, and now 2010-2011. The assessment methods, participants, results and impact are documented (Table 3)
Tables 4 – 6 contain feedback from site supervisors’ evaluations of students on RT 292 Practicum (Table 4) and RT 490 Cooperative Education (Tables 5 & 6). Note that the data on Table 5 deals with students’ skills, while Table 6 deals with their dispositions. The pre-internship statistics on senior students’ importanceperformance perceptions were taken in 2009-2010, skipped in 2010-2011, and planned again for 2011-2012.
With a strong practical/internship program (6 credits of practicum and 12 credits of internship of 97 total) RT is able to take employers’ assessments as a strong external validation of whether skills taught in the curriculum are being demonstrated to a satisfactory workplace level according to the perceptions of supervisors in the field.
1

Table 1 How is Recreation and Tourism doing ongoing assessment?
RT’s Five Learner Outcomes
Use of feedback by faculty in RT
A.
Demonstrate familiarity with the major concepts and
In 2010 – 2011, faculty continued to analyze the placement of skills within courses and assessment thereof, resulting in not only changes to historical antecedents in recreation and tourism
B.
Demonstrate ability to the existing program, but also the proposal of a new specialization.
Assessment methods are rigorous and continue to be refined. For most outcomes, more than one method and sample are measured against a
C.
design encounters
Apply practices of management, marketing, and budgeting.
D.
Demonstrate professional practice to meet workplace standards criterion with the number (n) assessed. .
An Exit Survey (form) for graduating students has provided some data from entering professionals, but has proved challenging to collect.
Multiple layers of evaluation are collected on our RT practicum and intern students at various workplace sites. In 2010-2011, the tourism and recreation sectors of our advisory committees were formalized and they continue to provide valuable feedback on current and proposed programs.
A considerable volume of feedback on students (and, by association, on the RT program) comes in from a wide variety of employers. On average, faculty will receive 3 to 6 evaluations on RT majors and minors by worksite supervisors during each student’s time in the program.
A mission statement for the RT program is under development. There is expertise for this exercise within the faculty who teach leadership and
E.
Define and identify principles of sustainability organizational development.
Concepts of sustainability have been introduced into three required courses: RT 201 Introduction to Recreation and Tourism; RT 309
Sustainable Areas and Facilities; and RT 330 Sustainable Resources for
Recreation and Tourism. Applied projects elaborating sustainability are used in the two 300 level courses. Three elective courses, RT 355
Sustainable Tourism: Contemporary Issues; RT 398 Sustainable Tourism:
International Perspectives (faculty-led study abroad); and RT 471 Tourism
Planning and Sustainable Development. Students therefore are tested on sustainability concepts in the required (at a minimum) courses.
2

Table 2: Learner Outcomes Assessed in Recreation and Tourism
The Five Learner Outcomes of the
RT Program
A.
Demonstrate familiarity with the major concepts and historical antecedents in recreation and tourism
B.
Demonstrate ability to design encounters
Connection to
Family and Consumer Sciences (Department) Goals
Goal: Continue to improve student centered learning and the quality of the curriculum within the department’s programs.
Goal: Continue to improve student centered learning and the quality of the curriculum within the department’s programs
…Improve student learning by increasing applied learning and service education opportunities (syllabi and faculty self assessment)
C.
Apply practices of management, marketing, and budgeting.
D.
Demonstrate professional practices to meet workplace standards
Goal: Continue to improve student centered learning and the quality of the curriculum within the department’s programs
Goal: Continue to improve student centered learning and the quality of the curriculum within the department’s programs
…Improve student learning by increasing applied learning and service education opportunities (syllabi and faculty self assessment)
E.
Define and identify principles of sustainability
Goal: Continue to improve student centered learning and the quality of the curriculum within the department’s programs
College and University
CEPS & CWU Goals
Goal 1: Provide for an outstanding academic and professional growth experience for students at all
CWU locations. (CWU Goals 1,5)
Goal 1: Provide for an outstanding academic and professional growth experience for students at all
CWU locations. (CWU Goals 1,5)
Goal 4: Build mutually beneficial partnerships with alumni, industry, professional groups, institutions, and the communities surrounding our campus locations.
(CWU Goal 4)
Goal 1: Provide for an outstanding academic and professional growth experience for students at all
CWU locations. (CWU Goals 1,5)
Goal 1: Provide for an outstanding academic and professional growth experience for students at all
CWU locations. (CWU Goals 1,5)
Goal 4: Build mutually beneficial partnerships with alumni, industry, professional groups, institutions, and the communities surrounding our campus locations. (CWU Goal 4)
Goal 1: Provide for an outstanding academic and professional growth experience for students at all
CWU locations. (CWU Goals 1,5)
Goal 3: Prepare students to participate in an increasingly diverse economy and environment.
(CWU Goal 6)
3

