SJSU Annual Program Assessment Form
Academic Year 2014-2015
Department: Child & Adolescent Development
Program: Child & Adolescent Development
College: Education
Website: http://www.sjsu.edu/chad
Program Accreditation (if any): NA
Contact Person and Email: Toni Campbell toni.campbell@sjsu.edu
Date of Report: 5/14/15
Part A
1. List of Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs)
ChAD Program Learning Outcomes
In spring 2015 the department faculty refined the seven critical program learning outcomes (PLOs) to
reflect different expectations for students completing their baccalaureate (BA) and for masters (MA)
degreestudents. Note that the core PLOs are identical for both BA and MA students but the level of
achievement differs for the two degree programs. The revised PLOs are:
Demonstrate knowledge of child and adolescent development in four major domains (cognitive,
emotional, social, and physical) and understand the interrelationships among these domains.


BA: Define and understand basic elements of the four domains of development and draw on
multiple perspectives to understand the interrelationships among these domains.
MA: Articulate an advanced understanding of the complexity of the four domains of development
and characterize the impact of the interrelations among domains on child and adolescent
development.
Understand the role of context in the growth and development of children and adolescents and their
socialization by family, community, society, and culture.


BA: Describe and evaluate different contextual perspectives that affect the growth and
socialization experiences of children and adolescents.
MA: Analyze the significance of context on child and adolescent growth and evaluate how
different contextual perspectives contribute to both dominant assumptions and alternative
viewpoints in our field.
Apply research, theory, and problem-solving skills to social policy, education, intervention, and
practical situations pertaining to children and adolescents.


BA: Identify and describe recognized ways to apply research, theory and problem-solving skills to
address social policy, education, intervention, and practical situations.
MA: Apply research, theory and problem-solving skills to evaluate best practices in social policy,
education, intervention, and practical situations relevant to child and adolescent development.
Examine and evaluate information about children and adolescents from a variety of sources.


BA: Differentiate between sources of information (research, professional, and popular) and
evaluate the credibility and validity of each type of information source.
MA: Categorize, investigate, and critically analyze different sources of information with
respect to credibility and validity and determine the appropriate contexts to use each type
of source.
Demonstrate inquisitiveness about the development of children and adolescents by articulating
appropriate and logical questions and methods for seeking answers to those questions.


BA: Identify and describe key developmental questions in our field and define methods to
investigate these questions.
MA: Analyze existing questions as well as formulate new questions that are relevant to our field
and describe and apply the appropriate methodologies for seeking answers to these questions.
Demonstrate communication and interpersonal skills for facilitating the development of children
and adolescents and meeting the challenges of working with other professionals.


BA: Demonstrate effective communication and interpersonal skills in fieldwork settings that
exemplifies professional behavior designed to best facilitate the development of children and
adolescents.
MA: Evaluate different styles of, and engage in, audience-appropriate forms of communication
that lead to a shared understanding of developmental issues through negotiation and translation
across multiple modes of communication.
Understand ethical and advocacy responsibilities in working with and on behalf of children and
adolescents.


