Central Washington University
Assessment of Student Learning
2012 to 2013 Anthropology Department and Program Report
Please enter the appropriate information concerning your student learning assessment activities for this year.
Academic Year of Report: _2012to 2013______ College: _Sciences_________
Department _Anthropology___ Program: __ B.S., B.A, Anth Minor, Museum Studies Minor___
Table of Contents
1. What student learning outcomes were assessed this year, and why? ................................................................. 2
Programmatic Goals............................................................................................................................................ 2
General Education Related Goal ......................................................................................................................... 3
2. How were they assessed? .................................................................................................................................... 3
Programmatic Goals............................................................................................................................................ 3
A) What methods were used? ......................................................................................................................... 3
B) Who was assessed? .................................................................................................................................... 3
C) When was it assessed? ............................................................................................................................... 3
3. What was learned? .............................................................................................................................................. 4
Programmatic Goals............................................................................................................................................ 4
4. What will the department or program do as a result of that information? .......................................................... 5
Programmatic Goals............................................................................................................................................ 5
5. What did the department or program do in response to last year’s assessment information? ............................ 6
Programmatic Goals............................................................................................................................................ 6
6. Questions or suggestions concerning Assessment of Student Learning at Central Washington University: ..... 6
Table of Tables
Table 1. 2011-2012 Assessed Student Learning Outcomes for Anthropology Minors and Majors. ...................... 2
Table 2. Paired Student Results for Anthropology Program Content/Knowledge Exam. ..................................... 4
Table 3. Anth 120, Introduction to Anthropology, General Education course and Anthropology major core
requirement, sample sizes n=51 (n=27 native students and n=24 transfer students). .. Error! Bookmark
not defined.
Table 4. Anth 301, Principles and Assessment of Anthropology, Anthropology entry to major core requirement,
sample size n=17 (n=10 native students, n=7 transfer students). ............Error! Bookmark not defined.
Table 5. Anth 458, Senior Survey, Anthropology major capstone requirement, sample size n=26 (n=13 native
students, n=13 transfer students). ............................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
1
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.
Programmatic Goals
The department assessed four Content/Knowledge student learning outcomes (LOs) from our
Programmatic Goals and Assessment plan. We chose these four LOs to pilot our revised Anthropology
Majors/Minors content/knowledge exam as an assessment tool for the content/knowledge LOs. The revised
exam was adapted from the department’s previous compressive exam after it was found the old questions were
not assessing well the Anthropology Program’s content/knowledge LOs. The entire Anthropology Department
faculty wrote revised exam questions two years ago to revise the exam. Last year we gave the exam in our
entry to the major courses (Anth 301) and our major/minor capstone courses (Anth 458). Table 1 contains
which program, college, and university goals are related to the four Content/Knowledge student learning
outcomes. Appendix A (last page) contains a matrix of the department’s goals and how they are related to the
college and university goals. These SLO’s support the CWU core value of inclusiveness and the COTS mission
to create and apply knowledge to solving human, social and environmental problems.
Table 1. 2011-2012 Assessed Student Learning Outcomes for Anthropology Minors and Majors.
Student Learning Outcomes
Anthropology students should
be able to:
(Content/knowledge, CK 1)
Demonstrate understanding of
concepts basic to the
anthropological study of
humans, such as culture,
cultural variability,
evolutionary change,
ethnocentrism, cultural
relativism, and holism.
(Content/knowledge, CK 2)
Identify the goals, main subject
areas and distinctive
characteristics of each subfield.
*Related
Progra
m Goal
Goals 1,
2, 3
*Related
College
Goal
Goal 1
*Related
Universit
y Goal
Goal 6
Method of
Assessment
Who/What
Assessed
When Assessed
Criterion of
Achievement
Content/
Knowledge
Exam
questions
Majors/Min
ors
Entry (Anth 301)
Exit (Anth
458/459)
95% of students
will pass exam
at 75%
minimum
Goals 1,
2, 3
Goal 1
Goal 1
Anth 107,
110,
120,130, 180
Content/
Knowledge
Exam
questions
Entry (Anth 301)
Exit (Anth
458/459)
95% of students
will pass exam
at 75%
minimum
(Content/knowledge CK 3)
Demonstrate knowledge and
understanding of the range and
variety of human bio-cultural
and environmental adaptations
past and present
Goals 1,
2, 3
Goal 7
Goals 1, 6
Content/
Knowledge
Exam
questions
Subfield
Course
@3xx – 4xx
Exams
Papers?
