Shoreline Community College
ANNUAL OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT REPORT—2003-04
Assessment Liaison/s
Jim James
Pam Dusenberry
Phone
206-546-6949
206-546-4626
Email
jdjames@ctc.edu
pdusenbe@ctc.edu
A. Highlights of Major Assessment Activities/Project
For the fifth year, a major portion of Shoreline's Assessment allocation was dedicated to faculty
assessment development efforts through an RFP process coordinated by the Institutional
Effectiveness Committee. Remaining funds supported the Office of Institutional Effectiveness,
Assessment and Research, the Assessment Liaison.
For 2003-04 funds were awarded to 7 faculty projects (5 new and 2 continuing) representing the
Humanities Division, Intra-American Studies and Social Science Division, Library/Media
Center, ESL and the Work Skills Assessment Center.







Professional Development Retreat: Crossing Disciplines, Neal Vasishth, Humanities,
nvasisht@shoreline.edu, Tim Payne Intra-American Studies and Social Science Division,
tpayne@shoreline.edu.
Assessing Information Literacy in ESL Courses, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services, ebianco@shoreline.edu
WorkKeys Assessment for Dislocated Workers, Cindi Price, Work Skills Assessment
Center, cprice@shoreline.edu
Information Literacy Online Tutorial Assessment, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services, ebianco@shoreline.edu
Revision and Development of Outcomes and Student Assessment Tools for
Individual VCT Courses, Dick Davis, Humanities, ddavis@shoreline.edu
Critical Thinking / General Intellectual Abilities Evaluation Project, Pam
Dusenberry, Humanities, pdusenbe@shoreline.edu
Information Literacy Assessment, Joanna Tillson Library/ Media Services,
jtillson@shoreline.edu
IEAR 8/01
1
B. Examples of Educational Improvements Made/Actions Taken

Professional Development Retreat: Crossing Disciplines, Neal Vasishth, Humanities,
Tim Payne Intra-American Studies and Social Science
o Faculty attended professional development workshops where they had the opportunity
to share teaching strategies, their course outcomes and methods of assessment. These
workshops, such as the one entitled “Grading on the Same Page,” also allowed faculty
a chance to step back and see how those outcomes and methods of assessment fit in
relation to each other and in relation to Shoreline’s general course outcomes. Here
are some examples of workshops that helped with pedagogical growth: “Shoreline’s
Surefire Classroom Practices,” “Inductive vs. Deductive Learning” and “Teaching
Obstacles.”
o Faculty had formal and informal time to get to know one another as people, not just as
instructors. This was invaluable time devoted to developing person to person
relations. The following workshops were instrumental in community building and
improving the collegial climate amongst faculty at Shoreline CC: “Getting to Know
You,” “Interacting with Deaf Colleagues and Students,” “Be the Rock, Be the Tree:
An Exercise in Reflection,” “Conversation Café, Gamin' and Goofin',” “Playing to
Learn, Global Team Trivia Game!,” and “Giving Back and Looking Forward: Group
Reflection.”
o In the workshop entitled “Four Hands on the Steering Wheel: The Art of TeamTeaching,” new Interdisciplinary Studies teams and faculty with interest in making
teams were able to learn team teaching strategies from faculty experienced in
Interdisciplinary instruction. Interdisciplinary assignments were created in the
session.
o Faculty developed unity in purpose and direction and discussed ways for maintaining
it during the school year. This was accomplished in the following workshops, “Hot
Faculty Issues,” “Conversation Café,” and “Giving Back and Looking Forward:
Group Reflection.”
o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix A.

Assessing Information Literacy in ESL Courses, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services
o Team participants learned about information literacy and discussed ideas for
incorporating it into their classes. At least one team member created a new
assignment focused on Internet searching for her Level 3/4/5 ESL classes.
o Team participants indicated that they are now more aware of the information literacy
concepts that may be included in their regular classroom activities and assignments
IEAR, 8/04
2
o
o
o
o
o
and will make a point of assessing the information literacy outcomes as well as the
other outcomes inherent in those assignments and activities..
Surveys given to ESL faculty indicated that faculty wanted more workshops for their
students. In response, the ESL liaison librarian who participated on the team created
a series of workshops for ESL students on the SIRS social issues database and offered
it through the ESL Technology Center. She plans to continue offering these
workshops
The ESL librarian also plans to offer workshops on information literacy skills for
faculty in the division. This also is a result of the survey. If faculty are more
comfortable with these skills themselves they will be more likely to incorporate them
in their classes.
The team has created a website with sample information literacy assessments that can
be shared and used with other faculty members. We did this in the hopes that such an
“assignment bank” would make it easier for faculty to include and assess these skills
in their courses.
The team created several grids that show which information literacy outcomes are
appropriate to each level of ESL. Next to the information literacy outcomes, the grids
list the corresponding ESL learning outcomes which are currently listed in the ESL
Curriculum Guides and course MCO’s. Hopefully, these grids will demonstrate to
faculty that many of these outcomes ALREADY are being incorporated and that it
would not take much more work to assess for these skills.
The team plans to present our findings and suggestions to the department faculty
meeting in the Fall as a follow-up to this project. We would like to seek additional
assessment funding to offer faculty workshops on how to integrate information
literacy into their curriculum. We would like to offer small stipends for faculty to
participate in these workshops.
o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix B.

WorkKeys Assessment for Dislocated Workers, Cindi Price, Work Skills Assessment
Center
o Students able to present to employers a Workplace Skills Certificate documenting
their skills
o Students able to identify skills sets and improve the skills via the use of Key Train in
their chosen occupational field
o Employers receive meaningful evidence of work skills
o CES staff are able to guide students in career choices and training based on
WorkKeys scores
o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix C.
IEAR, 8/04
3

Information Literacy Online Tutorial Assessment, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services
o The tutorial is linked from the library’s main page so it is now easily accessible to
students
o The assessment portion is expanded and is interactive, to give students responses to
their answers.
o An questionnaire of this tutorial has been added and allows students to submit their
answers online.
o Faculty members from English, CEO and Science have been identified who will pilot
the tutorial in Fall 2004 or Winter 2005.
o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix D.

Revision and Development of Outcomes and Student Assessment Tools for
Individual VCT Courses, Dick Davis, Humanities
o Prior assessment projects provided interaction with full-time and associate faculty.
Through this interaction outcomes/assessment information for visual communications
courses were developed, revised and published on line as well in printed format. The
goal of the overview/ review of the outcomes for each of 15 courses was to have
teams of instructors participate in the reviews and develop commonly agreed upon
outcomes for each course. Documents were designed and published on-line for use by
the teams. Much of the process was accomplished on-line with minimal meeting time.
When discussion meeting were held they required less time to complete. The various
groups involved had advanced information to use to apply to problems within the
outcomes developed The import of on-line meeting was that it allowed our associate
faculty, who have other career obligations to participate without impact on their daily
work schedule. The group interaction and group evaluation of courses provided us
with outcomes for each course as well as the ability to identify “cross course”
outcomes. The cross course outcomes are ones that appear in most if not allindividual course outcomes within the program. This overlap of outcomes became the
foundation for the development of assessment tools that evolved. From the developed
outcomes for each of the 15 courses we then (as a group) created two sets of
assessment questions. These sets were based on input from industry, industry
standards and as identified by our full and associate instructional staff. These
questions are grouped in two distinct areas of learning that the VCT (visual
communications technology) program identified as being essential for student
success. The two areas are: skills and concept/idea development. From the list of
assessment questions for each course the teams developed/created sub sets of
questions that can be administered, evaluated and tabulated. This will give a clear
indication of how students perceived their learning in each individual course and how
they felt they did in regards to the identified cross course outcomes as well. Through
the evaluations we were able to determine how well instruction was doing in our goal
IEAR, 8/04
4
to cover the identified outcomes in each course. Courses were identified by number.
There was no reference to instructors. That allowed more freedom and removed
instructor evaluation from the process. The final project in the series was to assess
each course through the year using the assessment question sets and correlate the
findings to determine which of our identified outcomes were being met and which
were not according to the students. An outcome that was not anticipated in the
development of the projects using this assessment process was for us to identifying
which outcomes are realistic for a specific course and which outcomes for student
learning cannot be achieved in a specific course or series of courses.
o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix E.