Table 3: Assessment Methods, Participants, Results and Impact
RT Learner
Outcomes
What methods were used
A.
Demonstrate familiarity with the major concepts* and historical antecedents in recreation and tourism
*leadership,
RT 201 Introduction to RT: Objective
Exams
FCSG 220 Leadership in Human
Development ( RT 302 ): Scored on a presentation in which students analyze a particular “clientele” and accurately describe that group and applicable theory
Who and When was assessed? Criterion
Criterion: For 200 level courses, a minimum standard of 70% > in objective exams was set. programming, knowledge of field
FCSG 320 Program Management and
Planning (formerly RT 221 Programming) is a course offered for the second year 10-
11 with multiple majors.
FCSG 220. Professor
Rob Perkins.
FCSG 320 (formerly RT 221)
Criterion: group project presentations with grades
> 80%. Professor Rob
Perkins.
B.
Demonstrate ability to
FCSG 320 Program Management and
Planning (formerly covered under RT 221).
Students specifically learn the process of designing activities, a common thread
Criterion: group project presentations with grades
> 80%. Grades are based on an extensive rubric,
Results and Impact: What will the [program] do as a result of the
[assessment results]?
This criterion was met for RT 201 . Students are demonstrating familiarity with major concepts. A prior year’s scrutiny of the exams for RT 201 had determined that questions drawn from readings seemed to receive the lowest score. The solution chosen was to present a more active class, and to draw assignments from online sources, and greater use of internet research produced good results. In 2010-11, a single instructor used multiple guest speakers, including other faculty, to present the breadth of the field. A full class of orientation with all four faculty speaking offered students a broader look at the field and its supporting disciplines.
Final Grades: RT 201 Spring 2011 (n=55) Class Mean of 76.8%
Winter 2011 (n=66) Class Mean of 79.32 %
Fall 2010 (n=57) Class Mean of 83.63 %
In all three quarters of 2010-11, the criterion was exceeded.
[Historical Data:
Objective Final Exams
Spring 2010 (n=47) Class Mean of 74.7%
Winter 2010 (n=52) 68.1%
Fall 2009 (n=53) 71.55%
Fall 2008 (n=60) 75%
Winter 2009 (n=65) 72.5%]
FCSG 220.
Winter 2011. Class mean on group projects = 93% (n=35).
Criterion Met. Cases are now in development to determine a greater depth of understanding and to relate leadership concepts to professional life. The result on this criterion was similar to Winter 2010, when the class mean on group projects = 95% (n=34).
FCSG 320 Winter 2011: Class Mean project grade: 86%. The criterion was exceeded. Project planning software is under development in the course.
[ Historical Data:
Winter 2010; Class mean project grade: 93.4%. Criterion exceeded
Winter 2009: mean =79.7%; Winter 2010=93.4%; Fall 2008 (RT 221): mean
73.5%]
FCSG 320 . As above.
4