Majors/min
ors
Course
work in
Anth
458/459
Presentatio
ns
Content/
Knowledge
Exam
questions
B.S.
B.A.
Entry (Anth 301)
Exit (Anth
458/459)
Course work
Anth 458/459
95% of students
will pass exam
at 75%
minimum.
portfolio – score
@ _____on
rubric
2
Student Learning Outcomes
Anthropology students should
be able to:
(Content/knowledge, CK 4)
Demonstrate knowledge and
understanding of the symbolic
and communicative capacities
of humans expressed through
culture.
*Related
Progra
m Goal
Goals 1,
2, 3
*Related
College
Goal
Goal 7
*Related
Universit
y Goal
Goals 1, 7
Method of
Assessment
Who/What
Assessed
When Assessed
Criterion of
Achievement
Content/
Knowledge
Exam
questions
B.S.
B.A.
Entry (Anth 301)
Exit (Anth
458/459)
100% of
students will
meet 3 xx and
4xx.
95% of students
will pass exam
at 75%
minimum.
portfolio – score
@ _____on
rubric
Ling ,
Cultural
Arch.
Subfield
courses @
3xx – 4xx
* See Appendix A for Goals for Department/Program of Anthropology, College of the Sciences, and Central Washington
University.
General Education Related Goal
The department did not assess the General Education Goal (GERG) for Information Technology
assigned by the AVP for undergraduate studies. No instructions or rubrics were provided by that office as they
were for previous GERG assessments.
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.
Programmatic Goals
A) What methods were used?
The anthropology content/knowledge exam was given to Anthropology majors/minor over the last year
as it has been for the previous 2 years. The exam is a multiple choice question test that consists of 60 questions.
The numbers of questions vary across each of the content/knowledge learner outcomes. Our standard of
mastery is that we expect each Anthropology major/minor will pass the exam in Anth 458 answering at least
75% of the questions correctly.
B) Who was assessed?
Two courses Anth 301 and Anth 458 are required for all majors and minors in the Anthropology
Program and the exam was administered to all students taking these courses. This year 114 students had taken
the exam in both courses since sampling began in Fall 2011. This allows paired results, which provide the
highest resolution view of an individual student’s performance and perhaps an indication of the Anthropology
Program’s effectiveness for these specific LOs and that particular student.
C) When was it assessed?
The exam was administered during regular class time in Winter, Spring, and Fall Quarters, 2011 and
Winter and Spring Quarters, 2012 and this year in Fall 2012, Winter and Spring 2013.
Graduating Student Exit Questionnaire
Students graduating from the Anthropology Department complete an exit questionnaire. Their
responses to some questions were considered in our assessment this year.
3
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.
Programmatic Goals
Table 2 contains the number of correct and incorrect answers across content/knowledge LOs for the 114
paired students. For all content/knowledge LOs the number of students giving correct answers increased from
Anth 301 to Anth 458. While some students are meeting our standard of mastery (at least 75% correct), others
are not. As a group of paired results, they do not meet the department’s standard of mastery.
Table 3 shows the results of the paired comparison from 2011-2012. In comparison with Table 2,
students are performing better on the exams. This could be a result of the larger sample size.
There are a number of variables that could be affecting the exam results. How far apart the exam is
given to a student, 1 year or more, could impact the change in the scores, assuming that more time to take
Anthropology classes the more absorption of the content/knowledge material. Change in the two exam scores
would be affected by how little time there was between each exam taking. As more paired results become
available (we continue to give the test) we can track the effects of this directly. Another variable might be the
questions themselves. It might be useful to look at the questions themselves and see how students are
performing. With large samples, we could look at the question itself and determine the distribution of student
success at answering particular questions correctly. That kind of information could be used to evaluate the
questions themselves.
Table 2. 2012-2013 Paired Student Results for Anthropology Program Content/Knowledge Exam.