Critical Thinking / General Intellectual Abilities Evaluation Project, Pam
Dusenberry, Humanities
o
Faculty workgroups such as used in this project are extremely effective at increasing
participants’ familiarity with General Education Outcomes (GEOs), at improving the
teaching and learning of GEOs, and at improving the evaluation of student achievement of
the GEOs. Indeed, such groups directly lead to better student achievement of the learning
outcomes this college has deemed most important.
o
Washington State University’s Critical Thinking Scoring Guide provides a good base for the
evaluation of students’ critical thinking abilities. The WSU scoring guide addresses the first
and third sections of the General Intellectual Abilities GEO. The middle section of GAI deals
with interdisciplinary learning which is not addressed by the scoring guide.
o
Faculty used current assignments to evaluate their students’ critical thinking abilities. They
made some adaptations to teaching, to assignments and to scoring guides which they felt
improved their students’ performances.
o
The development of criteria used in evaluating critical thinking helps faculty make their
expectations clear to students. Faculty participants believe their students produced better
work as a result of knowing the criteria beforehand. The use of a scoring guide or rubric is an
important component in teaching and assessing student achievement of learning outcomes.
o
While all faculty measure their students’ learning, gathering examples of assignments,
scoring guides and student work provides evidence of student learning.
o
The evidence of student learning that is gathered in a process such as this one can be taken to
programs as models of assessment. A group of faculty within a program could use this
approach to gather evidence of student learning of one or a set of outcomes. Evidence
gathered in this way could be linked to program improvement efforts.
o Additional project detail is contained in Appendix F.

Information Literacy Assessment, Joanna Tillson Library/ Media Services
o Report not yet received—will be forwarded at a later date.
IEAR, 8/04
5
C. Current Issues/Concerns
 General Although considerable progress has been made in attracting new faculty
participants in assessment development, there remains considerable work to be done to
complete the Shoreline Strategic Plan requirement for a well-defined assessment
procedure for each course in the College Catalog. Continued emphasis on progress in this
area is reflected in a Strategic Focus area for 2004-05. Shoreline Outcomes Assessment
Reports were a major exhibit for the successful Focused Interim Visit from a Commission
on Colleges Evaluator in Spring, 2004.

Professional Development Retreat: Crossing Disciplines, Neal Vasishth, Humanities,
Tim Payne Intra-American Studies and Social Science
o This was the first faculty retreat in over 15 years. We all discovered how productive
and beneficial it was for our pedagogical growth. Faculty were obviously hungry to
learn from each other and we discovered a need for the institution to do more in this
area.
o More effort in community building on campus is needed, not only amongst faculty,
but amongst all Shoreline employees, staff, administration and faculty. We need to
find ways of accomplishing this and assessing it.
o The retreat was a great opportunity to think out of the box. Many new ideas were
discussed. We need to develop strategies and create time for implementing these
ideas at Shoreline CC.

Assessing Information Literacy in ESL Courses, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services
o Our survey showed that faculty in the ESL department view assessing for information
literacy to be “one more thing” that they have to do in addition to their regular
curriculum. Many are not aware that they ALREADY incorporate many of these
skills into their classes and that devising simple assessments does not have to be
difficult or terribly time-consuming.
o Faculty also are not aware of the general education outcomes in general and how they
are to be implemented. For example, none of the ESL faculty were aware that, in its
response to the colleges accreditation self-study, the accrediting team specifically
asked that information literacy skills be incorporated and assessed in curriculum
across campus. There is the perception of a lack of leadership by the college
administration in this area. Repeatedly, we were asked, “Is the college going to
require this?”
IEAR, 8/04
6

o Many faculty are not comfortable teaching a number of the information literacy
outcomes, and so it would be important to offer professional development workshops
so they can hone their own skills. This cold pose a challenge to library faculty in
terms of time and workload. Faculty also need to be more connected to services that
can supplement their own teaching of these skills, such as the library and the
ESL/GED Technology Center.
WorkKeys Assessment for Dislocated Workers, Cindi Price, Work Skills Assessment
Center
o Lack of integration of the WorkKeys system into instruction
o Lack of requirements for students to engage in Key Train to increase their skill level
based on their WorkKeys scores
o If a second year of funding is made available, a concerted effort to improve
communication and education about the WorkKeys system between business, SCC
faculty, and staff will be a primary goal.

Information Literacy Online Tutorial Assessment, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services
o Many faculty lack time in their classes and knowledge of information literacy issues,
and so are less willing to include these outcomes in their courses. An online tutorial
with an assessment component included provides one more mechanism for providing
this instruction to students.
o Because the tutorial is freely accessible from the web, more work needs to be done to
figure out the feasibility of providing a version that could be accessed on Blackboard,
so instructors have some control and know who has taken the tutorial and how they
did on the assessment portions.
o Because there is no credit requirement attached to the information literacy general
education outcome, there are few reliable ways to discern whether students are
gaining these skills and the online tutorial is one attempt to do that.

Revision and Development of Outcomes and Student Assessment Tools for
Individual VCT Courses, Dick Davis, Humanities
o The ongoing concerns we have in our program would be as identified above.
Time/funding must be allocated for continued use of the assessment tools and
processes that we have successfully developed in the course of the three-year project.
The lion’s share of the work has been done with only scheduled reassessment to be
performed during the ensuing academic years. It should be noted that there is constant
and unavoidable change occurring in the Visual Communications arena regularly.
This change must be reflected in the revision of the outcomes/assessment questions
that are used.
IEAR, 8/04
7
Faculty involvement continues to be of concern in that many of our instructors are
associate faculty. They of course have the current industry expertise that gives us
much needed input for assessment and course content revision. Our project did
develop an idea that has proven workable using on-line Internet participation however
the technology needs to be updated and maintained for the process to continue to
work effectively.

