(Program Name) Program Assessment Report for AURA Spring 2006
BIS Assessment Report for Oral Presentation Skills
3/10/06
Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes
I.
1. Name and Contact Information of Person(s) Responsible for Program’s
Assessment
Gail Corbitt, BIS Program Assessment
2. Student Learning Outcomes (the goal included in this report)








Demonstrate proficiency in the use of current information technology
Effectively present information orally and in writing
o Effectively present business information orally
o Effectively present business information in writing
Critically evaluate, analyze and interpret information to solve problems.
Understand and evaluate ethical issues and situations.
Demonstrate an understanding of a diverse world.
Make effective business decisions.
Analyze business problems and construct IT solutions when appropriate
Be equipped with the area of specialization to work with “day one productivity” at
a job or in graduate school.
3. Course Alignment Matrix:
See AURA website
4. Learning Outcome(s) Assessed in Spring 2006
Student
Learning
Outcome
Sample and
Sample Size
Oral
N=13 BIS
presentation students in
skills
capstone
class
Measure
Percent of
Students
Achieving
Used rubric on course embedded presentation (see
attached)
100%
5. Analysis / Interpretation of Results
While the sample size is small it does represent the graduating seniors in the
program this Fall. The results did not uncover any major issues. The means on a
3 point scale for each of the items on the rubric are as follows:
Body language
2.54
Eye contact
2.11
Vocal presentation 2.37
Attire
2.00 (highest possible value)
Word choice
2.82
1
(Program Name) Program Assessment Report for AURA Spring 2006
Visual aids
2.21
Organization
2.57
Supporting evidence 2.25
6. Planned Program Improvement Actions Resulting from Outcomes (if applicable)
Since the data do not reveal big problems, the BIS faculty met and decided to do 3
things:
 Distribute the scoring rubric to students in all classes that have
presentations as a way to let students know what we think is important
about presentation skills
 Discuss with students (in classes requiring presentations) the importance
of maintaining eye contact and having good visual aids that are readable
by people in the room (the 2 areas that need the most improvement)
 Use the scoring rubric to score presentations even if it is not used as part
of the grade for the presentation. This provides consistent feedback to
students on presentations skills.
 Re-assess in the capstone class Spring 2006 in order to have a bigger
sample and see if we get the same results.
7. Planned Revision of Measures or Metrics (if applicable)
While there are 2 notable problems with the scoring rubric, in order to be
consistent with the rest of the college of business we are making no changes at
this time. If we could we would change the following:
 Add a superior description for attire – if students dress in the theme of the
presentation it does add value and enhances the presentation. We should
have a category that allows for this.
 The last trait is really 2 traits in one – using examples to increase the level
of detail and documenting sources correctly. These should be split so that
scoring is easier on this dimension. Since the faculty highlight the
comments that most closely matches their assessment, the students can
figure out what is right or wrong with their presentation with respect to
this trait. In the future, we’d like to see this trait split into 2 separate
dimensions.
8. Planned Revisions to Program Objectives or Learning Outcomes (if applicable)
None
9. Changes to Assessment Schedule (if applicable)
We will re-assess in Spring 2006 to increase sample size.
2
(Program Name) Program Assessment Report for AURA Spring 2006
10. Information for Next Semester
We are currently assessing technology proficiency Spring 2006 and Fall 2006.
II.
Appendices (please include any of the following that are applicable to your program)
A. Assessment Data Summaries (included)
B. Measurement Standards (Rubrics -- attached)
C. Survey Instruments (n/a)
3
(Program Name) Program Assessment Report for AURA Spring 2006
California State University, Chico
College of Business
Oral Presentation Rubric- Guidelines for Assessment
(Final version as of 4/13/05)
PRESENTATION
TRAITS
Body Language
Eye Contact
Vocal
Presentation
and Tone
Attire
Word
Choice
Use of Visual Aids
Organization
Support/evidence
UNACCEPTABLE
Appears nervous or distracted.