CK1
Less than 75%
75% or higher
301 Exam results
Count
Percent
28
25
86
75
458 Exam Results
Count
Percent
17
15
97
85
CK2
Less than 75%
75% or higher
38
76
33
67
20
94
18
82
Less than 75%
75% or higher
38
73
33
67
22
92
19
81
Less than 75%
75% or higher
34
80
30
70
15
99
13
87
CK3
CK4
Table 3. 2011-2012 Paired Student Results for Anthropology Program Content/Knowledge Exam.
CK1
Less than 75%
75% or higher
301 Exam results
Count
Percent
10
50
10
50
458 Exam Results
Count
Percent
3
15
17
85
CK2
Less than 75%
75% or higher
11
9
55
45
6
14
30
70
Less than 75%
75% or higher
9
11
45
55
9
11
45
55
Less than 75%
11
55
3
15
CK3
CK4
4
75% or higher
9
45
17
85
This exam will be automated this year so we can do an item by item analysis and assess the exam itself.
Graduating Student Exit Questionnaire
The following data are from the Anthropology Graduate Exit Questionnaire. Graduating students are
asked to rate on a scale of 1-5 (1= unsatisfied & 5= extremely satisfied) the following questions. The mean
response appears after the question. These are the results of 27 responses unless otherwise indicated.
1.) Quality of Instruction in the Anthropology Department: 4.6
2.) Quality of Anthropology Facilities: 4.8
3.) Range of Courses: 4.1
The following questions are in regard to: Please rate how the following experiences taught you the value of
anthropology as part of your preparation for life 1= extremely unhelpful & 5= extremely helpful).
4.) Experience as Teaching Assistant (Applicable to 9 students): 4.1
5.) Experience with Faculty Mentor (Applicable to 24 students): 4.5
6.) Individual Study Experience (Applicable to 17 students): 4.5
7.) Access/Quality of Advising (Applicable to 25 students): 4.2
8.) Experience of Earning Anthropology Degree at CWU: 4.5
The following refers to rate how your anthropology education and experience here at CWU have contributed to
your preparation for life in the early 21st C. Having examined other cultures, I can better understand my own.
1=disagree & 5= strongly agree
9.) Ability to Understand Own Culture: 4.6
The following are the number of students participating in various experiences with number of students and in ()
percent of respondees:
Study Abroad: 1 (.04%)
Field School: 21 (78%)
Internship: 7 (26%)
Faculty mentored presentation, poster, or publication: 12 (45%)
4. What will the department or program do as a result of that
information?
In answering this question, please note specific changes to your program as they affect student learning, and as they are related to
results from the assessment process. If no changes are planned, please describe why no changes are needed. In addition, how will the
department report the results and changes to internal and external constituents (e.g., advisory groups, newsletters, forums, etc.).
Programmatic Goals
The content/knowledge exam will be automated on a blackboard website. The questions will be coded
by content/knowledge LOs. This will allow us to automate the comparison students and generate distribution
data on the answers students are choosing. That information will be used in our next assessment cycle to further
calibrate our exam. We do not yet think that these exam results can be used reliably to make changes to
program curriculum. This year we are participating in a CSS project that will allow us to automate our exam.
Please see the attached proposal (Appendix B) for the project description.
5
We intend to assess student responses to ethics issues in the next year.
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.
Programmatic Goals
We continue to refine the program’s assessment plan to better provide context as to whether our students
are achieving the LOs. Additional modes of assessment like class scores and portfolio assessment will help us
further identify areas for attention. We had hoped to be moving into assessing Information Technology and
Literacy this academic year but have yet to receive any guidance for that.
See "2011-2012 Assessment of Student Learning Report/Feedback for the Department of Anthropology, Degree
Award BS & BA & BA (small plan)" attached.
6. Questions or suggestions concerning Assessment of Student Learning at
Central Washington University:
Some suggestions:
More lead time on the assessment targets. Information Technology and Literacy is to be assessed this year and
we have received no guidance yet. Workload units provided for the Assessment committee in the department if
it is to continue collecting data at these rates.
6
Appendix A:
Goals for Department/Program of Anthropology, College of the Sciences, and Central Washington University
Anthropology Goals
College of the Sciences Goals
University Goals
1. Provide opportunities for students to develop an
holistic understanding of human issues through the
theories and methods of cultural, linguistic,
archaeological and biological anthropology
2. Foster student learning in small-scale and
individualized settings with respect for different
points of view
1. Provide for an outstanding academic and student
experience in the College of the Sciences
1. Maintain and strengthen an outstanding
academic and student life on the Ellensburg campus
2. Provide for an outstanding academic and student
life in college programs and courses at the
university centers
2. Provide for an outstanding academic and student
life at the university centers
3. Provide opportunities for student-faculty
interaction in research, field work, and teaching
assistant experience.