design encounters
C. Apply practices of budgeting, management, and marketing. between the recreation and tourism specialties; programming is an essential skill.
Multiple majors work in groups to envision, create, and (likely) produce a community encounter or event (e.g. Wheelchair
Basketball Tournament; Bark Park).
Students submit sections of the project, are assessed, allowed to rewrite and resubmit.
FCSG 220 Leadership in Human
Development. Students were scored on a project whereby they were required to connect leadership theory to practice through a specific group service-learning project (e.g. animal shelter; seniors’ event) including 360 evaluation.
Criterion: 200 level courses > 70%.
FCSG 220. As above. Leadership skills were extended with introduction of
RT 300.
Challenge Course Leadership in Spring 2010 as joint venture with
OPR. Spring 2011. Class mean on group project = 89.9 (n=24). This handson project has students designing and implementing encounters for various target groups using the facilities of a challenge course.
Students were graded on this event in terms of teamwork, process, and product. Student supervisors disciplined their teams. 360 feedback.
RT 374. Festivals and Events
First taught in Spring 2011, this course was developed to form part of a new specialization in Event Planning.
Students were required to work in teams to produce all aspects of a major public event; the Senior Banquet.
For RT 400 level courses:
Criterion is Mean > 80%.
The event produced by RT 374 included CWU officials, alumni and recognition given to “young professionals,” thus students received feedback from multiple, discerning audiences. It was very successful. Student
Project Managers & committees created and used an HR rubric of compliance. Project participation was 50% of overall grade.
BUDGETING: FCSG 230 Program and Event Budgeting (formerly included within RT 483). Budgeting project and objective exams (2)
RT 490 site supervisor evaluation Q 22.d. rate knowledge or ability in budgeting >4 on a 5 point scale.
Criterion: While FCSG
230 is a 200 level course, the criterion was set at
>80% mean on projects and exams (as budgeting was formerly included in a 400 level class in RT).
FCSG 230 Program and Event Budgeting was introduced for multiple majors Fall 09. Also as of Fall 09, Budgeting is now required of all RT majors in both the recreation and tourism specializations.
[Historical Data: Fall 09 Objective Exams class means were 90.96% and 93.5%.
Instructor made adjustments after the initial quarter and Winter 10 Objective Exams class means were 81.75 and 80.37. Class means in two projects for Fall 09 were
100% and 100% (n=36); and for Winter 91.65% and 93.9% (n=36).
On RT 490 evaluation of student performance, site supervisors again rated knowledge and/or ability of Budgeting as the lowest of the skills, at a 4 out of 5, along with Accounting as 3.94. A third of the evaluators (11 of 33) in
2010-11 rated budgeting and accounting as non-applicable to their internships, while RT 490 students’ (n=13) evaluation of the importance of skills done prior to interning placed Budgeting (2.84/5.00) lowest in importance, followed by Accounting (2.53/5.00) lowest. Students (n=11) self-assessing their own skills rated their skill level in Budgeting at
5

