PROGRAM INFORMATION

advertisement
Kinesiology Assessment Report spring 2008
PROGRAM INFORMATION
Degree Program(s):
Department Chair:
Department:
B.S.
Shirley Reekie
Phone:
Report Prepared by:
Jim Kao???
Phone:
Next Self-study Due:
Spring 2011
E-mail:
Kinesiology
43012
Note: Schedule is posted at: http://www.sjsu.edu/ugs/programplanning/
ARCHIVAL INFORMATION
Location:
Person to Contact:
(Bldg/Room #)
(Name)
(Phone)
Does the information (e.g., Mission, Goals, and/or Learning Outcomes) posted on the web (see,
http://www.sjsu.edu/ugs/assessment/programs/ ) for this program need to be updated?
Yes
If yes, please submit changes to [email protected]
No
SCHEDULE OF ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES*
Please complete the schedule of assessment activities below by listing all program Student Learning
Outcomes (SLOs) by number down the left column and indicating when data were/will be collected (C)
and when they were/will be discussed (D) by your faculty. You can also schedule/track program
changes resulting from your assessment activities by indicating an “I” (implemented changes) where
relevant. This schedule is meant to be fluid; providing a proposed schedule for future assessment while
at the same time, providing a record of your efforts as the program planning cycle progresses.
↓Semester after self-study
SLOs
1
2
3
4
…
F--
S--
Semester before next self-study↓
F--
S--
F--
S--
F--
S--
F--
S--
*Note: This template is based on a five-year program planning cycle. If your program planning follows another cycle
(e.g., based on accreditation), please feel free to add (or subtract) columns as necessary.
Page 1 of 3
Kinesiology Assessment Report spring 2008
Student Learning Outcome

#1: Demonstrate the ability to research, organize, evaluate, and communicate information in the
discipline of Kinesiology, using technological resources and communication tools. (Skills
commonly encompassed by the term information competence) – KIN 185 Section
1.1 Data Collection:
a. [SEMESTER/YEAR] – For this assessment cycle, how were the data collected and what
were the results?
All data used for this assessment were based on student performance tasks and evaluated using
performance observation and rubrics measured on a Likert-type scale.
Three separate tasks were required in the class to assess the student’s ability to research, organize,
evaluate, and communicate information using oral and written communication skills. Students were
required to complete two debates (one pro/one con) involving the conversion of research into an informed
oral presentation conveying a coherent philosophical view of the Kinesiology discipline in society. In
addition, all students were to participate in one writing project that necessitated written conveyance of an
informed written statement (paper) researching, organizing, and evaluating the movement/activity needs
of a non-traditional population in the local community. Seventy-five percent of the students demonstrated
an exemplary overall performance score (i.e., A level performance) and another twenty-five percent
performed at an accomplished level (i.e., B level performance).
In light of the second aspect of the SLO, student performance were assessed on their ability to research,
organize, evaluate, and communicate information using technological resources. Students were required
to develop a multimedia presentation of their movement/activity needs analysis of a non-traditional
population. In addition, each student was required to create a ‘YouTube’ type electronic portfolio,
including the elements of a resume, professional goals/objectives and relevant coursework taken,
statement of philosophy relative to the value of physical activity, and other information deemed important
to convey his/her future professional directions. Eighty-three percent of the students demonstrated an
exemplary overall performance score (i.e., A level performance) and another approximately 13 percent
performed at an accomplished level (i.e., B level performance). One student (4%) chose not to
demonstrate competency in this aspect of the SLO due to his non-submission of evaluative materials.
1.2 What have you learn about this Student Learning Outcome?
[SEMESTER/YEAR] – Based on the results in part I., briefly summarize the discussion
surrounding this outcome, i.e., what does the faculty conclude about student learning for this
SLO?
All but one of the class members were able demonstrate mastery of the learning objective. The tasks
selected were effective in providing avenues for students to demonstrate proficiency in achieving
competence in performance outcomes.
1.3 Action Item(s) (if necessary):
[SEMESTER/YEAR] – Based on the discussion in part II., what actions will the department
take to improve student learning, e.g., program changes, changes in pedagogy, process
changes, resources requests, etc?
1.4 Results of Actions
Page 2 of 3
Kinesiology Assessment Report spring 2008
Student Learning Outcome

#! : Demonstrate the ability to research, organize, evaluate, and communicate information in the
discipline of Kinesiology, using technological resources and communication tools. (Skills
commonly encompassed by the term information competence) – KIN 185 Section 2
RECORD OF ASSESSMENT
2.1 Data Collection:
b. [Spring 2008] – For this assessment cycle, how were the data collected and what were
the results? The data used for this assessment were based on student performance
tasks and evaluated using performance observation and rubrics measured on a likert
scale.
c.
Three separate tasks (in class debates and two writing projects) required in the class
were designed to assess the student’s ability to research, analyze, organize and
synthesize primary research information or other relevant information. The students were
required to convert the information into an informed written position statement and/or an
oral argument presenting a coherent philosophical view of the discipline of Kinesiology in
society. Seventy-six percent of the students were able to perform these tasks with an
exemplary overall performance score (i.e., A level performance). The remainder of the
students, twenty- three percent performed at an accomplished level (i.e., B level
performance).
d. A second set of performance items (resume, cover letter, e-interviews and movement
project) focused on students’ oral and written communication as well as competence in
technological application. These tasks were also evaluated using performance
observation and rubrics measured on a likert scale. On these tasks, forty-eight percent of
the students demonstrated an exemplary overall performance score (i.e., A level
performance) another forty-eight percent performed at an accomplished level (i.e., B level
performance). One student performed at a developing performance score (i.e., C level
performance.
2.2 What have you learned about this Student Learning Outcome?
[SEMESTER/YEAR] – Based on the results in part I., briefly summarize the discussion
surrounding this outcome, i.e., what does the faculty conclude about student learning for this
SLO?
All of the class members were able to master the learning objective. The tasks selected were
effective in providing avenues for students to demonstrate proficiency in achieving
competence in performance outcomes..
2.3 Action Item(s) (if necessary):
[SEMESTER/YEAR] – Based on the discussion in part II., what actions will the department
take to improve student learning, e.g., program changes, changes in pedagogy, process
changes, resources requests, etc.
2.4 Results of Actions
Page 3 of 3
Download