Assessment Report Standard Format
July 1, 2012 - June 30, 2013
PROGRAM(S) ASSESSED ENGLISH, TESOL concentration
ASSESSMENT COORDINATOR Andrew Strombeck
YEAR ___2___ of a ____5______YEAR CYCLE
1. ASSESSMENT MEASURES EMPLOYED
Briefly describe the assessment measures employed during the year.
 What was done?
 Who participated in the process?
 What challenges (if any) were encountered?
For this years’ assessment, we collected eight papers from an upper-division TESOL course.
These papers were then made anonymous and distributed to the eight members of the
evalution committee. Each committee member evaluated two papers, so that every paper was
evaluated by at least two members. Because our department is divided into concentrations
which can differ greatly from each other, the primary challenge committee members faced was
in evaluating content from a concentration that lay outside their area of expertise.
2. ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
In assigning papers a score of 1-4, with 4 = Excellent, 3 = Good, 2 = Fair, 1 = Poor, the
committee found student weaknesses in students’ ability to articulate the rationale for their
project (score of 2.5/4); familiarity with the nature of language, the structure of language, the
influence of culture on communication, and the fundamentals of language teaching (score of
2.5/4); and demonstrating the ability to develop a classroom pedagogy informed by an
understanding of language and culture (2.3/4).
In terms of mechanics, the committee found that students needed to improve their use of
paragraphs (unified and effectively developed), sentences (coherent and empathetic), word
choice (contextually appropriate and clear) and proofreading (careful and complete). All of
these areas received scores in the 2.4-2.5 range, between Fair and Good.
3. RESPONSE TO ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
Assessment criteria for TESOL: The content problems the committee found are complex, and
may in part reflect a mismatch between the particular crop of papers assessed and the
assessment criteria themselves. These papers concerned the pedagogical topic of
assessment, and as a result of this focus, some of the skill areas were harder to discern than
they might have been in papers focused on pedagogical issues closer to the core
competencies described by the TESOL faculty—in particular “demonstrating the ability to
develop a classroom pedagogy informed by an understanding of language and culture.” In
other words, while the problems identified above partly reflect student skills, they partly reflect
using the measurement standards that are poorly matched with the papers being assessed.
One response to these results, then, is to develop a set of assessment criteria which more
closely match the goals of the TESOL program itself.
Student writing about the results of their work: Some of the identified issues clearly indicate
that students need more instruction in articulating the results of their work, and so the
committee will recommend that the TESOL program find ways to emphasize modes of writing
about their results in the concentration’s introductory courses.
Mechanics: In terms of mechanics, the committee will recommend that these skills be further
emphasized in the introductory courses to the major.
4. ASSESSMENT ACTIVITIES FOR COMING YEAR
Briefly describe the learning outcomes to be assessed during the upcoming year and the
measures that will be used to assess them.
Concentration to be assessed: Integrated Language Arts program
A measure similar to the one used to assess the TESOL program this year will be used to
assess the ILA program next year. That is, papers from upper-division courses will be
collected and evaluated by the evaluation committee.
5. UNIVERSITY LEARNING OUTCOME ASSESSMENT
As part of the HLC Academy project, each program of study will eventually assess two
University Learning Outcomes in required courses in the major. One outcome will be
assessed in 2014-15, and the second will be added in 2015-16. Identify the two ULOs that
will be assessed and, if possible, the likely course(s) to be used.
Concentration to be assessed: Integrated Language Arts program
ULOs to be assessed:
1. communicate effectively
3. evaluate arguments and evidence critically
Course to be used: ENG 3050
APPENDIX: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Department of English: Assessment of Undergraduate Program
Rubric for Evaluating Undergraduate Writing in TESOL
Summary of findings
4
3
2
1
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Content
Purpose of project clearly defined and developed.
Project rationale supported substantially and concretely through
analysis of findings.
Reflection shows thoughtfulness and thoroughness
Paper shows student’s familiarity with the nature of language, the
structure of language, the influence of culture on communication, and
the fundamentals of language teaching.
Paper shows the ability to develop a classroom pedagogy informed
by an understanding of language and culture.
Mechanics
Paper progresses by clearly ordered and necessary stages.
Paragraphs are unified and developed effectively.
Sentences are coherent and emphatic.
Word choices are contextually appropriate and clear.
Proofreading is careful and complete.
Average rating
3.0
2.5
2.9
2.5
2.3
3.3
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.4