RT 480 Tourism Administration This capstone course requires students to do a senior project (“mini-thesis”) involving original research, data collection and conclusions that answer a management question. Writing and rewriting in stages is utilized and these projects were used to assess writing skills for 2010-11.
RT 488 Recreation Management
This capstone for Recreation specialists is offered in Spring quarter only. After
Spring 09, SEOI’s had indicated that students sought more “hands-on” experiences that would cap the course and give students the opportunity to apply theory. Several projects were included.
Criterion: >80% mean for 400 level course.
Senior projects are expected to be error-free and at or above B+ .
Students in RT 488
Criterion: >80% mean
(2.36/5.00) and Accounting at (2.18/5.00). Faculty need to continue to highlight the relevance of financial skills, especially for beyond-entry-level positions. The numerical ineptitude was addressed 09-10 with the introduction of a basic accounting BSED 146 within FCS, and FCSG 230
Budgeting. RT – Tourism specialty accepts either BSED 146 Accounting or
ACCT 301, but faculty encourage able students to take COB accounting and even to minor in Business. It may be that in taking the budgeting and accounting skills down to lower division levels, students’ knowledge is insufficient for their workplaces. This needs to be re-assessed by RT faculty.
It may also be that there is not time for students to learn site specific financial systems during an internship; further questioning of employers may yield insight here.
RT 480 Tourism: Class grades: Winter 2011 class (n=12) mean 85.83 %.
Spring 2011 (n=16) mean 84.13 %.
Spring quarter, only 12 of 16 written projects were at or above B+.
Senior projects: Original work included evaluations of tourism and recreation programs (e.g. Red Wine and Chocolate, Science Education and
Center for Excellence in Science, Performing Arts and Speaker Series,
Swiftwater marketing plan, Icicle Creek Musical Center, etc.) On average, writing levels were acceptable for a senior capstone only with grading feedback and rewriting. Verbal projects, including slide presentations of data and conclusions, received high scores.
Students were given opportunities for small group meetings to discuss theses and review written work. Faculty conclude that scheduled one on one tutoring sessions with instructor are really required for many students to produce closer to an A written project. This is feasible with small classes.
RT 488 Recreation :
Spring 2011: Class mean grades 82.77% (n=13).
The Mean on the objective quizzes was equal to 80.5% The score from their committee for the project demonstrated knowledge as the mean score
=95% However, the discrepancy between the application and knowledge indicates the necessity of more practice of theory. Additional focus will be made on emphasizing knowledge and providing opportunities for students to demonstrate their knowledge. A self-directed inventory of core competencies will be conducted by each student. Areas most in need of improvement will be identified and individualized projects that strengthen the identified core competency area will be developed in conjunction with the instructor. Each student will present the results of their progress on their selected core competency.
6

D. Demonstrate professional practice to meet workplace standards
RT 292 Practicum: Students majoring in the RT Program complete 6 credits of field experience (RT 292) A requirement for completion of RT 292 is a Site
Supervisor Evaluation at the completion of the experience (see Table 4 for complete results from Site Supervisor
Evaluation of the Student)
RT 490 Cooperative Education (12 credits) is also required. Two Site
Supervisor evaluations are required of students registered in RT 490; one at the midpoint and one at the completion .
Table 5 contains data addressing
Outcome C.
For both the evaluations above, a Likert scale asking supervisors to score the student based upon their agreement or disagreement with the item listed is used.
RT 292 Criterion: >4.0 mean on a Likert Scale
[while it is a 200 level course, see note regarding supervisors’ perceptions]
Students registered in
RT 490 (n=21)
Criterion: >4.5 mean on the Likert Scale
A requirement for completion of RT 292 is a Site Supervisor Evaluation at the completion of the experience (Table 4)
Two Site Supervisor evaluations are required of students registered in RT 490; one at the midpoint and one at the completion. Final evals tend to be higher and are reported in Table 6. In 10-11, faculty made learning objectives more stringent; piloted a competitive internship
Criterion 4.5> on a 5 point Likert scale.
Students registered in
RT 490 09 - 10 (n=21)
Criterion: >4.5 mean on a Likert scale
The following item is included on the RT 292 Final evaluation by site supervisors: Demonstrate competencies in planning, marketing, administration, risk/legal, budgets/accounting, leadership, information technology through core curriculum and approved electives . The mean score from the Likert scale was 4.5 (see Table 4). [Historical data: 4.54 in
2009-10 and 4.44 in 2008-09] This criterion was met. Additional work is being done in the reporting process for RT 292 to identify the courses students have completed prior to registering for RT 292 in order capture their level of competency on the items identified above. Also a revised evaluation form that breaks down content skills is slated.
In RT 490 , there are higher expectations, and the evaluation breaks down the management components. Table 5 contains data gathered from site supervisors about students’ abilities to demonstrate the following: Customer
Service, Programming events/activities, Supervision/Leadership, Budgeting,
Accounting, Risk Management, Promotion and Marketing, Planning,
Sustainability, Trends and Issues in the field, Computer technology (Internet,
Word Processing, Spreadsheets, promotional items, and organization computers)
For the hard skills (Question 22) ,once again in 2010-11, the >4.5 criterion was met only in by Customer Service at 4.58 (4.77 in 2009-10).
Computer skills were similar to the last two years with a 4.45 score in 5 areas of computer technology. The IT area overall at 4.45 is similar to last year (4.47). Students are required to take as part of their core requirements a course addressing Spreadsheets (i.e. IT 258) and one or two other computer applications courses above 101. Spreadsheets are ever more visible in the workplace, and pre-interns rated their importance at 3.3 (Table 7) but their current skill level at 2.82 (Table 8). Students are learning more IT as well through FCSG 320 and 420 and demonstrating flexibility, critical in the current climate.
Table 4 contains data gathered from a sample of students registered in RT
292 all three quarters of 2010-11. It is compared with data from last year.
All areas are above the 4.5 criterion. While presumably students are more able by the time they undertake the internship RT 490, it is postulated that supervisors of students in 200 level course are “kinder” in their evals.
Communication, scores improved to 4.63 from (4.20 in 2009) and (4.22 in
2010). This skill had been specifically addressed in 2010-11.
Table 6 contains data gathered from site supervisors about students registered in RT 490. The aggregate means for Professionalism, Performance and Attitude and Communication all met the criterion of achievement of 4.5 of 5 points this year. Communication was 4.52, up from 4.42 the previous
7

