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: __2011-12_ College: ____CEPS________
Department ____PESPH_______ Program: ___Public Health Education_______
1.
What student learning outcomes were assessed this year, and why?
Our student learning outcomes reflect the Certified Health Education Specialist’s (CHES) Areas of
Responsibility, and imply core competencies for entry-level health educators as well as for further study if students choose to pursue such study.
This year we chose to assess three process/skills-based outcomes, reflecting CHES Responsibilities
1, 4, and 7
1 – Students will conduct & formally present a needs assessment
4 – Students will evaluate a strategy, intervention or program
7 – Students will be able to communicate & advocate for health & health education
In addition to these outcomes, as a program team our active engagement in working with students demonstrates our program’s commitment to departmental strategic planning emphases. The two examples below also strongly reflect university core values. We explored our current status related to these two commitments as part of our AY2011-12 assessment.
1.
Undergraduate research
2.
Cultural competence & diversity/inclusivity
2.
How were they assessed?
A) What methods were used?
B) Who was assessed?
C) When was it assessed?
Performance on course project rubrics: The table on the next page provides results for each outcome, including numbers of students. (See Appendix 1 “Public Health Student Learning
Outcomes Assessment Plan” for a summary of methods and classes in which assessments took place.) Students were assessed as part of the normal classroom grading protocols.
Participation at SOURCE, other presentation abstracts, and manuscripts: Program students
assessed, number participating in mentored undergraduate research projects that require work
beyond that required for graded course credit.
Responses to exit survey item re departmental diversity: Faculty are committed to demonstrating and ensuring our students emerge with these skills and values as part of their programmatic context and perceptions of our department; thus, in our exit survey we asked students to rate the department’s performance as related to requiring, developing, building, and facilitating student awareness and understanding of diversity and multiculturalism.

3. What was learned?
Data summary appears in the table below for the three Student Learning Outcomes assessed.
For the additional research and cultural competence assessments, results are as follows:
1.
Undergraduate research: Two poster entrants (total of three students) at SOURCE
(including one award winning poster), one successful submission (two of the three
SOURCE students) to the Joint Conference on Health; one faculty co-authored student publication (5 other students) in a refereed national student monograph.
2.
Cultural competence & diversity/inclusivity: All student ratings “B” or better (ratings provided by 12 students to date).

1.
Student Learning
Outcome
1. Students will conduct & formally present a needs assessment
4. Students will evaluate a strategy, intervention or program.
7. Students will be able to communicate & advocate for health & health education.
Criterion of Mastery Assessment Venue & Result
Assessment Project: 90% of student projects will qualify for at least “good” on a 4-pt rubric (i.e. Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs Work) signifying demonstration of ability to design an assessment project; use practical validation tools/skills; implement the assessment; analyze collected data; and report results, including a literature review in support of study.
Program Evaluation Report: 90% of students will qualify for at least “good” on a 4-pt rubric (i.e. Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs Work) signifying demonstration of ability to analyze evaluation data and report findings, including suggestions for programmatic improvement.
Advocacy Portfolio: At least 90% of students will earn a
“good” or better on all components of the rubric (i.e.
Excellent, Good, Average, Needs Work) attached to the portfolio project. Project components will include a background/rationale for advocacy strategies to improve a particular population health outcome, a letter to the editor, an op/ed piece, and an exploration of an advocacy-focused agency or organization related to the issue.
HED 330
Fall 2011 - 24 students
75% scored at least good (an 80% on rubric) – criteria of 90% not met
Winter 2012 - 17 students
64% scored at least good - criteria of 90%
not met
HED 473
Spring 2012 - 45 students
30 in sectn 1 - 93% scored at least good – criteria of 90% met
15 in sectn 2 – 66%% scored at least good
– criteria of 90% not met
HED 450
Winter 2012 - 29 students
100% scored at least good – criteria of
90% met