Critical Thinking / General Intellectual Abilities Evaluation Project, Pam
Dusenberry, Humanities
o
o
The administration needs to commit dollars to assessment. Assessing student learning in
thorough, substantial ways takes a great deal of time. Faculty need release time and stipends
to do this work.
Faculty need continuous professional development on how to assess student learning, how to
record the evidence gathered from performance-based assessment of student learning, how to
report the effects of assessment information on classroom and program improvement, and
how to assess whether the changes to classrooms and programs actually make a difference in
student learning.
IEAR, 8/04
8
D. Budget Summary
CATEGORY
Salaries and benefits:
1) assessment liaison
2) institutional researcher
3) clerical support
4) other (please specify)
5) total salaries/benefits
AMOUNT SPENT
(indicate NA for “not applicable”)
1) (see below)
2. $18,216
3. $2,000
4) N/A
5) 20,216
Assessment project costs (faculty
stipends/reassigned time, minigrants, instrument costs, scoring
costs, etc.)
$24, 441.
Professional development costs
(travel, consultants, workshops,
resource materials, etc.)
$86.
Support costs (supplies, printing,
postage, etc.)
$64.
Other: (optional)
IEAR, 8/04
NA
9
NOTES/COMMENTS
2)also serves as a
liaison
3) OA3 support for
scanner operation and
scan form
development.
APPENDICES
IEAR, 8/04
10
APPENDIX A
1. Project Title:
Professional Development Retreat: Crossing Disciplines
Name(s) and contact information for project manager(s):
Neal Vasishth, Interdisciplinary Studies Coordinator & English Professor
nvasisht@shore.ctc.edu, (206) 546-4736
Tim Payne, Professional Development Coordinator & Economics Professor
tpayne@shore.ctc.edu, (206) 546-4706
2. A detailed overview of the project including the purpose, the number and
nature of participants, and the specific activities and processes in which they
engaged. Highlight both successes and challenges encountered in the course of
your project.
Purpose:
The purpose of this project was to give an opportunity for faculty across all disciplines to
learn what we each teach and to learn our methods of teaching. We created the
opportunity to share pedagogical approaches in a way that has been lacking because of
our day to day duties. Using a retreat as a setting allowed for constructive and creative
dialog between faculty, without the distractions and time limitations usually present. The
physical boundaries that separate faculty from different disciplines were removed
allowing for new constructive collegial relations.
With this spirit in mind, here were some specific objectives for the project:
1. Faculty will share teaching strategies, their course outcomes and methods of
assessment.
2. Faculty will have a chance to step back and see how those outcomes fit in relation
to each other and in relation to Shoreline’s general course outcomes.
3. Faculty will attend specific professional development workshops of their
choosing. Here are some examples of topics: Constructing/re-shaping stand alone
and interdisciplinary courses by clarifying outcomes; Using ungraded forms of
assessment for improving student learning; Integrating diversity into existing
courses; Developing strategies for team teaching and integration of disciplines.
4. Faculty who have engaged in curriculum transformation projects will share their
experiences and finding with general faculty. In other words, this will be a chance
to share results of prior assessment grant projects and to help incorporate results
IEAR, 8/04
11
into our teaching. Those faculty involved with the multicultural transformation
projects will also share their work.
5. Faculty will have informal time to get to know one another as people, not just as
instructors. There will be time structured and unstructured devoted to developing
person to person relations.
6. New ideas for interdisciplinary courses will be developed.
7. Faculty will develop unity in purpose and direction and discuss ways for
maintaining it during the school year.
The number and nature of participants:
There were ten members of the Retreat Planning committee. Together, we planned the
retreat agenda and made critical decisions. I chaired the committee and was responsible
for planning the meetings, collecting registrations, handling the finances, and setting up
the facilities, food and housing. Twenty three faculty members helped to facilitate
workshop sessions. Fifty six faculty attended the retreat.
Specific Activities and Processes:
The Interdisciplinary committee came up with the idea for the retreat, and we decided to
make the retreat about interdisciplinary professional development and community
building rather than about interdisciplinary course development. We wanted to create an
event that would benefit all faculty. In order to accomplish this, we gave the faculty
opportunity to create the agenda and purpose.
At the beginning of the year, we invited all faculty to a brainstorming session. Eighteen
faculty members attended and we shared ideas for the retreat. These ideas were the
nucleus for the agenda that would slowly emerge over the next two months. At this
session, we also asked for volunteers to serve on a Retreat Planning committee. Ten
faculty volunteered: Tim Payne, Brooke Zimmers, Daina Smuidrins, Emma Baer, Steve
Bogart, Paul Duernberger, Russell Rosco, Elizabeth Hanson, Pam Dusenberry, Neal
Vasishth.
Since we wanted the retreat to meet the needs and desires of the faculty and the IDS
committee didn’t want to impose a vision, the brainstorming session became more of our
guide than the Retreat proposal. As a result, a few of the goals on the proposal were
discarded, but most of the goals were embraced.
After a series of meetings and email discussions, the retreat planning committee
developed an agenda which included the following workshops:
Getting to Know You: Icebreakers and Community Building
Hot Faculty Issues
Interacting with Deaf Colleagues and Students
Shoreline’s Surefire Classroom Practices
Guided Tour of Island Wood
Grading on the Same Page
IEAR, 8/04
12
Be the Rock, Be the Tree: An Exercise in Reflection
Inductive vs. Deductive Learning
Conversation Café
Gamin' and Goofin': Playing to Learn
Global Team Trivia Game!
Four Hands on the Steering Wheel: The Art of Team-Teaching
Teaching Obstacles
Giving Back and Looking Forward: Group Reflection
After the retreat was over, we assessed the outcomes of the retreat through a variety of
methods. We had each individual faculty participant fill out a questionnaire. We had
faculty get into small groups and asked them to discuss what worked and what could be
better. They wrote their comments on poster paper and shared them with all participants.
After we returned to campus, we asked faculty to send an email expressing which
workshop was the most beneficial and we asked them to explain why.
Here are a few comments about the retreat as a whole that illustrate the perceptions of
most of the faculty:
I left the retreat with a deeper sense of pride and admiration for all the hard work and
dedication that takes place at Shoreline Community College. I will continue to be
inspired by being around so many people who love doing what they do and are willing to
give so much of themselves to enrich lives and make our community a better place.
The main thing that I gained in the whole conference was a better understanding of the
talent that we have at SCC. I got to know my fellow faculty better and met many faculty
from other areas of campus that I normally have little contact with. Thank you for the
opportunity.
The retreat was an opportunity to reconnect and reflect, and through taking part in the
workshops focused on faculty concerns and the enjoyable activities, I was able to do just
that. It is so important for us to have the time to know each other and the paths that
brought us to teaching. We can gain greater respect for and understanding of each other
that way. It is equally important for us to think about our own growth and professional
development. We feel re-energized and re-committed to our tasks when we have an
opportunity to do this. When we leave campus to do this, and go a beautiful environment
like Island Wood, we are more able to have a fresh perspective, get outside of ourselves,
and be positive.
As illustrated above, the retreat was very successful. The faculty found the time to be
productive and beneficial and expressed a desire to make this an annual event. In terms
of areas to improve, some faculty made a few suggestions. It was mentioned that there
was too much structured time. We had activities scheduled from the time we started at
10:00 am until 9:00 pm. It was also mentioned that we try doing this type of community
building with all employees at Shoreline: staff, administration and faculty. Also, many
ideas emerged at the retreat, but we need to meet the challenge of turning them into
concrete institutional improvements.
IEAR, 8/04
13
3. A collection of all materials (in electronic form) produced by the project.
Materials should be annotated, where necessary, to inform readers of their
nature and purpose and how they support program improvement efforts. For
any products available on the web, you may provide a URL in lieu of a copy of
the material.
This portion will contain the following material:
a.
b.
c.
d.
The Retreat Agenda and Workshop Descriptions
List of Participants
Workshop Evaluations
Assessment Questionnaire
e. The Retreat Agenda and Workshop Descriptions
Recovering Our Passion!
Session Descriptions
Friday, February 20
9:30-10:00: Check in at the Great Hall
If you have extra time, you can take your personal belongings to your assigned room in one of the lodges.
10:00-12:00: Session One:
Getting to Know You: Icebreakers and Community Building
Great Hall
12:00-1:15: Lunch at the Dining Hall
