Central Washington University
Assessment of Student Learning
Department and Program Report
Please enter the appropriate information concerning your student learning
assessment activities for this year.
Academic Year of Report: 2010-2011_____________ College: CEPS_________________
Department: TEACH_________________ Program: Elementary_______________
1. What student learning outcomes were assessed this year, and why?
In answering this question, please identify the specific student learning outcomes you
assessed this year, reasons for assessing these outcomes, with the outcomes written in clear,
measurable terms, and note how the outcomes are linked to department, college and university
mission and goals.
This fall saw a new configuration, leadership, and responsibilities for the Elementary
Council. This group now has the power to direct studies, evaluations, and program change,
acting as a department coming together. This is a difficult task for 2/3 of the classes
within this program are housed outside the influence of TEACH. We are making our way through
vision and goals. Being asked to reflect upon the assessment of those at this point in our
history is premature. We have identified 5 goals and the relationship to the CTL and
university goals, the methods and timing of assessments and the needed criteria. (attached)
however this document has just been completed and not yet approved by the Group. We see
ourselves in a much better place next year to fully respond to these questions.
The Elementary Education Program assessed one programmatic goal this year: Understanding of
Learners and Their Communities; Teaching Candidates possess a deep understanding of the
development and learning of children and young adolescents from diverse learning. This
program goal supports the related CTL goal of teacher candidates demonstrating understanding
of meeting the diverse needs of learners and it further supports the related University goal
of promoting diversity and multicultural opportunities.
This goal was chosen because we wished to learn if our students were being exposed to
diversity during field experiences within our methods classes.
2. How were they assessed?
In answering these questions, please concisely describe the specific methods used in
assessing student learning. Please also specify the population assessed, when the assessment
took place, and the standard of mastery (criterion) against which you will compare your
assessment results. If appropriate, please list survey or questionnaire response rate from
total population.
A) What methods were used?
B) Who was assessed?
C) When was it assessed?
This goal was assessed within two of the three classes that are directly under
the Department of TEACH, EDEL 323 Teaching Elementary School Mathematics and
EDEL 420 Social Sciences in the Elementary.
We looked at the opportunities for experiences with elementary students in
these two classes over three quarters Winter 2011, Spring, 2011, and Fall
2011, a total of approximately 300 students.
Data was collected as to the total number of opportunities for interaction
within a diverse setting.
Diverse setting being described as a variety of age, exceptionalities, and/or
culture.
3. What was learned?
In answering this question, please report results in specific qualitative or quantitative
terms, with the results linked to the outcomes you assessed, and compared to the standard of
mastery (criterion) you noted above. Please also include a concise interpretation or analysis
of the results.
Out goal: Students will have multiple opportunities to interact in diverse settings which was
defined as 50% of the audience would represent diversity: age, culture, and/or
exceptionality. Those experiences that indeed met the criteria are noted in red.
EDEL 323
Mathematics
2 sections/qt
EDEL 420 Social
Studies
2 sections/qt
Winter 2011
Ellensburg
Selah
Yakima
George
peers
Peers
Spring 2011
Ellensburg
George
Peers
Fall 2011
Ellensburg
George
Yakima
Peers
Peers
Peers
100% student participation
Of these; we have saw offering diversity of ages from pre K-adult, diversity
in cultural environments (Hispanic) and socio-economic diversity represented.
Most concerned with experiences only with peers for these tend to lack
diversity as defined.
We concluded that we had limited information, needed a survey to determine
comfort and knowledge of the students.
4. What will the department or program do as a result of that information?
The Elementary Program has requested all classes within program to complete a table noting
all required field experiences. In addition they are being asked to note all additional
experiences that may be offered dependent upon instructor.
In the future, we will survey teacher candidates preparedness to interact within a diverse
field setting spring of 2012. We believe student’s who have taken EFC’s multicultural
education will have a greater understanding of diversity. We seek to understand the
background experiences and knowledge prior to the field experience and the level needed for
success.
5. What did the department or program do in response to last year’s
assessment information?
In answering this question, please describe any changes that have been made to improve
student learning based on previous assessment results. Please also discuss any changes you
have made to your assessment plan or assessment methods.
This fall saw a new configuration,, leadership and responsibilities for the Elementary
Council. This group now has the power to direct studies, evaluations, and program change.
We reviewed last year’s report and found it lacking in direction. We have used the goals
outlined in past years and will continue to tweak and internalize. This is process of
ownership is new to us.
We also found that the attached document does not truly define our needs and needs monthly
reflection by the program.
6. Questions or suggestions concerning Assessment of Student Learning at
Central Washington University:
Some professional development as to how our program can do a yearly program
review for our needs that will also meet yours would be wonderful! I have
been writing reports for the report itself and not as a cohesive process.