4. What will the department or program do as a result of that information?
This was again a working year for our program in terms of assessments and curriculum revision.
We anticipate continuing in our process of enhancing our curriculum, which is already tighter, more specific to needs, and will allow our students to continue to meet with success.
1.
This year, we are exploring ways to strengthen our Outcomes using language we see as more measurable and active.
2.
In addition, our results for outcomes 1 & 4 may tell us something about determining student competence in producing a needs assessment or evaluation may not be accurately assessed by “good” in the rubric which can sometimes reflect components affected by the group work dynamic rather than skill-reflecting work toward the multifaceted project as a whole.
3.
We continue to look at ways to improve our curriculum, including connections between classes, and between classes and the “real world” our students will face as entry-level professionals.
4.
We continue to utilize our in-house expertise in developing and implementing more meaningful assessments of our program.
5.
We requested the participation of all graduates in an exit survey, and plan to spend time together as a team in early 2013 to explore findings from it as well as ways to institutionalize participation so that all students provide feedback in future years.
6.
We are establishing a system of interviewing students as they graduate from our program. We will utilize various social media for this project, and work to ensure we hold interviews with all graduating students.
7.
We are continuing work around a Dispositions/Professionalism outcome.
8.
Our program continues to grow and develop. We continue to place students in nursing programs, in jobs, and in public health related and other graduate programs across the country, and will be working as a program to formalize our data systems around graduates’ status.
5. What did the department or program do in response to last year’s assessment information?
We rewrote Programmatic Assessments and Student Learning Outcomes. Based on the assessments from last year, we developed all new assessments. They reflect the use of rubrics, exit interviewing, and also reflect stronger community/campus collaboration for our students.
These can be found in Appendix 1. This work represents extensive review and collaboration in developing this assessment. We are excited about enhancing our use of rubrics and other methods next year, and recognize the challenge we face in ensuring consistency of rigor and expectations across sections and courses.
Based on our new program goals, we are working actively to make the “match” between goals and course strategies. As is relevant for goal especially #3 - Collaboration: Community/Campus partners are actively engaged in program activities, events, and enhancement - we are, for example, successfully working with outside partners to pursue projects that include a funding base and/or student dissemination opportunities (HED 330) and/or stable offerings of meaningful service-learning hours for students (HED 230)
As can be seen in the table showing results for Question 3, we have improved our report to show numbers of students in courses and sections, as has been suggested in past feedback.
As noted above in Question 4, we have developed and implemented an exit survey designed to compare graduates’ perceptions with our results of direct assessments. By including openended questions, the survey strengthens our results by providing a semi-qualitative component not available in the direct, rubric- and grade-based assessments.

6. Questions or suggestions concerning Assessment of Student Learning at Central Washington
University:
There is no opportunity for the Program to include a narrative of the accomplishments and growth within the program in the assessment. We teach our student the value of BOTH quantitative AND qualitative evaluation. I would encourage additional questions or opportunities to report this type of data:
Comments:
The Public Health Program continues to devote extensive efforts to its process internally in terms of curriculum. The community/campus partnerships that were forged in creating opportunities for our curriculum to be based on actual implementation instead of contrived scenario are exceptional and growing in strength and sustainability. An example is the HED 330 class HSRCapproved assessment projects. Each year students in HED 330 have an opportunity to create, administer, analyze, and report results of an assessment of their peers. This year, for the third time, students presented at SOURCE and at a regional conference; other students saw their work on a manuscript come to fruition in a national publication. Getting the chance to take HED 330 project results to an “above and beyond” class work level and collaborate with faculty to submit presentations and publications is phenomenal for our students, in particular as more and more of them consider and pursue graduate school.

Public Health Programmatic Outcomes and Assessments (AY 2011/2012)
Department/Program
Goals
1. Students will be prepared to enter the field of Public Health by demonstrating the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed for success.
2. Faculty and students will remain current in the Public Health profession.
Related
College
Goals
Goals 1 and 2
Goals 2 and 2
Related
University
Goals
Goal I
Method(s) of
Assessment (What is the assessment?)
Portfolio review of
Student Learning
Outcomes artifacts and internship artifacts; capstone internship preceptor evaluations.
Who/What
Assessed
(population, item)
All senior students
Goals V and VI
Conference attendance, papers published, presentations given at conferences, trainings attended; services provided to university, profession, and community.
Faculty and students
When
Assessed
(term, dates)
Initial review at mid-term of internship, and again on completion of the internship
Fall, Winter,
Spring, and
Summer terms
Criterion of
Achievement
(Expectation of how good things should be?)
All students will provide artifacts for all seven
Student Learning
Outcomes and materials they may have created during their internship, including evaluation by supervisor; all students will successfully complete their internship experience
All faculty will participate in some form of scholarship (Category
A or B) annually; all faculty and 10% of students will attend at least one state, regional, national, or international conference annually.
Department/Program
Goals
Related
College
Goals
Related
University
Goals
Method(s) of
Assessment (What is the assessment?)
Who/What
Assessed
(population, item)
When
Assessed
(term, dates)
Criterion of
Achievement
(Expectation of how good things should be?)
Results for
2011-2012
We will be working as a program team to develop processes to determine results of
Goal 1 assessments
Faculty are striving to meet the assessment of this goal, as is evident in reappointmen t materials.
Data will be made available here as it becomes available for each faculty member and as regards student data.
Results for
2011-2012

