Los Angeles Valley College
Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Cycle Report
Courses and Programs
Discipline:
Italian
Department:
Foreign Language
Program/Course:
Italian 5, Sections 8134
Semester/Year:
Fall 2011
Department Chair:
June Miyasaki
SLO Representative: Rafael Arias
Student Learning Outcome Assessed
Using the vocabulary and structures learned, students will be able to summarize,
analyze and discuss cultural and/or literary texts orally and in writing at an
advanced level of accuracy and fluency in Italian.
Students will recognize the contributions that the Italian-speaking world has made
to the global society, and understand the role of the Italian language and heritage
in various parts of the world.
Description of Assessment Method
a. Describe the assessment tool and how
the data was analyzed (e.g., student
activity, rubric elements, etc.).
a. Evidence of attainment of the SLO will include the written preparation and
oral presentation of literary analyses. A literary analysis rubric will be
developed.
b. Evidence of attainment of the SLO will include written papers, analyses of
cultural readings, and oral presentations. A cultural rubric will be used.
The students’ ability to summarize, analyze and discuss cultural and/or literary
texts orally and in writing at an advanced level of accuracy and fluency in Italian
was assessed by means of an oral presentation on a play by Cesare Pavese "Si
parva licet" which was conducted totally in Italian without any notes.
The students’ ability to perform communicative functions in writing was
determined by assessing the students’ performance in a written 500 word
composition in Italian also on a story by Italian writer Cesare Pavese. Students
had to use the grammatical structures and the vocabulary mastered in class.
An oral and a writing rubric were used to assess the students’ productions (see
Foreign Language SLO Assessment rubrics). As per the rubrics used, the
students’ oral and written performance was assessed as 1 (not achieving the
SLO); 2 (minimally achieving the SLO); and 3 (clearly achieving the SLO) [For
specific descriptors of what constitutes a 1, 2, and 3, please refer to the rubrics
attached.
b. Describe the sampling methodology (i.e.,
how sampling was done, number of
students and faculty/staff involved out of
the total).
c. Describe how inter-rater reliability was
achieved
Assessment Results
a. Describe the data according to the
assessment tool used
The students’ ability to recognize and compare cultural traits of Italian culture was
assessed by correctly answering a set of 6 cultural questions. The department
agreed that answering 4-6 correct answers would indicate the student’s
attainment of the cultural SLO.
b. 1 out of 1 student in these section of Italian 5 took part in the assessment.
c. Since this was the only section of Italian 5 taught by one professor, no
interrater reliability was necessary.
Describe the relevant findings of the data analyses.
Number of Students in this section:
1
Number of Students assessed in this section: 1
Oral SLO Assessment:
(Yes) Percentage of students scoring 5-9 points: 1 out of 1 student (100%) did
achieve the SLOs (obtaining either a 2 or 3 as per the rubric).
(No) Percentage of Students scoring 3-4 points: 0 student (0) did not achieve
the SLO (obtaining a 1 as per the rubric).
SLO Covering the Culture of Italy:
6 questions were asked on the final exam covering the culture of Italy.
100% of students (1 out of 1) achieved the cultural SLO by answering correctly
either 4, 5 or 6 questions.
0% of students did not achieve the cultural SLO.
Writing SLO Assessment:
(Yes) Percentage of Students scoring 2-3 points (as per the FL rubric):
1 student out of 1 student or 100%
(No) Percentage of Students scoring 1 point (as per the FL rubric):
0 students
Based on this assessment, it seems evident that the Italian 5 student assessed is
achieving the SLOs of the course. The data indicates that there is a 100 %
achievement rate for the Italian 5 Oral, Written, and Cultural SLOs for the course.
How Results were Used for Course/Program
Improvement
a. Describe how the results are going to be
used for the improvement of teaching,
learning, or institutional effectiveness
based on the data assessed.
b. Describe how results will be shared with
others in the discipline/area.
a. Recommendations to Improve the SLO:
- Continue with the program and adapt the course to the students in the
class based on their needs.
b. The results obtained in these assessments will be shared with the other
FL faculty in departmental meetings as there is only one professor teaching
Italian 3 at Los Angeles Valley College.
ORAL ASSESSMENT RUBRIC
POINTS
3
2
1
LEVEL FLUENCY
Fluent. The student speaks
very clearly without
hesitation.
Generally fluent. The
student speaks with some
hesitation.
Not fluent. The student hesitates
frequently.
COMPREHENSIBIL
ITY
Comprehensible.
The speaker uses appropriate
language to convey the main
idea of this item clearly.
Pronunciation and intonation
sound natural.
Generally
comprehensible. The
message is unclear in
places. The language used
is inadequate to make the
message totally clear.
Problems with
pronunciation do not
prevent communication.
Incomprehensible.
The message could only be
understood by a sympathetic native
speaker. The language used is
often distorted by interference
from native language. Problems
with pronunciation distort meaning
and inhibit communication in some
instances.
LEVEL OF
EXPRESSION
Appropriate. Functions,
grammar, and vocabulary are
used correctly.
Generally appropriate.
Minor problems in usage
do not distort meaning or
inhibit communication.
Not appropriate. Problems in
usage significantly distort meaning
or inhibit communication.
Total points ________________/9
ORAL SLO ASSESSMENT
Based on the student's score on their linguistic
performance, was the student able to perform oral
elementary everyday communicative functions in the
target language?
NO
(Score 3-4)
Number of students/out of
COMMENTS: _________________________________________________________________________
YES
(Score 5-9)
Number of students/out of
____________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________
ARIAS
WRITING ASSIGNMENTS HOLISTIC SCORING RUBRIC
Level 1:
Does Not Meet
Expectations
$
$
$
$
Level 2:
Meets Minimal
Expectations
$
$
$
$
Level 3:
Meets/Exceeds
Expectations
$
$
$
$
$
Message communicated with difficulty and is unclear.
Vocabulary is often inappropriate, leading to
miscommunication.
Significant patterns of error.
Self-correction is rare and usually unsuccessful.
Message generally comprehensible.
Vocabulary is appropriate, with mostly complete sentences.
Generally accurate, although some patterns of error may be
evident
Occasional self-correction may be successful.
Message effectively and clearly communicated requiring no
or minimal interpretation from the reader
A variety of vocabulary and complete sentences effectively
used.
Mostly accurate, showing no significant pattern of error.
Self-correction increases comprehensibility.
Few or no errors in spelling, use of diacritical marks,
punctuation, and/or capitalization