1:30-2:45: Session Two:
Hot Faculty Issues
Great Hall
What's happening on campus, and what are some of the "burning issues" that should be on your radar this
year? A panel of faculty leaders will highlight key issues, prompting a rich discussion, with many
opportunities for questions and discussion. The panelists include Pam Dusenberry (Assessment), Bob
Francis (Curriculum Committee), Tim Payne (Faculty Senate Chair), and Karen Toreson (Federation
President).
Interacting with Deaf Colleagues and Students
Learning Studio-L2
This workshop is for those interested in learning how to communicate with their Deaf colleagues and
students. Richard Jacobs (RJ), American Sign Language Professor, will facilitate the workshop. Kathleen
Lynch will join RJ to discuss their experiences working together and communicating across cultural
differences. The format will be a question and answer session. Please, if possible, email your questions in
advance of the workshop to: rjacobs@shoreline.edu . They are looking forward to an open, interesting and
enlightening discussion with their colleagues.
Shoreline’s Surefire Classroom Practices
Learning Studio-L3
IEAR, 8/04
14
It's no secret we are an exceptional faculty. Here is an opportunity to share our most effective teaching,
practices, assignments and activities. We will learn from the best and share our best. Come away with all
kinds of new ideas.
2:45-3:00: Snack Break
Beverages and Homemade Cookies will be available.
Dining Hall.
3:00-4:15: Session Three
Guided Tour of Island Wood
Outside the Great Hall
“Operating from sustainable designed facilities on a 255-acre campus, the organization serves as a model
for energy conservation and community living. The property provides a diverse variety of ecosystems for
field experiences: 62 acres of wetlands, a bog, pond, second growth forest, a stream, and access to a marine
estuary park adjacent to the property.”
Grading on the Same Page
Learning Studio-L2
How do we define our grading criteria and communicate them to our students and colleagues? How do we
measure grades and ensure that we are creating assignments that fit our grading models? Come and discuss
and, if you can, bring copies of grading materials you use and/or give to your students!
Be the Rock, Be the Tree: An Exercise in Reflection
Learning Studio-L3
As educators, we create reflective experiences for students, but we are often too busy to take time to engage
in reflection ourselves. Come take a time out to engage in a brief contemplative exercise that may just
surprise and enlighten you. Please bring pen and paper.
4:30-5:45: Session Four
Guided Tour of Island Wood
Outside the Great Hall
See description in previous session.
Inductive vs. Deductive Learning
Learning Studio-L3
Inductive = Teacher provides examples, and students come up with the rule. Deductive = Teacher provides
the rule, and students come up with examples. Experience inductive teaching and discuss ways to infuse
your teaching with this approach.
Conversation Café/Happy Hour
Lodge Lounge in Invertebrate Inn
This is your opportunity to discuss issues near and dear to your heart. We'll collect ideas, break into
discussion groups, and cavort away! Here are some ideas that have been suggested as possible topics:
consistency in Division practices/policies, campus communication, and block scheduling.
6:00-7:30: Dinner at the Dining Hall
Evening Sessions
7:30-8:45: Session Five
Gamin' and Goofin': Playing to Learn
Great Hall
We're going to move, laugh, negotiate, compete, and cooperate. Play and Learn, en masse, some games you
can take back to the classroom.
9:00-10:15: Session Six
Global Team Trivia Game!
IEAR, 8/04
15
Great Hall
Come test your "global awareness" in a fun and hopefully lively contest. Play in an interdisciplinary team
of colleagues from across campus. This shouldn't be called a trivia game, because the questions and
answers may be far from insignificant. Game show hosts: Tim Payne and Daina Smuidrins.
A. Saturday, February 21
8:00-9:00: Breakfast in the Dining Hall
9:15-10:30: Session Seven
Four Hands on the Steering Wheel: The Art of Team-Teaching
Learning Studio-L2
Team-teaching is never easy but can be extremely rewarding for both teachers and learners. Two Shoreline
teams, Rachel David & Pam Dusenberry and Jeanette Idiart & Shelly Jordon-Zirkle will show us how they
succeed at this ‘art’. Challenges and solutions will be discussed. Attendees will have a chance to share a
steering wheel.
Teaching Obstacles
Learning Studio-L3
In our teaching we constantly meet with obstacles presented by our students, our surroundings, the
limitations of time, and even our own shortcomings. We usually overcome these hurdles to our success, but
in some cases we just haven’t found the perfect solution. This facilitated discussion will be an opportunity
to share ideas about teaching obstacles, the common and uncommon, the predictable and unpredictable.
10:45-12:00: Closing Session
Giving Back and Looking Forward: Group Reflection
Great Hall
f. List of Participants
Faculty Attending
1. Nikki Honey-Dental Hygiene
2. Stephanie Diemel-Physics
3. Crystal Hanscom-Math
4. Carol Dyksterhuis-PE
5. Barry Ehrlich-Music
6. Claire Joly-Eng & IAS
7. Daniel Hyatt-Math
8. Christine Landon-IAS
9. Julie Kemp-History
10. Bob Francis-Economics
11. Matt Houghten-CEO
12. Troy Wolff-English
13. Daina Smuidrins-ESL
14. Robert Shields-Comp Sci
15. Jeanette Idiart-English
16. Donna Linn-ESL
17. Robert Hayden-IAS
18. Pamela Pasquale-Nursing
19. Susan Sparks-Speech Path
IEAR, 8/04
29. Brooke Zimmers-Speech Com
30. Diana Knauf-Psych
31. Jeff Junkinsmith-Music
33. Linda Forst-Criminal Justice
34. Karen Toreson-Business Admin.
35. Kenny Lawson-Political Sci
36. Matt Loper-Biology
37. Pam Dusenberry-English
38. Paul Duernberger-Business Admin.
39. Rachel David-Women Studies
40. Russel Rosco-Business Admin
41. Steve Bogart-Math
42. Venus Deming-Nutrition
43. Tim Payne-Economics
44. Neal Vasishth-English
45. Kathleen Lynch-Speech Com
46. Richard Jacobs(RJ)-Am. Sign Lang.
47. Dongwa Hu-Economics
48. Shelly Jordan-Zirkle-History
16
20. Elena Bianco-Library
21. Ernest Johnson-IAS
22. Lauren Wilson-ESL
23. Kristin Marra-ESL/ABE
24. Guy Hamilton-Biology
25. Nirmala Savage-Math
26. Jason Gardner-Math
27. Lindsey Legaspi-WED
28. Jan Slusher-ESL
49. Lyn De Carlo-ESL
50. Mayumi Steinmetz-Japanese
51. Amelia Acosta-Spanish
52. Bruce McCutcheon-ESL
53. Donna Biscay-ESL
54. Bob Thompson-Psychology
55. Jan Bittenbender-Nutrition
56. Matt Depies-Biology
g. Workshop Evaluations
Recovering Our Passion
Retreat Outcomes
After we returned, I asked faculty to let me know what they gained from the specific workshops. Here are
their responses.
General Comments from faculty about the retreat:
I left the retreat with a deeper sense of pride and admiration for all the hard work and dedication that takes
place at Shoreline Community College. I will continue to be inspired by being around so many people who
love doing what they do and are willing to give so much of themselves to enrich lives and make our
community a better place.
The main thing that I gained in the whole conference was a better understanding of the talent that we have at
SCC. I got to know my fellow faculty better and met many faculty from other areas of campus that I
normally have little contact with. Thank you for the opportunity.
The retreat was an opportunity to reconnect and reflect, and through taking part in the workshops focused
on faculty concerns and the enjoyable activities, I was able to do just that. It is so important for us to have
the time to know each other and the paths that brought us to teaching. We can gain greater respect for and
understanding of each other that way. It equally important for us to think about our own growth and
professional development. We feel re-energized and re-committed to our tasks when we have an
opportunity to do this. When we leave campus to do this, and go a beautiful environment like Island Wood,
we are more able to have a fresh perspective, get outside of ourselves, and be positive.
The retreat was not only great fun and truly a chance to relax for me, but most importantly an opportunity to
get to know the people I work with, in particular, those from other fields and departments. I learned what
great people I work with in a personal and practical sense.
Hot Faculty Issues
The "Faculty Issues" session was helpful. In Dental Hygiene, I had not used the "Z" grade before. It was
interesting to learn more about using that in grading.
IEAR, 8/04
17
Excellent synopsis of hot faculty issues from each of the major faculty factions.
Very collaborative on sharing and exchanging ideas on current issues facing faculty. It was very helpful to
me to get a chance to discuss topics with faculty on other parts of the campus that I usually do not get a
chance to converse with. It was the most effective development activity I have ever attended.
I learned that there was a general sense among the faculty that the administration needs to be more
genuinely open to faculty opinions and respectful of faculty time.
Interacting with Deaf Colleagues and Students
RJ gave a sample lesson, so we had the experience of being a student in an ASL class. We also had the
opportunity to ask questions about the language and deaf culture. In addition, we flooded Kathleen
w/questions about learning the language as an adult. There was so much enthusiasm that the possibility of
holding Friday afternoon ASL workshops was mentioned.
Definitely the best experience for me was attending the workshop with Richard Jacobs and Kathleen Lynch.
As an instructor in Multicultural Studies, learning from Richard and Kathleen about the deaf culture was
very helpful, something I can definitely use in my classroom when I talk about interacting with people who
have a disability and with whom you do not necessarily feel comfortable communicating until you learn