4. Build interdisciplinary relationships that express
the multidisciplinary scope of anthropology
3. Provide for outstanding graduate programs that
meet focused regional needs and achieve academic
excellence
4. Develop a diversified funding base to support
curriculum and academic facilities, student and
faculty research and scholarships, as well as faculty
development, service and applied research in
college disciplines.
5. Build partnerships that support academic
program quality and student experiences in the
college of the sciences, including those with private,
professional, academic, government and
community-based organizations.
6. Strengthen the college’s contributions to the field
of education.
3. Strengthen and further diversity our funding base
and strengthen infrastructure to support academic
and student programs.
4. Build mutually beneficial partnerships with the
public sector, industry, professional groups,
institutions, and the communities surrounding our
campuses.
5. Engage in research and scholarly activities and
share results with peers, students and the public
6. Offer public services that link research and
teaching with the needs and interests of local, state
and regional communities.
7. Raise awareness of ethical conduct in crosscultural and intercultural interactions for program,
campus and community
5. Achieve regional and national prominence for
the university.
6. Build inclusive and diverse campus communities
that promote intellectual inquiry and encourage
civility, mutual respect, and cooperation.
7. Create and sustain productive, civil, and pleasant
learning environments.
8. Recruit and retain highly qualified faculty to
maintain and develop program currency, stability
and effectiveness in all four sub-fields
9. Students will demonstrate knowledge, skills and
values relevant to student learning outcomes.
7
Appendix B
Computer Science
Senior Project Proposal
Contact Information
Name: ??
Department/Affiliation: ??????
Email:
Phone Number: ??
????
Description of Project
The anthropology department has a comprehensive assessment exam that is given to their majors twice, when
they enter the program and at the end of their program. The questions on the exam are coded for content
knowledge of anthropology subdiscipline area and they are coded for specific student learning outcomes tied to
the department's assessment plan. So, each exam can be scored in two ways, one for subdiscipline content and
one for learner outcomes. The problem is that we cannot easily calculate these scores each way. Further the
time it takes to do a question by question analysis of the exam to determine what is driving the exam scores is
time prohibitive. If we had a software solution for our test it would greatly facilitate our assessment efforts and
provide readily accessible feedback to the department. Working closely last year with Blackboard people it was
determined that software/architecture cannot do what we need. So, for now, we are stuck with hand cranking
the results twice for each of our majors and have not been able to do a question by question analysis. A
software program that would output two scores, one for subdisciplines and one for learner outcomes would be
useful and if it also could show us how the students answer on each question the department would gain a
strategic advantage over other similar peer institutions when it comes to curriculum development, assessment,
and feedback loops. Part of the software output should be graphical and numerical summaries of the results by
students pairs (e.g., entry to major and exit to major) as these could easily show differences between
individuals/groups/cohorts performance and provide an analytical means to evaluate our program.
Questionnaire
1. Purpose. Does software exist that solves this or a similar problem?
☐Yes
XNo
☐ Not Sure
If “Yes”, please list what the software is (This can help to understand the project or as a starting point)
If possible, explain why existing software is not appropriate for your use.
BlackBoard’s testing programs give you student scores for the test, but not how the students did on particular
questions or at different times of taking the test.
2. Scope. Is the project large enough to keep a team of 4 students busy for 4-8 hours/week/person for two terms?
☐ Definitely
☐Probably
XNot Sure
☐No
8
3. Timeline. Does the project need to be completed before the beginning of March (i.e. end of Winter term)?
☐Yes
XNo
4. Level of Risk. Student projects can fail. How important is having a fully functional piece of software completed?
☐Very important ☐ Somewhat important
☐Not important
XNo worse off without it
Please email this document to Dr. John Anvik
(janvik@cwu.edu).
9
APPENDIX C
CENTRAL WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
2011-2012 Assessment of Student Learning Report
Feedback for the Department of: Anthropology
Degree Award: BS & B.A.