process with Suncadia that included 4 departments of the resort hotel; and encouraged some employers to be accurate and realistic, and not only encouraging, in their evaluations.
FCSG 379 Professional Development and
Internship Preparation was introduced in
Winter 2010 as a professional preparation course for multiple majors. For RT this replaced RT 275 (Career Development) and RT 475 (Professionalism). Half the grade in FCSG 379 is based on completion of a “preparation” portfolio and a “professional” portfolio.
The multiple major approach was not deemed successful for this particular class due to differing workplace cultures and internship and career opportunities. For
2010- 11, most students are RT.
Upon registration in RT 490 students are required to complete a self assessment of
Professionalism, Performance on the Job,
Attitude and communication. This was pilot tested in 09 and used Spring 10.
Criterion: As a 300 level course, grades
>80%. Student feedback sought on all new FCSG courses.
For 2010, Students registering for RT 490
(n=13 at an orientation meeting Spring 2010) year, though written communication is still < 4.5. Communication was also the lowest score in 2009; and in RT 292 evals. Action: RT expected to have access to a Business Communications course in 11-12, but this is postponed a year. RT will determine if it should be a required class. All RT faculty advertise the Writing Center on their syllabi. Students continue to score highest on willingness at 4.77 (4.81 last year), accepts responsibility at 4.74
(4.80 last year) and responds positively to supervision at 4.81 (4.9 last year), factors which make the students welcome at workplaces.
RT continues to use FCSG 379 (3 credits) for internship preparation and determined that a specific section on public speaking should be included.
While students are asked to make presentations in many classes, they are not trained to do so. For 2011-12, RT experiments with team teachers, one handling a full half of the course on public speaking and interpersonal communications.
Last year’s report suggested reintroducing a 200 level (1 cr) practicum preparation course with the rationale that majors approached internships without having completed their practicum credits first. Faculty will await the outcome of a new content approach in FCSG 379.
As prescribed in last year’s Program Assessment, pre-interns were asked to do assessments. At an orientation meeting for RT 490, students were required to complete an Importance/Performance survey. They first indicated the importance level of items in their internship placement (Table 7); and then self-assessed their own Professionalism, Performance on the Job,
Attitude and communication levels of skills and abilities (Table 8). There is a high correlation between perceived importance and perceived skill levels.
The highest rated attributes by seniors were dependability, willingness, and verbal communication. Lowest rated were budgeting, accounting, computer skills such as spreadsheets and graphics. An action for faculty based on both employers’ evaluations and students’ self-assessments is that a greater variety of skills and lower-rated skills should be stressed more in the learning objectives of RT 490 learning agreements.
8