how to. This was very good for me.
This was a great session. I learned how to sign some letters and phrases. I learned about the various types
of sign languages used within the U.S. We were also given a lesson which showed how RJ teaches his
hearing students on the first day.
Shoreline’s Surefire Classroom Practices
I attended several sessions, including the "Better Practices" one. I found it very helpful in finding new ways
of creating a productive classroom environment, and also in creating a sense that we all face similar
challenges.
I learned some great ways to ensure or encourage appropriate class participation - that is, not too much or
too little. One idea was to hand out cards to all those who have spoken, and after some time, only those
without a card can speak.
Guided Tour of Island Wood
Not only a great way to appreciate the location we were staying in but a great way to interact with
colleagues while walking through a beautiful setting. The setting of this retreat was truly relaxing and
conducive to the goal of "retreating".
I enjoyed being able to connect with several colleagues on a couple of hikes and was able to discover quite
a bit about their specialties, interests and unique knowledge that I would never have become aware of in the
ordinary work environment due to a lack of time or inconvenient location of their office. Some of this new
knowledge may never be put to use, on the other hand it may well be put into use either in overcoming the
mundane cross campus communication problems we seem to have or in a more serendipitous way when
trying to coordinate special projects/presentation/learning communities.
Grading on the Same Page
IEAR, 8/04
18
I learned some great stuff from my colleagues at the Grading session I co-facilitated, and the session itself
led to some useful discussion on standards and practices, especially in transfer programs.
There were professors from various disciplines: music, world languages, history, English, business
administration, and math. In the beginning I was not sure how we could find the common ground and talk in
the same language. It turned out to be we were in agreement in most of areas. Even we practiced in different
ways, I could understand the rational of different practices. One of the most interesting topics was if we
should test students something we did not teach in class but it is in the textbook. We all agreed that we
should test what we were doing in the classroom. But we could understand there might be some cases that
untaught topics might need to be tested to cover all the basic knowledge in order to go to the next level.
It was a nice session to be reassured that we all were using various assessment tools to assess students in
more complete sense. I mean we are taking serious measurements to give fair grades.
This session allowed for conversation of the ways that each of us defines what an "A," "B," etc. are. We
also tackled the ways that we convey such definitions to our students and sample rubrics were shared. This
really helped me to think about my grading system and how I convey it to students.
Be the Rock, Be the Tree: An Exercise in Reflection
This was an enlightening experience on free writing. Coming from a science background, this is not
something I had ever done, and it was quite uncomfortable and intimidating at first -as many great
experiences often are in the beginning. We all picked up an unanimated object from a small selection and
begun a free-flowing introspective writing about what the object was like (first on a descriptive level) and
then we went into searching from a symbolic metaphorical meaning of the object. It was shocking to me to
see where the explorations lead me and how quickly we could get to a very deep intimate level of selfexploration. We finally were asked to share in small groups, and to the level we felt comfortable doing it,
what we had discovered. This was also both uncomfortable and enlightening. I felt this was a very powerful
and extremely liberating experience. I can definitely see the educational value of type of writing, how this
kind of very personal experience can be so powerful in allowing students to access deeper levels of selfexploration, and trigger the flow of words in otherwise uninspired writers. It was also a relief to find out
from a colleague who has used this exercise in class, that students can feel free and honest to write whatever
because this writing never gets read by anyone else.
At first, I was unsure what this session was about, exactly, but in the spirit of adventure, I attended anyway.
It ended up being the most valuable of any of the sessions I experienced at the retreat. The facilitators
demonstrated an excellent tool for getting students to explore their own thinking and to reflect in depth on a
topic. I plan to use this reflective writing technique in my LIB 150 class next quarter as a way to address
the issues of information overload and research anxiety experienced by many students.
I found this workshop very helpful for me in learning how to teach the concept of reflection to my CEO
students. The notion of what reflection is difficult enough to understand, so to see an activity that
demonstrates this for my students is wonderful. Any student needs to know how to conjure reflection to be
efficacious in their studies; this is a task often novel for my students.
Conversation Café
The Conversation Café actually led to some good discussion from faculty on concrete issues we'd like to
continue to work on.
Free form expression and cavorting
Gamin' and Goofin': Playing to Learn
IEAR, 8/04
19
I am very kinesthetic. Community and teambuilding are strongly held values of mine.
I like to see/hear my colleagues mooing. Breaking a sweat is always a good thing in my book. I am
competitive by nature (or is it nurture?) I enjoyed watching people with advanced degrees struggle
understanding the rules of the games.
Fun and games with our colleagues--icebreakers galore.
I gained a better sense of how I might structure activities that help all participants learn and challenge
themselves without setting up a sense of competition (to which some people respond well whilst others
wilt).
Inductive vs. Deductive Learning
I learned the value of deductive and inductive teaching methods, as well as how I can systematically use
both of these approaches to improve my teaching.
The "Inductive and Deductive Teaching Styles" workshop was interesting and interactive. It was given
from ESL viewpoint, but it was interesting to think how more student-generated learning could be utilized
in my area in Prof-Tech.
I went to "Inductive and Deductive" teaching. I enjoyed this workshop because it put a name to what I was
already doing and gave me a few new strategies. I particularly liked the discussion because it was about
TEACHING AND LEARNING, something we don't get to talk about much around here.
My learning from "Inductive and Deductive Learning" included new ways to guide students. Specifically, I
learned the impact of different correction techniques when student makes a mistake. The inductive ways
take more patience and time from the instructor, but ultimately, the student's long term learning is better.
Of the sessions I attended I particularly remember the ‘Inductive v. Deductive Learning’ session as being
helpful as an excellent refresher on the differences between these two approaches to learning. Daina gave us
several clear examples of each kind of approach to experience ourselves, then opened the session up to
suggestions of other ways to incorporate the different techniques. The session was well attended and almost
everyone contributed at least one or several ideas for us to take away. Who knows why some ideas stick, but
I particularly remember and will use Kristin Marra’s suggestion for an inductive technique which she uses
with writing classes: “Dumb Teacher”, where she stands in front of the class, chalk in hand, and asks for
their directions. She follows their directions exactly, even if it is wrong, forcing students to find their own
way through the situation, with a touch of humor. Thanks Kristin!
The "Inductive and Deductive Learning" session made me more aware of the positive impact of Inductive
learning from a student point of view. Every teacher should have a chance to be a student, even for one
class session, to understand the efficient way of teaching.
Four Hands on the Steering Wheel: The Art of Team Teaching
I attended this workshop because I will be teaching an IDS in the fall and wanted to get some ideas about an
approach to the class, "dovetailing" content, the actual day to day team teaching with another faculty
member and some ideas for assessment.
This session was valuable and, for me, the session that I needed.
IEAR, 8/04
20
I really enjoyed the 4 hands on the steering wheel session as it allowed me to find a way to integrate new
materials into my classes next quarter. Just in our brief encounter in this session I was able to work with
Troy to find a way to include ideas surrounding the use of literature to highlight specific examples of how
we as humans have a tendency to follow the path of least resistance.
Very helpful workshop with great tips and modeling from exemplary faculty who've IDSed.
It gave me insight into the process of developing an IDS and insight into the rewards for student learning.
The workshop was relaxed and informative. It encouraged me to consider forging stronger links between
my field and other disciplines.
This workshop was about successful approaches to team-teaching. It was of particular interest for me as I
am working to develop a new IDS course. We were exposed to examples of approaches to team-teaching,
structure of courses and teaching tools successfully used by veteran team-teaching pairs on campus. I found