Program: Anthropology
1.
What student learning outcomes were assessed this year, and why?
Guidelines for Assessing a Program’s Reporting of Student Learning Outcomes (Target = 2)
Program
Value
Demonstrated Characteristics
Score
4
Outcomes are written in clear, measurable terms and include knowledge,
skills, and attitudes. All outcomes are linked to department, college and
2
university mission and goals.
3
Outcomes are written in clear, measurable terms and include knowledge,
skills, and attitudes. Some outcomes are linked to department, college and
university mission and goals.
2
Outcomes are written in clear, measurable terms and include knowledge,
skills, or attitudes. Outcomes may be linked to department, college and
university mission and goals.
1
Some outcomes may be written as general, broad, or abstract statements.
Outcomes include knowledge, skills, or attitudes. Outcomes may be linked
to department, college and university mission and goals.
0
Outcomes are not identified.
Comments: No attitudes assessed.
10
2.
How were they assessed?
a. What methods were used?
b. Who was assessed?
c. When was it assessed?
Guidelines for Assessing a Program's Reporting of Assessment Methods (Target = 2)
Program
Value
Demonstrated Characteristics
Score
4
A variety of methods, both direct and indirect are used for assessing each
outcome. Reporting of assessment method includes population assessed,
3
number assessed, and when applicable, survey response rate. Each
method has a clear standard of mastery (criterion) against which results
will be assessed
3
Some outcomes may be assessed using a single method, which may be
either direct or indirect. All assessment methods are described in terms of
population assessed, number assessed, and when applicable, survey
response rate. Each method has a clear standard of mastery (criterion)
against which results will be assessed.
2
Some outcomes may be assessed using a single method, which may be
either direct or indirect. All assessment methods are described in terms
of population assessed, number assessed, and when applicable, survey
response rate. Some methods may have a clear standard of mastery
(criterion) against which results will be assessed.
1
Each outcome is assessed using a single method, which may be either
direct or indirect. Some assessment methods may be described in terms of
population assessed, number assessed, and when applicable, survey
response rate. Some methods may have a clear standard of mastery
(criterion) against which results will be assessed.
0
Assessment methods are nonexistent, not reported, or include grades,
student/faculty ratios, program evaluations, or other “non-measures” of
actual student performance or satisfaction.
Comments: No indirect assessment methods apparent.
11
3.
What was learned (assessment results)?
Guidelines for Assessing a Program’s Reporting of Assessment Results (Target = 2)
Program
Value
Demonstrated Characteristics
Score
4
Results are presented in specific quantitative and/or qualitative terms.
4
Results are explicitly linked to outcomes and compared to the established
standard of mastery. Reporting of results includes interpretation and
conclusions about the results.
3
Results are presented in specific quantitative and/or qualitative terms
and are explicitly linked to outcomes and compared to the established
standard of mastery.
2
Results are presented in specific quantitative and/or qualitative terms,
although they may not all be explicitly linked to outcomes and
compared to the established standard of mastery.
1
Results are presented in general statements.
0
Results are not reported.
Comments:
4.
What will the department or program do as a result of that information (feedback/program
improvement)?
Guidelines for Assessing a Program’s Reporting of Planned Program Improvements (Target = 2)
Program
Value
Demonstrated Characteristics
Score
2
Program improvement is related to pedagogical or curricular decisions
2
described in specific terms congruent with assessment results. The
department reports the results and changes to internal and/or external
constituents.
1
Program improvement is related to pedagogical or curricular decisions
described only in global or ambiguous terms, or plans for improvement do
not match assessment results. The department may report the results and
changes to internal or external constituents.
NA
Program improvement is not indicated by assessment results.
0
Program improvement is not addressed.
Comments:
12
5.
How did the department or program make use of the feedback from last year’s assessment?
Guidelines for Assessing a Program’s Reporting of Previous Feedback (Target = 2)
Program
Value
Demonstrated Characteristics
Score
2
Discussion of feedback indicates that assessment results and feedback
2
from previous assessment reports are being used for long-term
curricular and pedagogical decisions.
1
Discussion of feedback indicates that assessment results and feedback
from previous assessment reports are acknowledged.
NA
This is a first year report.
0
There is no discussion of assessment results or feedback from previous
assessment reports.
Comments:
13