E. Define and identify principles of sustainability
RT 309 Facility Planning and
Sustainable Design. Instructor evaluation of final project per rubric and peer evaluation utilizing 360 degree review criteria.
RT 330 Sustainable Resources for
Recreation and Tourism: Limits of
Acceptable Change Project Score Means of assessment: instructor evaluation of final project per rubric and peer evaluation utilizing 360 degree review criteria.
RT 398 Sustainable Tourism:
Contemporary Issues
Criterion: Final student project in RT 309 >
80%. Final grade class mean >80%.
Students registered in
RT 330 Spring quarter will achieve a criterion:
>80% on Limits of
Acceptable Change project. Students will achieve >80% class final mean in this upper division requirement.
This course allows students to see applications of sustainability in a variety of agencies in the RT field.
RT 309
Winter 2011 final grades – class average 84.92% (n=25)
Winter 2011 (n=) Final Project class mean %.
[ Historically: Winter 2010 (n=27) Final Project class mean 86%. Fall 2008 mean =83.3%
(n=21); Winter 2009: mean=81% (n-17)].
Criterion met over time. A tour of the new LEEDS facility on campus was integrated into the course. SEOI’s indicated that this new dimension assisted the students in successfully meeting the requirements for the final project. More students are expressing a desire for careers in RT that revolve around sustainable dimensions.
RT 330
Spring 2011 (n=46) class mean final grades was 81.59%, meeting criterion
>80%.
Spring 09 (n=15) class mean on LAC project 86.6%, meeting the criterion.
[Historically: Fall 2008: mean =83.0%]. What was learned: The original
Limits of Acceptable Change assignment assumed the students had greater understanding of the environmental dimensions of resource based recreation than they actually possessed. Therefore the LAC component was deemphasized as a stand- alone project and alternatively it was introduced as part of an adaptive management system. In place of the stand-alone LAC assignment, a field experience at Manastash Ridge was introduced for
Winter 2009 and students acknowledged that additional time in the field applying key concepts enriched their understanding of interrelated social interactions and environmental impacts. The course was re-evaluated on learning objectives, SEOI’s, and advisory board feedback, and a sustainable framework was formally adopted. Presently students are completing their
LAC final project utilizing a rubric. Scores from Spring 2010 and final artifacts will be assessed and refined. Based on the elevation of the project in terms of knowledge, skills, and application, it could be a service-based project culminating in a LAC report for Manastash’s land management agencies.
RT faculty converted this course from a special topic to a permanent elective
(RT 355) to give it more presence in the curriculum. Students explore ethical and operational dimensions of sustainable tourism. Students analyze media and make presentations clarifying what is being promoted and what is being done.
9

RT 498 Sustainable Tourism:
International Perspectives
A cross-section of RT students will participate in the international experience with a resulting emphasis on disseminating findings.
In June 2011, as in June 2010, twelve students traveled to Ecuador. Students utilized a matrix of key criteria for measuring sustainability, and incorporated these measurements into a final report. Students also kept reflective journals. Students shared their analysis and experience via
SOURCE presentations and presentations in RT courses
10

Table 4: RT 292 Practicum Site Supervisor’s
Final Evaluation of Student (scores 1 – 5 with 5 high)
Demonstrate professional practice meeting workplace standards
Dependability (attendance & punctuality)
Relationship with co-workers (cooperative, flexible)
Motivation (initiative, self-starter)
Attitude (accepts criticism, interest in personal and professional growth)
Judgment(common sense, maturity in decision making)
Organization/Efficiency
Communications Skills (oral and/or written)
Demonstrate ability to effectively produce and manage projects and activities in diverse groups
Demonstrate critical, conceptual and analytical thinking skills
Demonstrate competencies in planning, marketing, administration, risk/legal, budgets/accounting, leadership, information technology through core curriculum and approved electives
Customer Service Skills
Overall Mean
Fall 2011
Results from
2010- 2011
Means (n=39)
4.72
4.7
4.8
4.7
4.75
4.7
4.68
4.5
4.86
4.71
4.63
4.76
4.77
4.54
4.77
4.62
4.42
4.55
4.48
June 2010 June 2009
Results Results
From 09 -10
Mean (n=31)
From 08 - 09
Mean (n = 39)
4.63 4.85
4.52
4.74
4.61
4.80
4.64 4.58
4.74
4.55
4.90
4.78
4.73
4.50
4.49
4.56
4.63
4.44
4.51
4.63
11