the alignment of ideas and methods of each pair striking and very inspiring. All the IDS partners showed a
deep level of interconnection between the two disciplines and a very strong respect and cooperation spirit.
Two hands-on activities were particularly enjoyable and helpful to demonstrate how to really integrate
concepts and disciplines. The first was one exercise modeled after Pam Dusenberry’s and Rachel David’s
class “Sex in Space”. They had us brainstorm major themes we discussed at the retreat and they (quickly
and simultaneously) wrote them up on the board. They then asked us to think of 2 random numbers (1-20).
Then they randomly numbered each theme. Each of us had got to try to integrate in writing the 2 themes
identified by the number we had thought which in many cases, were seemingly unrelated themes. It was
amazing what we could come up with.
The second exercise, also quite effective, was to write up 6 major concepts for our discipline and then
number them. We were then paired up randomly with another faculty member and had to work together to
find a way to connect two concepts with the same number. It was funny, challenging and had a great
demonstrative power.
I really enjoyed an opportunity to brainstorm with colleagues from several different disciplines on potential
IDS classes. Neal, Jeanette and Rachel's discussion of the practical aspects of teaching a class together was
especially illuminating. Not having taught an IDS class before, I found it very useful as well as, well,
comforting to learn about how one can strike a balance between complete integration and independent
presentation. It certainly inspired me to actively pursue IDS opportunities with my colleagues.
Teaching Obstacles
It was a really constructive discussion about how to deal with situations that arise that keep our students
from learning and teachers from teaching at the best.
I attended the Teaching Obstacles workshop and learned about many different challenges that we may face
in an educational environment. I learned that there are several categories of obstacles.
The first are obstacles that an instructor can address with course policies and procedures as stated
in a syllabus. These include obstacles such as disruptive students (who arrive late, leave early, and have
cell phones that interrupt class, for example). These are student behaviors that can be addressed through
creating course policies and announcing them in course syllabi.
Another category of obstacles are those that we may not be able to easily address using our own
expertise, but can be addressed by seeking out the expertise of others on campus. For example, students
with learning disabilities can be assisted by working with the staff in the student services/counseling office.
Faculty can assist in referring students with learning disabilities to trained support staff by including a
statement in course syllabi.
A third category of obstacles are those that are not imposed by either the students or the subject
matter, but by sources that are seemingly beyond the control of the faculty member. Some examples
IEAR, 8/04
21
are the distractions that cause students to lose focus on classroom activities, such as the noise generated
by lawn mowers and power tools being used by plant operations outside of classrooms. While some
h. Assessment Questionnaire
Faculty Retreat 2004
Retreat Assessment
Islandwood, Bainbridge Island,WA.
In order to provide adequate feedback on the success of this retreat,
please evaluate (with an X in the appropriate box) the program
based on the following:
( 1 Low
Rating System
3 Moderate or OK
1
1. Was Session 1, Friday AM (Getting to
know you) worthwhile ?....................
2. Circle the Session 2 meeting that you
attended: (1) Faculty Issues Panel, (2) RJ
and Kathleen ? , (3) Better Practices; and
rate the session that you
attended……………………………….
3. Circle the Session 3 meeting that you
attended: (1) Reflective Writing, (2)
Grading, (3) Tour of Islandwood; and rate
the session that you attended…….
4. Circle the Session 4 meeting that you
attended: (1) Open topic (2) Tour of
Islandwood (3) Open topic ________ ; and
rate the session…………….….....
5. Friday Evening session, Experiential
IEAR, 8/04
22
5 Excellent)
2
3
4
5
Games
5a. Friday Evening session, Team Trivia
5 b. 5 b. If you decided not to attend any
Friday evening sessions, place an X in # 5
1
2
3
4
5
6. Late Night Friday , Circle the meeting that
you attended or number 3: (1) Adventure
Game (2) Special topic _______, or (3) did
not attend and rate session (1) or
(2)…………………….
7. First Session Saturday Morning, Circle the
session that you attended (1) Teaching, (2)
Team teaching (3) special topic__________;
and rate that
meeting…………………………….
8. Saturday – All Group Reflection, was this
meeting worthwhile ………..
9. Please rate the meals at Islandwood
10. Overall, would you consider returning to
Islandwood next year……
Please place an X in the appropriate box for the following:
Yes
No
1. Based on your expectations, were the topics presented
adequate …………………………
2. Were the accommodations at Islandwood adequate
……………………………………..
3. This faculty retreat was limited to 55 faculty on a “first
paid, first registered” basis, the next retreat should be
larger in order to accommodate those on the retreat waiting
list
General Comments: ______________________________
________________________________________________
IEAR, 8/04
23
RETURN THIS FORM TO: Neal Vasishth via campus
mail or drop in collection box prior to leaving Islandwood.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION
<<Return>>
IEAR, 8/04
24
APPENDIX B
Assessing Information Literacy in ESL Courses, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services, ebianco@shoreline.edu
Project Overview:
The purpose of this project was to determine to what extent information literacy
outcomes are incorporated and assessed in the ESL department. It is a project that I
took on as a result of my participation in the campus Assessment Response Team
(ART) this year. In addition, the library faculty are concerned about this because in
the 2002 “Full-Scale Evaluation Committee Report,” which responded to the
college’s accreditation self-study, the Northwest Association of Schools and of
Colleges and Universities Commission of Colleges and Universities noted that
“integration of the library and information resources into the learning process is
uneven.” The report specifically asked that information literacy be integrated into all
instructional programs at Shoreline. To that end, we decided to approach individual
departments and evaluate which aspects of information literacy they do and do not
include and which aspects they do and do not assess. Because we already work
closely with many ESL faculty, we chose to start there. We hope to continue this
process with other departments across campus.
The first step in the process was to get a selection of faculty who teach at all levels of
ESL. We put the word out through the department’s weekly e-mail, and got responses
from 5 ESL faculty members. In addition, the library’s ESL liaison was also
included. The team met and discussed what the Information Literacy outcomes were.
Some of the ESL faculty were familiar with them, but others were not. We decided to
create a survey to find out how many other faculty incorporate and assess these
outcomes in their classrooms. As part of the survey, we asked how the library could
help them incorporate and assess these skills.
The survey results are included in the project team website which is listed below, but
to summarize, we found that most of the respondents DID incorporate at least one of
the outcomes in there classes, but that many of them did no formal assessment of
those outcomes. Faculty mentioned that lack of time was a major factor in their not
including these skills more. At least one faculty member said that they saw no clear
connection between information literacy and their ESL curriculum. Others said that
they lacked knowledge of one or more of these skills that would prohibit them from
including these skills in their classes. They expressed a desire to have the library
faculty offer workshops for both themselves and their students on these skills.
The team took these results and created a list of suggestions, also attached on the
project team website. Among those suggestions was the need to better publicize the
IEAR, 8/04
25
accrediting teams findings regarding incorporating information literacy throughout the
curriculum, offering professional development opportunities to faculty around these
skills, and creating stronger links between ESL courses and the library and ESL/GED
Technology Center.
Another major task the team undertook was to create a bank of assignments,
appropriate to each level of ESL, that included information literacy outcomes. We
decided that these assignments should be make available for all ESL faculty to share.
Team members collected (in one case created) assignments from their own files and
those of colleagues (with permission), attached a cover sheet explaining the
assignment and listing which ESL outcomes were included in each, and then posting
those in electronic format on the Team website. As a companion to these
assignments, the team listed appropriate information literacy outcomes by each level
of ESL course. The grids that resulted also included corresponding teaching
outcomes that are currently part of the ESL Curriculum Guides and course Master
Course Outlines. We hope these will show faculty in the department that the
information literacy outcomes are not exclusive of the curriculum they are currently
teaching. The team has suggested that the ESL department include information
literacy outcomes in future Master Course Outlines and Curriculum Guides.
Successes encountered in this process included:




Participating faculty increased their own understanding of information literacy
and began to brainstorm ways of including and assessing these skills in their
own courses.
The library faculty received good suggestions for ways we can help faculty.
We were able to fairly easily link the information literacy outcomes with
existing ESL learning outcomes.
We created a web-based assignment bank, which we hope faculty will
continue to use and contribute to in the future.
Challenges encountered:
 Lack of understanding among faculty of what information literacy is. This
may have impeded responses to the survey (we only got 18 faculty to
respond). It also may have colored faculty responses. We realized that the
existing outcomes are written in a way that are not very clear to most faculty
who are unfamiliar with information literacy, and that we had to find a way to
simplify the definition (which we did, and it’s posted on the team’s website).
 Reluctance of many faculty to incorporate these skills because they are
perceived as being extra work or unrelated to their stated learning outcomes.
 Lack of participation of full-time faculty. All of the ESL faculty who served
on the team were part-timers. We had to recruit one new faculty member in
the Spring because one of the original faculty did not get any classes to teach
and was laid off in the Spring. We did have one or two full-timers in ESL
who expressed an interest in keeping up with our efforts, but beyond that it
IEAR, 8/04
26
was clear that faculty are swamped with other commitments and that this was
low on their priority list.
All materials produced by the team are available online at
http://oscar.ctc.edu/library/ESLInfoLit/eslinfolit.htm
<<Return>>
IEAR, 8/04
27
APPENDIX C
WorkKeys Assessment for Dislocated Workers, Cindi Price, Work Skills Assessment
Center, cprice@shoreline.edu
Project Overview
In March 2004, this Outcomes Assessment pilot project received funding to develop a
process for assessing Worker Retraining students’ workplace skills and assist them in
securing employment. All (400) students in worker retraining programs were invited to
take three workplace skill assessments. These WorkKeys™ assessments, Reading for
Information, Locating Information, and Applied Mathematics, were chosen because they
were relevant to most occupations. WorkKeys is a comprehensive system for measuring
and reporting workplace skills and provides a common language for teachers, students,
workers, and employers.
A total of twenty-one students chose to take the assessments in four testing sessions—
April 6, 9, and 10. Each student was asked to list his/her desired occupation. Some
students chose more than one occupation based on entry level and higher level positions.
Due to the fact that this project began late in the year, a smaller number of students were
assessed than expected. Notably, due to “word of mouth” by other students, some
students expressed a desire to take the assessments if they were offered on another date.
Letters were mailed in May to 360 students currently enrolled in worker retraining
programs at Shoreline offering them a chance to take the assessments on June 16 and 17.
On these dates an additional 10 students participated in the assessments. One student
returned requesting to take additional WorkKeys assessment in other skill areas because
she understood the value in up-grading her workplace skills.
The assessments were scored and scores were mailed to the students the following week.
Their scores were compared to the skill levels required to perform in 50% of jobs
nationwide and 80% of jobs nationwide. Their scores were also compared to the job
profiles of the occupation(s) of the student’s choice. Students were also mailed a
Workplace Skills Certificate which could be presented to a prospective employer
providing evidence of their skills. See the attached letters, score report, and certificate.
One-third (seven) of the students did not meet the skill levels recommended for success in
their chosen careers in all skill areas. These students were given access to Keytrain.
online courseware in the student computer lab. Keytrain is a self-paced computerized
training system aligned with WorkKeys skill levels. One student requested access to the
courseware.
IEAR, 8/04
28
Attachments
1. Recruitment Letter
2. Follow up letter to assessed students
3. Work Place Skills Certificate (example)
March 7, 2016
IEAR, 8/04
29
Dear Student:
"I recently hired a cashier who
came to the interview with her
application, resume and
WorkKeys assessment scores. I
went right to the file and pulled
the job profile. Her WorkKeys
scores matched what was needed
for the position. Consequently, I
had a much higher level of
confidence in my hiring decision
because the candidate had already
demonstrated the necessary skills
that we require for a cashier. If a
candidate provides evidence that
he or she has achieved the skill
level required for the job, it takes
all the bias and subjective
judgment out of the equation."
-
Larry Kreyling, Dierbergs
Markets
"There is a definite link between
foundational skills and job
performance, and people can't
learn new skills if they don't have
the foundation first. New skills
result in more career opportunities
for workers."
-
three
can
the
in
At no cost to you and as part of the worker retraining program at Shoreline
Community College, we would like to offer you the opportunity to take
WorkKeys assessments.
What is WorkKeys? WorkKeys measures skills valued by employers. You
use your results to get a better picture of your chances for success in the
workforce and improve areas where your skills are weak. After completing
assessments, you will receive certification that clearly demonstrates your
workplace skills. In addition you will receive free access to self-paced
computerized courses to advance your workplace skills.
Why take these assessments? Studies show that occupations requiring skills
math, locating information, and reading pay higher entry-level salaries. By
increasing your skill levels while you are still in school, you increase your
opportunity for a higher salary in the future.
Limited space is available. Please contact Kim Cambern at Shoreline
Community College, (206) 546-6961 to schedule one of the following
sessions:
Tuesday, April 6: 12:00 – 4:00
Tuesday, April 6: 4:00 – 8:00
Friday, April 9: 12:00 – 4:00
Saturday, April 10: 9:00 – 1:00
Sincerely,
Kimberly Cambern, Program Support Supervisor
Career Employment Services
Mark Scott, president and
CEO of CARES
For more information about
WorkKeys, please go to:
www.workkeys.org
IEAR, 8/04
Shoreline Main Campus
Shoreline Main Campus
Lake Forest Park Campus
Shoreline Main Campus
30
Dear «FNAME» «LNAME»:
Thank you for taking the WorkKeys Assessments. The WorkKeys system is used to
profile and assess workplace skills.
Enclosed you will find a copy of your WorkKeys Score Report. Your Workplace Skills
Certificate will be mailed shortly. You may use these to demonstrate your workplace
skills to potential employers by attaching to job applications and resumes.
Here is how your skills compare to the ACT Occupational Profiles for your career choice.
If levels are not shown for your career choice, a profile has not been done for that job.
Based on data from over 9,000 job profiles performed by ACT across the country, the
desired skill levels for 50% of these jobs are Level 4 in Applied Math, Locating
Information and Reading for Information, and for 80% of these jobs are Level 5 in
Applied Math, Locating Information and Reading for Information. More Occupational
Profiles may be found at www.act.org/workkeys/profiles/occuprof/index.html.
Applied Math
Your skill levels
«Career_Desired»
«Career_Desired2»
50% of jobs profiled by ACT
80% of jobs profiled by ACT
Locating
Reading for
Information
Information
«AM_score»
«LI_score»
«RFI_score»
«AM_Desired» «LI_Desired» «RFI_Desired»
«AM_Desired2» «LI_Desired2» «RFI_Desired2»
4
4
4
5
5
5
If you would like to improve your skill levels in any of these subjects, you may take selfpaced computer courses on campus or over the internet. Keytrain is available for free
through summer quarter in the Shoreline computer lab. Online courses may be taken for a
small fee. To sign up for these courses contact Amy Baron Hatch at 206-533-6713.
If you have any questions about WorkKeys, contact Amy at the number above or go to
ACT’s web site at www.act.org/workkeys. For training and other questions, please
contact Kim Cambern at 206-546-6961.
IEAR, 8/04
31
orkKeys is a national workforce development system that provides a direct comparison of the skills and skill
levels an individual currently possesses to those skills and proficiencies required by business and industry. This
certificate reports an individual’s skill proficiencies in those foundational skill areas relevant and applicable to
today’s work environments. The ACT/WorkKeys job/occupational profile database contains over 9,000 current
profiles.
Reading for Information (Level «RFI_score»)
«RFI_text1» «RFI_text2» «RFI_text3» «RFI_text4»
Locating Information (Level «LI_score»)
«LI_text1» «LI_text2» «LI_text3» «LI_text4»
Applied Math (Level «AM_score»)
«AM_text1» «AM_text2» «AM_text3» «AM_text_4»
IEAR 8/01
32
Certifies that:
«FNAME» «MI» «LNAME»
has demonstrated the following workplace skills for successful employment
as measured by WorkKeys assessments of workplace readiness.
Reading for Information
Locating Information
Applied Math
33
Level
«RFI_score»
Level
«LI_score»
Level
«AM_score»
<<Return>>
APPENDIX D
Information Literacy Online Tutorial Assessment, Elena Bianco, Library Media
Services, ebianco@shoreline.edu
Project Overview:
The purpose of this project was to grant me release time from my reference desk
duties in order to update the library’s online tutorial and to add an interactive
assessment portion to it. Since the adoption of the college’s new general education
outcomes, the library faculty have looked for a way to measure students’ information
literacy abilities. Many colleges and universities are utilizing online assessment tools
to ease the process.
We have had an online tutorial for about two years, but it was badly outdated and
many of the pages no longer worked. None of the librarians had time to work on this.
So, this grant allowed me to work on updating and fixing all of the pages (there are
over 200 files linked to the tutorial) during Winter Quarter. In Spring, I researched
the assessment portions of other institutions’ online tutorials and turned the existing
“worksheets” into interactive “self quizzes” for each module of the tutorial. The
modules are: Focusing A Research Topic, Finding Books, Finding Periodicals,
Finding and Evaluating Websites and Citing Sources. I used JavaScript to create
interactive self quizzes where students submit an answer and immediately find out if
it is correct or not. Ultimately, I would like to make the self-quizzes a bit longer and
more detailed. I also would like to somehow incorporate them into Blackboard so
classroom faculty can assign the tutorial and self-quizzes and find out how their
students did.
Successes:
 Each module has been updated to reflect current tools, such as the online
catalog and periodical databases.
 The self-quizzes (formerly “worksheets”) that serve as assessments are
interactive, so students can get responses right away.
 A number of faculty have expressed an interest in using the tutorial in their
classes.
 A online survey of the tutorial has now been placed on the front page of the
tutorial so when faculty have classes take the tutorial, students will be able to
send me immediate feedback on what they liked and didn’t like about the
tutorial.
IEAR, 8/04
34
Challenges:
 I was not notified that this project had been approved until the end of Fall
Quarter, so I only had two quarters in which to update the tutorial and its
assessment portions. As a result, I had no time to pilot it with classes across
divisions, as I had originally planned. I plan to do this in either Fall 2004 or
Winter 2005 (when I return from a one-quarter sabbatical leave).
 Currently, there is no way of knowing who has taken the tutorial and what
their score was on the self-quiz, so this assessment tool is still fairly informal.
This will be the subject of a future assessment project.
Materials Related to the Project:
The online tutorial can be found on the web at
http://oscar.ctc.edu/library/tutorial/ttutorial.htm
The evaluation tool for this tutorial can be found at:
http://oscar.ctc.edu/library/tutorial/tutorialassessment.htm
<<Return>>
35
APPENDIX E
Revision and Development of Outcomes and Student Assessment Tools for
Individual VCT Courses, Dick Davis, Humanities, ddavis@shoreline.edu
Project Overview:
The project was designed to work “backwards” from the standard course assessment
process and in addition to provide feedback from students as to what specific identified