BA: Demonstrate understanding of effective advocacy and describe ethical issues present in our
field and how these issues inform advocates’ decision-making.
MA: Delineate different methods of advocacy, elaborate on key ethical issues, and articulate how
differing ethical perspectives influence their decision-making as advocates in our field.
2. Map of PLOs to University Learning Goals (ULGs)
Unchanged from previous year
3. Alignment – Matrix of PLOs to Courses
Unchanged from previous year
4. Planning – Assessment Schedule
Find our revised assessment schedule below.
ChAD BA Major Courses With PLO Assessment Plan: Semester By Year
ChAD Course
ChAD
PLO
Trans.
Orient
60
101
158/159/160
162/164
163/173
169
170
195
Sp even
yr
1
Sp odd
yr
2
F even
yr
3
Sp even
yr
4
F odd
yr
5
6
Sp odd yr
F even
yr
7
Ed.exp.
survey
all
PLOs
All
Every
sessions sem
Every
sem
Exit
survey
All
PLOs
Every
sem
Every
sp
5. Student Experience
Unchanged from previous year.
Part B
6. Graduation Rates for Total, Non URM and URM students (per program and degree)
Note that the department URM and Non URM graduation rates are consistently and, in many cases, substantially
higher than the same rates for the university.
Graduation Rates by Entering Cohorts: Child and Adolescent Development
First-Time Freshmen
Undergraduate Transfer
New Credential
First-Time Graduate
Fall 2008 Cohort: 6-Year
Graduation Rate
Fall 2011 Cohort: 3-Year
Graduation Rate
Fall 2011 Cohort: 3-Year
Graduation Rate
Fall 2011 Cohort: 3-Year
Graduation Rate
Progr Progr CollegUnivers Progr Progr CollegUnivers Progr Progr CollegUnivers Progr Progr CollegUnivers
am am
e
ity am am
e
ity am am
e
ity am am
e
ity
Cohor Grad Avera Averag Cohor Grad Avera Averag Cohor Grad Avera Averag Cohor Grad Avera Averag
ge e Grad t Size Rate
ge e Grad t Size Rate
ge e Grad t Size Rate
ge e Grad
t Size Rate
Grad Rate Grad Rate Grad Rate Grad Rate Rate All
Rate All
Rate All
Rate All
All Studen
All Studen
All Studen
All Studen
Stude ts Who
Stude ts Who
Stude ts Who
Stude ts Who
nts Entere
nts Entere
nts Entere
nts Entere
Who d the
Who d the
Who d the
Who d the
EntereUnivers
EntereUnivers
EntereUnivers
EntereUnivers
d This
d This
d This
d This
ity
ity
ity
ity
Colleg
Colleg
Colleg
Colleg
e
e
e
e
Tota
59
l
62.7% 62.7% 49.7% 103
66.0% 69.1% 55.3% 0
/0
8.3% 8.3%
UR
25
M
48.0% 48.0% 40.7% 30
56.7% 59.5% 55.2% 0
/0
12.2% 12.2% 3
100.0
86.7% 65.2%
%
Non
31
UR
M
74.2% 74.2% 53.3% 56
66.1% 69.7% 54.9% 0
/0
8.0% 8.0%
8
87.5% 76.8% 54.2%
All
othe 3
rs
66.7% 66.7% 52.9% 17
82.4% 85.0% 56.9% 0
/0
4.9% 4.9%
2
50.0% 66.7% 69.4%
13
84.6% 78.3% 60.8%
7. Headcounts of program majors and new students (per program and degree)
Below are the ChAD headcount numbers. Enrollment in the MA program is intentionally kept low at about 15
– 18 students while the BA headcount and enrollment in service courses offered by ChAD has been allowed to
increase.
Headcount of Program Majors by Degree: Child and Adolescent Development
Fall 2014
New Students
Continuing Students
Total
FT AdmitNew TransfContinuingRetn.TranfTrnst-Ugrd
Total
52
133
525
6
1
717
BA
43
133
518
6
1
701
MA
9
7
16
8. SFR and average section size (per program)
With the exception of our graduate program which has an enrollment of just 16 students, our LD and UD SFRs
are in all cases above college and university SFRs and in some cases significantly higher.
Student-Faculty Ratio (SFR) and Average Headcount per Section: CHAD - Child/Adolescent Dvlpmt
Fall 2014
Fall 2014
Subject College University
Subject College University
Headcount Headcount Headcount
SFR SFR
SFR
per
per
per
Section Section Section
Lower
36.8 33.7 31.0
Division
Lower
48.3
38.6
35.6
Division
Upper
25.7 22.5 25.5
Division
Upper
29.5
22.6
28.0
Division
Graduate
13.9 16.8 20.8
Division
Graduate
12.5
16.2
15.8
Division
9. Percentage of tenured/tenure-track instructional faculty (per department)
The department is clearly inappropriately staffed with PT instructors at a rate above that of the college and
sharply above that of the university.
Percentage of Full-Time Equivalent Faculty (FTEF): Child & Adolescent Development
Fall 2014
DepartmentDepartment College University
FTEF # FTEF % FTEF % FTEF %
Tenured/Tenure5.5
28%
34.0% 42.8%
track
72%
66.0% 57.2%
Not tenure-track 13.9
19.4
100%
100.0% 100.0%
Total
Part C
10. Closing the Loop/Recommended Actions
Below are some of the suggestions offered by the COE assessment coordinator and the actions of the
department.
a) Moving forward, the department could consider more clearly distinguishing the expectations for
how students in the BA and MA will meet the PLOs:
o Completed and posted 5/4/15
b) PLOs are currently assessed once in program courses (although content from the PLOs are
repeated in multiple courses). The ChAD faculty been discussing how PLOs might be assessed
multiple times in different required courses to show increasing levels of proficiency for targeted
objectives. This would be an excellent future addition to the ChAD assessment plan:
o We have designed a survey related to students’ educational experience to be completed
at two entry points into the program, in a mid-program required course, and in the senior
seminar. Surveys to be deployed in fall 2015.
c) In the future, it might be advisable to have students engage in the process of reflection on their
level of performance on PLOs in more ChAD courses.
o See b) above
11. Assessment Data
These materials were provided as part of our program plan review completed this AY. Refer to that
document.
12. Analysis
See #11 above.
13. Proposed changes and goals (if any)
NA