Table 5: RT 490 Cooperative Education - Site Supervisor Evaluation Data (addresses RT Outcome C)
Final Evaluation n Not Final Evaluation Final Evaluation
(scores 1 – 5 with 5 high)
Mean (n = 33)
2010 - 2011 appli- cable
Mean (n=21)
June 2010
Mean (n = 16)
June 2009
Q 22. Demonstrates knowledge and/or ability in the following areas: 4.22 4.21 4.64 a.Customer Service
4.58 0
4.74 4.88 b.Programming events/activities
4.37 2
4.44 4.53 c.Supervision/Leadership 4.11 3 4.33 4.57 d.Budgeting
4 11
4 4.55 e.Accounting
3.94 12
3.86 4.55 f.Risk Management
4.3 11
4.17 4.79 g.Promotion and Marketing 4.13 8 4.4 4.69 h.Planning 4.37 6 4.19 4.60 i.Sustainability
4.24 8
4.11 4.77
4.17 6 j.Trends and Issues in the field 4.27 4.53
Demonstrates effective use of computer technology:
Word processing
4.45
4.53 2
4.47
4.4
4.61
4.64
Spreadsheets
4.41 4
4.27 4.67
Graphics/Promotional Document Production 4.27 8 4.6 4.43
4.5 2
Internet Research
Shows aptitude for learning the organization computer system
4.52 2
4.63
4.47
4.69
4.64
Overall Mean
12

This data covers a student’s disposition as well as his/her professional practice in a work environment.
Table 6: RT 490 Site Supervisor Evaluation Data addressing Disposition and Professional Performance
(Outcome D) (scores 1 – 5 with 5 high)
Final
Evaluation
Means (n = 33)
2010 - 2011
Final
Evaluation
Mean (n=21)
June 2010
Final
Evaluation
Mean (n = 16)
June 2009
Professionalism Mean
4.6 4.67 4.78
1.Dependable (attendance & punctuality)
4.62
4.76 4.56
2.Professional behavior and appearance
4.48
4.38 4.63
3.Assists fellow workers and exhibits teamwork 4.64 5 4.88
4.Demonstrates sound judgment
4.42
4.24 4.81
5. Has appropriate rapport with clients/guests
4.52
4.71 4.81
4.81
6. Responds positively to supervision
7. Follows organization policies and procedures 4.74
4.90
4.71
4.88
4.88
Performance on the job Mean
4.51 4.57 4.70
8.Demonstrates willingness to learn the job
4.77
4.81 4.81
9.Generates high quality work products/activities/events
4.5
4.67 4.75
10.Solves problems well
4.26
4.43 4.63
11.Works efficiently
4.51
4.43 4.69
12.Works independently without close supervision 4.58 4.62 4.63
13.Takes initiative when appropriate
4.42
4.48 4.69
14.Is actively engaged
Attitude Mean
4.65
4.63
4.72
4.62
4.84
4.81
15.Relates well to supervisor(s)
4.63
4.76 4.81
16.Is receptive to suggestions/criticism
4.65
4.86 4.94
17.Accepts added responsibility willingly
4.74
4.80 4.75
18. Accepts responsibility for own actions
4.61
4.67 4.88
Communication Mean
19. Communicates well in writing
4.52
4.45
4.42
4.22
4.55
4.20
4.56
4.45 4.88 20.Communicates well verbally
21. Takes information and ideas and is able to draw conclusions
(analytical) 4.56 4.6 4.56
13