3. Collaboration:
Community/Campus partners are actively engaged in program activities, events, and enhancement.
Goals 1, 2, and 4.
Goals I, IV,
V, and VI.
Number of courses and projects that include community/campus partners; advisory board meeting minutes.
Curriculum,
Attendance at
Advisory
Board
Meetings
Fall, Winter,
Spring, &
Summer terms
100% of our core process courses have a community/campus collaborative component
(HED 230, 330, 422,
440, 471, 472, 473, 475);
At least one advisory board meeting per academic year.
Discussed in response to
Question 5

Student
Learning
Outcomes
(performance
, knowledge, attitudes)
1. Students will conduct
& formally present a needs assessment
2.
2. Students will plan an effective education strategy, intervention
Related
Program/
Departmental Goals
Appendix 1
CWU Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Plan Preparation Form (AY 2011/2012)
PESPH; Public Health Education Program
Related
College
Goals
Related
University
Goals
Method(s) of
Assessment
(What is the assessment?)*
Who assessed
(Students from what courses – population)**
When
Assessed
(term, dates)
Standard of
Mastery/Criterion of
Achievement (How does performance have to be?)
Goal 1 Goal 1 Goals 1
& 2
Assessment
Project
HED 330
Goal 1 Goal 1 Goals 1
& 2
PRECEDE
Model Writeup
HED 471
Fall,
Winter
Fall
90% of student projects will qualify for at least “good” on a 4-pt rubric (i.e.
Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs
Work) signifying demonstration of ability to design an assessment project; use practical validation tools/skills; implement the assessment; analyze collected data; and report results, including a literature review in support of study.
90% of students will obtain a
“good”
on a 4 pt. rubric (i.e.
Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs
Work) for all

or program.
3. Students will implement a health education strategy, intervention, and program.
Goal 1 Goal 1 Goals 1
& 2
Wellness
Program
HED 472
PRECEDE model components: Phase
1- Social
Assessment, Phase
2- Epidemiological
Assessment, Phase
3- Educational &
Ecological
Assessment, Phase
4- Administrative &
Policy Assessment
& Intervention
Alignment
Winter
90% of students will obtain a
“good” on a 3pt. rubric (i.e.
Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs
Work
) for all components related to implementation of the wellness project. These components include: 1) Mission
Statement, Goals,
Objectives, 2)
Budget and Timelines, 3) Marketing
Materials, 3)
Intervention plans and Theoretical
Constructs, 4)
Implementation,

3.
4. Students will evaluate a strategy, intervention or program.
5.
5. Students will be able to administer health education strategies, interventions,
& programs.
6. Students will be able to serve as a health education resource person.
Goal 1 Goal 1 Goals 1
& 2
Goal 1 Goal 1 Goals 1
& 2
Goal 1 Goal 1 Goals 1
& 2
Evaluation of the Wellness
Fair
HED 473
Grant
Application
Environmen tal Blog
HED 475
HED
320 and 5) Wellness project evaluation
Spring 90% of students will qualify for at least
“good”
on a 4-pt rubric (i.e.
Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs
Work) signifying demonstration of ability to analyze evaluation data and report findings, including suggestions for programmatic improvement.
Spring A minimum expectation is that
90% of students receive “Good” on a 4 pt. rubric (i.e.
Excellent,
Good,
Average, Needs
Work
).
Summe r &
Spring
At least 90% of students will earn a
“ good ” or better on all components of the rubric
(Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs
Work) attached to the group blog

7. Students will be able to communicate
& advocate for health & health education.
Goal 1 Goal 1 Goals 1
& 2
Advocacy
Portfolio
HED 450 project. Project components will include at a minimum a history/background of the issue, including a timeline showing positive and/or negative milestones that affect population health; a weekly myth vs. fact; a suggested reading/resource list; individual weekly posts in response to instructor prompts; and a comparative
“state of affairs/efforts” detailing diverse local-, state-, or country-level situations and solutions surrounding the issue.
Winter At least 90% of students will earn a
“ good ” or better on all components of the rubric (i.e.
Excellent, Good,
Average, Needs

Dispositions
Goals
1,2, &
3
? ?
*Method(s) of assessment should include those that are both direct (test, essays, presentation, projects) and indirect (surveys, interviews) in nature
**Data needs to be collected and differentiated by location (Ellensburg campus vs University Centers – see NWCCU standard 2.B.2)
***Timing of assessment should be identified at different transitions points of program (i.e., admission, mid-point, end-of-program, post-program)
?
Work) attached to the portfolio project.
Project components will include a background/rational e for advocacy strategies to improve a particular population health outcome, a letter to the editor, an op/ed piece, and an exploration of an advocacy-focused agency or organization related to the issue.
?