Paces, fidgets, or sways. Poor
use of hands (e.g., jiggles, taps
or plays with something). Body
language distracts from
presentation.
Reads speech directly from notes
or visual aids (e.g., PowerPoint).
Little to no eye contact with the
audience.
Speaks too fast or too slow.
Halting, uneven pace. Volume
inappropriate. Giggling or other
inappropriate vocal behaviors
interfere with the message.
Extremely monotone, ineffective
tone. Tone is unprofessional and
disrespectful of the audience.
Complete lack of enthusiasm.
Attire is inappropriate for type of
presentation. Attire distracts
from the quality of the
presentation.
Uses clichés, slang, jargon,
racist, or sexist language. Word
choice is inappropriate and
exhibits bias.
Visual aids missing,
inappropriate, or poorly
designed and executed.
Visual aids have errors, are
difficult to read, and don’t
enhance the presentation. Visual
aids not properly integrated into
presentation.
Information presented in a
disorganized manner. Abrupt
transitions from one topic to
another with no clear transition
or logic. Does not appear
prepared or practiced. If
appropriate: Lacks a clear
introduction and conclusion.
Much too general or anecdotal.
Insufficient use of evidence to
support key points. Lacks
appropriate source citations.
4
ACCEPTABLE
SUPERIOR
Appears slightly nervous, but
it doesn’t interfere with the
presentation. Occasional use
of meaningful hand gestures.
Body language needs some
improvement but it doesn’t
significantly distract from the
presentation.
Occasionally refers to notes or
visual aids. Sometimes fails to
make eye contact with
audience.
Articulation, volume, pace,
and pronunciation are
acceptable. Slightly monotone.
Tone is acceptable, but
somewhat casual for a
professional business
presentation. Somewhat
lacking in enthusiasm and
assertiveness.
Attire is appropriate for type
of presentation.
Appears confident, poised and
comfortable. Is relaxed and in
control. Body language (e.g.,
posture, facial expressions,
gestures) enhances the
presentation. Good use of
appropriate hand gestures to
emphasize points.
Never or rarely glances at
notes or visual aids.
Consistently makes eyes
contact with audience.
Articulation, volume, pace,
and pronunciation are
excellent. Fluid, natural
delivery. Excellent vocal tone.
Tone is professional.
Enthusiastic and assertive.
No inappropriate language. No
apparent bias.
Word choice illustrates grasp
of content and enhances
presentation.
Visual aids are adequate but
could be improved. Easy to
read and informative, but not
outstanding. No significant
errors. Adequate integration of
visual aids.
Visual aids are easy to read,
attractive, informative and
error free. Visual aids greatly
enhance the presentation.
Excellent integration of visual
aids.
Information organized and
presented adequately. Minor
problems with topic transitions
or logical flow. If appropriate:
Introduction and conclusion
are clear, but not used
effectively.
Information presented in an
organized, logical fashion.
Obviously prepared and
practiced. If appropriate: Has
an effective introduction and
conclusion.
Adequate use of specifics and
evidence. Sources cited
appropriately.
Excellent details. Uses
multiple forms of evidence to
support key points. Sources
cited appropriately.
(N/A)
(Program Name) Program Assessment Report for AURA Spring 2006
Assessment Data Summary for BSIS oral presentation skills – Fall 2005
Count of SCORE_CAT
TRAIT
Attire
Body Language
Eye Contact
Organization
Support/Evidence
Use of Visual Aids
Vocal Presentation and Tone
Word Choice
Grand Total
SCORE_CAT
Superior
0.00%
38.46%
16.67%
38.46%
25.00%
15.38%
16.67%
66.67%
27.27%
Acceptable Needs Improvement Grand Total
100.00%
0.00%
100.00%
61.54%
0.00%
100.00%
66.67%
16.67%
100.00%
61.54%
0.00%
100.00%
66.67%
8.33%
100.00%
69.23%
15.38%
100.00%
75.00%
8.33%
100.00%
33.33%
0.00%
100.00%
66.67%
6.06%
100.00%
5