Table 7. Class Means: Perceptions of the Importance of skills and attributes to pre-interning seniors
(n=13)
Very shortly, you will embark on your RT 490 Internship. The internship will be a highlight of your RT program. As you think about specific skills and attributes that you will use and practice at your worksite, certain skills may seem more important than others. Please rate items as most (5) or least important (1).
A. As an intern, my demonstration of Professionalism Data collected in June 2010
4.75 1.
Dependable (attendance & punctuality)
2.
Professional behavior and appearance
3.
Assists fellow workers and exhibits teamwork
4.
Demonstrates sound judgment
4.75
4.58
4.85
4.8 5.
Has appropriate rapport with clients/guests
6.
Responds positively to supervision
7.
Follows organization policies and procedures
4.38
4.69
B. As an intern, my performance on the job
8.
Demonstrates willingness to learn the job
9.
Generates high quality work products/activities/events
10.
11.
Solves problems well
Works efficiently
12.
Works independently without close supervision
13.
Takes initiative when appropriate
4.76
4.69
4.61
4.61
4.38
4.53
C. As an intern, my attitude at the workplace
14.
Is actively engaged
15.
Relates well to supervisor(s)
16.
Is receptive to suggestions/criticism
17.
Accepts added responsibility willingly
18.
Accepts responsibility for own actions
D. Skills Demonstrated by me as an Intern
4.53
4.23
4.23
4.53
4.84
19.
Communicates well in writing
20.
Communicates well verbally
21.
Takes information and ideas and is able to draw conclusions (analytical)
3.84
4.84
4.15
22.
Demonstrates knowledge and/or ability in the following areas: a) Customer Service 4.69 b) Programming events/activities c) Supervision/Leadership d) Budgeting e) Accounting f) Risk Management g) Promotion and Marketing
4.53
4.07
2.84
2.53
3.53
3.07
4.15 h) Planning i) Sustainability j) Trends and Issues in the field
3.00
3.23 k) Computer Technology: Demonstrates effective use of the following:
Word processing 4
14

Spreadsheets
Graphics/Promotional Document Production
Internet Research
Aptitude for learning the organization’s computer system
3.30
2.92
3.69
3.84
Table 8.
Class Means: Perceptions of personal levels of skill and attributes to pre-interning seniors
(n=11)
Instructions to participants: This form is a pre-internship self-assessment. You will use many skills in your internship. Some skill areas will be strengths of yours; others may be weaknesses. This form is meant to be a
SELF-ASSESSMENT. Where do you think you stand right now? (Important note: This is NOT an evaluation on you. It is a self-assessment. There is nothing at all to be gained by rating yourself higher than you think you are). It is a measurement for the program; it is not personal to you. Rating of 5 is excellent; 4 good; 3 average; 2 marginal; 1 poor; n/a (n=11)
Data collected in June 2010
Intern demonstrates professionalism
1.Dependable (attendance & punctuality)
Scale to 5
4.64
2.Professional behavior and appearance
3.Assists fellow workers and exhibits teamwork
4. Demonstrates sound judgment
5.Has appropriate rapport with clients/guests
4.36
4.45
3.82
4.36
6.Responds positively to supervision
7. Follows organization policies and procedures
Intern’s performance on the job
8.Demonstrates willingness to learn the job
9. Generates high quality work products/activities/events
10. Solves problems well
11. Works efficiently
12.Works independently without close supervision
13.Takes initiative when appropriate
Intern’s Attitude at the Workplace
14.Is actively engaged
15.Relates well to supervisor(s)
16.Is receptive to suggestions/criticism
17.Accepts added responsibility willingly
18.Accepts responsibility for own actions
Skills demonstrated by intern
19.Communicates well in writing
20.Communicates well verbally
21.Takes information and ideas and is able to draw
4.45
4.27
4.7
3.9
3.73
4.27
3.91
4.1
4.55
4.55
3.64
3.91
4.55
3.91
4.55
3.27
15

conclusions (analytical)
22.a.Customer Service b. Programming events/activities c. Supervision/Leadership d.Budgeting e.Accounting f.Risk Management g.Promotion and Marketing h.Planning i.Sustainability j.Trends and Issues in the field
Word processing
Spreadsheets
Graphics/Promotional Document Production
Internet Research
Aptitude for learning the organization’s computer system
3.55
3.55
3.18
3.18
3.64
2.82
2.91
4.2
3.37
4.27
3.73
3.82
2.36
2.18
3.36
16