INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS ASSESSMENT EVALUATION
QUESTIONNAIRE
Humanities Division
Bryan Campus
1. What kinds of assessment processes do you use to determine your area’s effectiveness?
The following methods are used for assessment in the English courses:
Workshops/departmental meetings, course inventory tests, syllabi review and revision, and final
grade analysis.
2. Give one recent example of an assessment process you have used in your area and
discuss the measures (direct or indirect) you chose to determine the effectiveness of the
process. The remainder of the questions will pertain to this example.
At the beginning of the Fall 2003 semester and the Spring 2004 semester, this department held
workshops designed (1) to help English instructors ensure they are consistent in the types of
assignments for a course (and consistent with the course syllabus), and (2) to help writing
instructors achieve consistency in grading assignments. Follow-up workshops will be held during
the Spring 2004 semester. All instructors teaching English courses are required to attend. Two
workshops are held each time, one during the day and one in the evening to accommodate
everyone.
3. How did you determine the need for this assessment?
The need for this assessment came mostly from anecdotal evidence from both instructors and
students. The information indicated that some teachers were grading for one element, such as
grammar usage, while others were not grading this element at all. We want all instructors
grading for the same elements (guided by the syllabus and the Department’s official “Grading
Criteria” list). The need was also indicated by an analysis of Final Grades data produced by the
Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness, which showed some wide deviation among
instructors.
4. How many individuals participated in the identification of these assessment needs? Were
any of these individuals from outside your department or area? If so, please indicate.
The identification of this assessment need was made by the Chair and Assistant Chair of the
Humanities Division.
5. How, and from what sources, did you gather the data necessary to support the
measurement activity described above? Did you use any of the standard reports from the
Office of Institutional Research or make a request for data from that office?
We used several final grade analysis reports as a springboard for discussion on consistency in
assignments and grading. These reports are provided to the Division Chair at the end of each
semester. We also used the current syllabus for each course as a point of discussion. The rest of
the support measurement came form anecdotal discussion among the instructors.
6. How long of a time frame did the data gathering cover?
We used Final Grade Reports from the past three semesters. We plan for this type of assessment
to be a regular activity each long semester.
7. How were the data compiled (in written report, presentation, charts and graphs)? What
types of analytical methods, if any, did you use to determine the nature of the data?
The Final Grade Reports were compiled and provided by the Office of Institutional Research.
Data from these reports were presented on the whiteboard for the whole group and then
discussed. Copies of the current syllabi were given to each participant for group discussion.
8. What did the final data indicate? Were you surprised by the findings?
A discussion on the current syllabi did reveal that not all instructors were following them as
closely as the Division Chair had thought. The instructors were told how important it is to be
sure everyone is teaching the same set of objectives and student outcomes. Analysis and
discussion of the Final Grade Reports indicated some instructors giving an unusually high
amount of A’s and B’s. The number of W grades was also analyzed. More discussion on these
data will take place during individual evaluation conferences with the instructors later this
spring.
9. With whom did you share the results of your assessment activity? Was your vicepresident or other supervisor included in the distribution of results.
No one outside the Division was included in these discussions. The results were not shared with
the vice-president or supervisor.
10. How have you used the results of this assessment activity to make improvements in your
division or area?
We have used the Final Grade Reports in two meetings so far this year. Improvement would be
indicated by more consistency among instructors as shown in these grade reports.
We have used it to improve our instruction and to show students that there is a logical, fair,
identifiable reason for the grade they receive on assignments and in the course.
11. What types of follow-up measure have you established to determine if improvement has
taken place? What time frame (following term, one year later, etc.)?
We expect to continue these workshops/meetings on a regular basis each long semester as long
as there is a need. If our goal is achieved, then we would offer this type of assessment—
workshops, meetings—to only the new instructors when they first come to Blinn to teach
English.
Another way to assess improvement is by the Student Evaluations of each instructor. Meetings
with individual instructors will be held this Spring during which this issue will be discussed.