revised 3/19/07
Spring 2007 Semester Program Assessment Report
(Please provide electronic and hard copy to your college facilitator.)
Degree program*: German B.A.
Chair: Prof. Dominique van Hooff
Report Prepared by: Romey Sabalius
Department: Foreign Languages
Department Phone: 4-4616
Date: 05/15/007
*Where multiple program curricula are almost identical, and SLOs and assessment plans are identical,
it is acceptable to list more than one program in this report.
Please list all Student Learning Outcomes/Objectives (SLOs) for this program in Tables 1A & 1B.
Table 1A. Learning Outcomes (all outcomes if one program reported, or common outcomes if
multiple programs reported on this form.)
SLO #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Exact wording of Student Learning Outcome/Objectives (SLO)
Language & Communication. Written Expression. Develop advanced (ACTLF)
skills in writing German.
Language & Communication. Reading Comprehension. Develop advanced
(ACTLF) skills in reading German.
Language & Communication. Oral Expression. Develop advanced (ACTLF)
skills in speaking German.
Language & Communication. Listening Comprehension. Develop advanced
(ACTLF) skills in understanding spoken German.
Literacy: Develop the students' ability to use appropriate terminology in
linguistic, cultural, or literary analysis.
Linguistics: Develop the students' ability to recognize the various components
that make up the German language, to understand complex syntactical features,
and to analyze and reflect the grammar.
Cultural Knowledge: Develop the students' ability to understand the cultural
and intellectual development of German-speaking civilizations and societies
within their socio-political contexts.
Literary Analysis and Traditions: Develop the students' knowledge of major
periods, genres, authors, and movements of German-language literature within
their cultural, intellectual and socio-political contexts.
Global Perspective and Comparisons: Develop the students' ability to relate the
German-speaking civilizations and societies to events in other countries around
the world, with a special focus on Europe in the early years and to the United
States since the 20th century.
Table 1B. Unique Learning Outcomes, if multiple programs reported on this form.
N/A
Page 1
revised 3/19/07
Please complete the schedule of learning outcome assessment below by listing all program SLOs by
number down the left column and indicating whether data were/will be collected (C), when they
were/will be discussed by your faculty (D) and when changes resulting from those discussions
were/will be implemented (I).
NOTE: * SJSU must provide data to WASC for all SLOs by the end of Sp07.
Table 2
C = data Collected
SLO #
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
F05 or
earlier
D = results Discussed
Sp06
I = changes (if any) Implemented
F 06
C, D, I
Sp07
F07
Sp08
I
C, D
C, D
C, D, I
I
I
C, D
C, D
C, D
C, D
C, D
C, D
1. Check the SLOs listed at the UGS Website
(www.sjsu.edu/ugs/assessment/programs/objectives). Do they match the SLOs listed in Tables 1A
and 1B?
__X__ YES
_____ NO
http://www.sjsu.edu/foreignlanguage/slos/dfl_index.html#germanslos
2. Fall 2006 Performance Data: Describe the direct assessment (performance) data that were
collected fall 2006 (‘C’ in F06 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific. For
example: Instructors in two sections (60 students) of PSYC 150, Anagnos and Cooper, gave an embedded
exam question and in their summary report indicated the % of students who earned a ’B’ or better, ‘C’, or
less than ‘C’ using the same grading rubric for that question.
SLO #
1
Page 2
Data collected, how much, by whom**
The students’ ability to write in German correctly and clearly was improved in both
upper-division courses offered by the German Program during the fall semester.
In German 101A (Advanced German) taught by Larissa Chireaeva, students were
required to write 5 essays and one dictation. The first essay drafts were returned to
the students – with their mistakes marked – for self-correction. The second version
was graded. The grades ranged from A to B- (A to C for dictation), and
improvement in correctness of grammar and spelling (dictation: focus on
punctuation) was noticeable. The final also had a written component (short essay),
and the students performed satisfactory in that section.
revised 3/19/07
In German 102B (German Culture from 1871 until the Present) taught by Romey
Sabalius, students were required to take class minutes, prepare an informational
hand-out to accompany their oral report, and to submit a 5-6 pages research paper.
The grades for all written exercises and examinations ranged from A to C-.
Although most students showed adequate or good progress, it was evident that some
students needed extra assistance to write with sufficient confidence and correctness.
A German tutor, hired by the department, provided intensive and focused help to
individual students.
7
The students’ ability to understand the cultural and intellectual development of
German-speaking civilizations and societies within their socio-political contexts was
tested and improved in German 102B (German Culture from 1871 until the
Present), taught by Romey Sabalius, through a variety of tasks and exams. The
students were required to prepare an oral report on a chosen cultural topic. This
oral report needed to be accompanied by an informational hand-out for all the other
students. After the delivery of the oral report and the ensuing class discussion, the
students were required to submit a research paper. Two midterms and the final
also served as tools to assess the students’ cultural knowledge.
3. Fall 2006 Indirect Measurement (if any): Describe the indirect assessment data that were
collected in fall 2006 (‘C’ in F06 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific, for
example: 50 employers were surveyed by Margaret Wilkes, Career Planning and Placement about
performance of recent hires who graduated from our program in 2004-5.
N/A
4. Fall 2006 Findings/Analysis: Describe the findings that emerged from analysis of data collected in
F06. Be specific. For Example: less than 50% of students met criteria for teamwork outcome. OR
Employers indicated students have sufficient teamwork skills, no change needed.
Finding 1 (SLO 1) The method of marking mistakes in students’ first drafts of their essay and
returning them for self-correction seems to be effective since clear
improvement was made by all students.
Finding 2 (SLO 1) The hiring of a German tutor happened too late in the semester to have a
noticable effect on the skills of the students.
Finding 3 (SLO 7) The performance and progress of the students was satisfactory with final
grades ranging from A- to C (two students received an F due to unauthorized
withdrawal). No changes in developing and assessing the students’ cultural
knowledge were necessary.
Page 3
revised 3/19/07
5. Fall 2006 Actions: What actions are planned and/or implemented to address the findings from fall
2006 data? These are indicated by ‘I’ in Table 2 for the SLO data collected in fall ’06. Examples of
actions taken include curricular revision, pedagogical changes, student support services, resource
management. Be specific. For example: revising ENGR 103 to include more teamwork.)
Planned (SLO 1)
Planned (SLO 1)
The department is committed to maintain the tutoring service to improve the
writing skills of the students.
The method of marking mistakes in students’ first draft of essays and
returning them for self-correction as practiced in the Advanced German
(101A) class in fall will be adopted for the Elementary German (1B) class in
the spring as well.
6. Fall 2006 Process Changes: Did your analysis of fall 2006 data result in revisiting/revising the
Student Learning Outcomes or assessment process? Yes __ No X
If the answer is yes, please explain and submit an updated version of the Student Learning
Outcomes and/or assessment plan.
7. Spring 2007 Performance Data: Describe the direct assessment (performance) data that were
collected spring 2007 (‘C’ in Spr07 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific. For
example: Instructor for MATH 188 (30 students), Stone, gave 3 embedded exam questions and in his
summary report indicated the % of students who met or did not meet SLO #2.
SLO #
5
8
Page 4
Data to be collected, how much, by whom**
The students’ ability to use appropriate terminology in linguistic, cultural, or
literary analysis was developed and assessed in German 160 (Special Topics:
German Short Story) taught by Romey Sabalius. The students’ improvement was
assessed by 10 text analyses, 2 midterms, and the final.
Generally, students made good progress: 7 out of 8 students scored between 20-30
points (out of 30 points maximum) in the ten text analyses, in which theknowledge of
literary terminology was required. 1 student did not make adequate progress,
scoring only 12 out of 30 points. Average grades in the two midterms range from Ato C-, and the final had not yet been given by the time of writing of this report.
The students' knowledge of major periods, genres, authors, and movements of
German-language literature within their cultural, intellectual and socio-political
contexts was developed and assessed in German 150 (German Literature and Film)
taught by Romey Sabalius. The students’ improvement was assessed by 5 text
analyses and 5 media comparative analyses, as well as 2 midterms and the final.
The results in the ten analyses range between 12 and 26.5 points (out of 30
maximum points). The low score is mostly due to absences or assignments not
submitted. The average grades of the two midterms (taken by all students) range
from A- to C+, which indicates the typical learning success of students in upperdivision classes. The final had not yet been given by the time of writing of this
report.
revised 3/19/07
8. Spring 2007 Indirect Measurement (if any): Describe the indirect assessment data that were
collected (‘C’ in Spr07 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific, for example: 100
alumni were surveyed by the department with questions related to SLOs #1 & #2.
SLO #
5+8
Data collected, how much, by whom**
A survey conducted by the department in spring 2007 yielded 6 responses from B.A.
students and alumni. The question regarding “the understanding and appreciation
of literary works” was answered 3 times with a rating of 5 (out of 5), once with 4,
once with 3, and once with “cannot evaluate” (presumably a major who hasn’t taken
literature classes yet). The sample group is still too small to draw definite
conclusion, however the trend points to general satisfaction.
9. Fall 2007 Direct Measurement: For the SLOs scheduled to be assessed in fall 2007, describe the
direct (performance) data that will be collected, how much and by whom.
Be specific, for example: Instructors in two sections of ART144, will assess SLOs #3 & #4 using a common
rubric on the students’ final paper.
SLO #
7+9
Data to be collected, how much, by whom**
The students’ cultural knowledge as well as their global perspective and
comparative ability will be developed and assessed in German 102A (German
Culture until 1871) to be taught by Romey Sabalius. The students’ expected
improvement will be assessed by a diagnostic assessment at the beginning and at the
end of the semester, by two midterms and a final, and by a variety of other
assessment tools and methods such as class notes, oral presentations, class handouts, etc.
10. Fall 2007 Indirect Measurement (if any): Describe the indirect assessment data that will be
collected (‘C’ in F07 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific, for example:
graduating seniors in all capstone course sections will be surveyed on curriculum strengths & weaknesses.
SLO #
several
Page 5
Data to be collected, how much, by whom**
The department will continue to collect surveys from B.A. students and alumni to
assess their satisfaction with the program.