outcomes they felt they came away with at the end of a course or set of courses. Through
the course of the project there were upwards of twenty participants both paid and unpaid.
We started the “backwards” process by first identifying what the outcomes for each
course should be in two categories: skills based and concept based. Those outcomes were
compared to other courses within the curriculum to identify commonality and cross
course outcomes since we all agreed there needed to be built in redundancy to assure
students were getting a complete education.
We felt there was much to be gained in the assessment process from student input. The
input would be based on what the program participants thought each course should be
accomplishing compared to what the students felt was accomplished. The input was
presented in a non-threatening manner for both the student and the instructional staff. We
made sure that questions only asked how completely a subject was addressed with a range
from 1-5 allowed in each response.
At the outset we realized the process was an incredibly lengthy one and that to assure
good participation from all of our instructional staff we would have to simplify and
condense our process. One of the ways we achieved that goal was to design, prepare and
post on line the documents that would be use in the project. Another way that really helps
with the simplification was to select group chairs that were responsible for initiating each
course document and then forwarding via email those documents to their team members.
The use of digital signature assured each participant had a unique identifiable document
yet one that could be merged into the master outcomes for each course. To get as many
instructors as possible to participate we made sure their were only three meetings in a 1015 week time frame and those meetings were help the one hour in length. Once the
process was complete it was quite easy to consolidate the data into usable assessment
questions for each course. After developing the assessment questions it was a matter of
administering the questions to selected classes and tabulating the data.
They were many incredible successes in the project anticipated and unanticipated. The
primary success was to engage all of our Visual Communications Instructional Staff in at
least a portion of the process. This gave our associate faculty ownership in the course
IEAR, 8/04
36
content and ownership in the development of outcomes for our courses. All of the
associate faculty was intrigued with the process of course development and processing.
We developed a strong sense of place through the interaction, which furthered our desire
to provide identity to Shoreline’s Visual Communication Program.
Materials Related to the Project
At this time the forms, files and data is being organized into separate books for each
course which will include:
The outcomes identified for each course
The assessment question sets
Master Course Outlines for each course
Samples of course exercises and tests (for use by instructional staff teaching the course)
A CD with the above areas included for each course
<<Return>>
37
APPENDIX F
Critical Thinking / General Intellectual Abilities Evaluation Project, Pam
Dusenberry, Humanities, pdusenbe@shoreline.edu
B. Project Goals and Purposes
C.
D. Critical thinking means many things to many people, yet it is often cited as one of the
most important abilities that students develop in college. This project is designed to
bring participants to a common and complex understanding of how students
demonstrate higher level thinking abilities. More specifically, the goals of this project
are to
1) pilot use of Washington State University’s Critical Thinking Scoring Guide
(Appendix A) as one means of measuring student achievement of the General
Intellectual Abilities (GIA) General Education Outcome (GEO) (Appendix B),
2) gather examples of assignments that might assess one or more dimensions of
critical thinking and GIA across disciplines,
3) gather samples of student work as evidence that students are achieving the
GIA outcome,
4) investigate and document how these activities could be used for classroom and
program improvement, and
5) promote among faculty an increased understanding of and respect for each other’s
disciplines.
E.
F. The Washington State University’s Critical Thinking Scoring Guide is a tool to
evaluate student achievement of critical thinking across disciplines. The guide has
been used extensively at WSU and other higher education institutions. This project
pilots its use to evaluate SCC student achievement of the critical thinking dimension
of the General Intellectual Abilities GEO in a group of SCC faculty from various
subjects. In addition, the project will gather assignments that elicit critical thinking—
and student work that demonstrates it—across the disciplines. Finally, the project
participants will investigate whether the process of looking at assignments and
student work through the lens of the critical thinking scoring guide can lead to course
and program improvement, and if so, to a process that can be replicated for assessing
other GEOs.
This project directly addresses two of the Strategic Plan focus areas for 2001-03: Focus Area #2:
Teaching, Learning and Academic Excellence: “Shoreline Community College will be known
for the quality of its faculty and its commitment to rigorous academic standards.” A major goal
of this project is to see how well students are developing critical thinking abilities, practically by
definition a part of maintaining rigorous standards. By looking at and discussing student
achievement of the outcome, faculty by necessity talk about how each assesses student learning.
Focus Area #3: Positive Interaction: “Foster positive interaction among faculty, staff, students
IEAR, 8/04
38
and administrators.” Another goal of this project is to promote "increased understanding of and
respect for each other’s disciplines." Working in an interdisciplinary team will foster positive
interaction among faculty.
In addition, this project directly contributes to several items of Accreditation Standard Two:
Instruction. Standard 2.A.3. calls for “assessment of learning outcomes,” the primary stated
purpose of this project. Standard 2.A.4. states that degree objectives should be clearly defined;
one major goal of this project is to translate General Intellectual Abilities for assessment and use
in a variety of courses and programs. Standard 2.B.3 states, “The institution provides evidence
that its assessment activities lead to the improvement of teaching and learning.” This project is
aimed at developing just such a process—to define how we use information on student
achievement of General Education Outcomes to improve programs. This is also a
recommendation of the accreditation process. The college needs to develop means of using
outcomes assessment data to feed back into program improvement in preparation for the Fall
2004 accreditation focus visit. Standard 2.C.2. calls for a clearly articulated rationale that guides
General Education requirements. This project directly addresses this need because faculty from
across disciplines will work together to define outcomes and assessment procedures and criteria
in terms of their subjects.
Project Activities
In Fall 2003, six faculty signed up to participate in the Critical Thinking Assessment
Project (CTAG): Emma Baer, Geology; Robert Shields, Business; Julie Kemp, History;
Linda Forst, Criminal Justice; Stephanie Diemel, Physics; and Elizabeth Hanson, English
as a Second Language. Pam Dusenberry, English, leads the project. In addition, two
members from the Assessment Response Team took part occasionally: Carla Hogan,
Business, and Russell Rosco, Computer Information Systems. Jason Gardner from Math
joined the group during Spring Quarter. The group met three times during Fall to discuss
common readings defining critical thinking, to compare the elements of the WSU critical
thinking scoring guide to SCC’s General Intellectual Abilities outcome, and to evaluate
the WSU scoring guide for use across the disciplines at SCC.
Faculty participants agreed that WSU’s Critical Thinking Scoring Guide provides a good model
for measuring students’ abilities to think critically in all their disciplines. The guide identifies
seven elements of critical thinking that are most easily used to evaluate critical thinking in the
form of an essay, presentation or problem-solving demonstration. The ESL, English and History
faculty agree that the seven elements on the guide could be used as an outline for writing a
college essay using outside sources. Math and science faculty find the scoring guide less well
suited to their disciplines, particularly the elements relating to stating a position and considering
context. The faculty concluded that the scoring guide works well to assess the first and third
elements of Shoreline’s General Intellectual Abilities General Education Outcome (disciplinary
expertise and complex problem-solving), but not the second element which deals with making
connections among disciplines. Making interdisciplinary connections is more difficult to build in
to an individual course; it is not usually an explicit learning outcome of a course, so it is difficult
to design an assignment that would elicit such cross-disciplinary critical thinking from students.
However, Carla Hogan’s accounting assignment included explicit interdisciplinary thinking and
assessment. She found that students do not readily apply knowledge from other subjects and
courses in her assignment; they were most likely to incorporate concepts that Carla herself
identified as examples, rather than making fresh interdisciplinary connections.
39
Faculty also decided which course and which assignment they would use during winter quarter to
pilot the WSU scoring guide or an adaptation of it. The group worked on fine-tuning the
assignments to better elicit critical thinking from their students in their individual disciplines. In
addition, the group worked on adapting the scoring guide to fit their disciplines and assignments.
During Winter 2004, faculty participants discussed how their assignments inform their teaching
of critical thinking. Most agreed that they taught critical thinking better as a result of creating a
rubric to inform students of criteria for evaluation of their critical thinking abilities. The
conversations with other faculty about how well their assignments elicited the elements of
critical thinking in WSU’s scoring guide also contributed to improved teaching and learning of
critical thinking. In addition, the group read and discussed additional material in common.
In the second half of winter quarter, faculty began bringing student work to the group for
discussion on how well the work demonstrates critical thinking and on how well the scoring
guides identify the important criteria. All faculty participants brought student work to the group
for discussion; following is a list of the assignments (with rubrics and student work) we
considered:
 Julie Kemp, History: Essay exam question: Draw conclusions based on two primary
historical documents.
 Emma Baer, Geology: Plate Tectonics Paper
 Stephanie Diemel, Physics and Astronomy: Physics Quiz Question
 Linda Forst, Criminal Justice:
 Jason Gardner, Math: (Jason joined the group in Spring, 2004)
 Elizabeth Hanson, ESL: Critical Thinking in the Writing Process
 Carla Hogan, Accounting:
 Lee Libby, Criminal Justice:
 Bob Shields, Computer Information Systems: Troubleshooting Group Demonstration
Examples of these assignments, scoring guides, and sample student work are included in the final
section of the Critical Thinking Notebook. Permission had been obtained from students whose
work is included in the notebook. Five of the assignments and their adapted rubrics form
Appendix B of this report.
During Spring 2004, faculty participants completed their examination of student work samples.
In addition, the group discussed ways that the learning of this group can be taken to programs to
be integrated into program improvement processes.
Participant Evaluation
Six faculty have provided answers to project evaluation questions. Here are their answers
verbatim.
1. What aspects of the Critical Thinking Assessment Group’s work have been most useful to
you?

Explicitly linking the value of student work to a quantitative grading scale. My goal is to
make this link as deliberate and transparent as possible. I still have a long way to go.
Working with others and seeing concrete examples of their critical thinking assessment
IEAR, 8/04
40
rubrics has been helpful, as well as simply discussing our common assessment
challenges.

Hearing from others what they do in class; defining what critical thinking is.

I found the evaluation aspect of critical thinking to be the most valuable to me
personally. Using a rubric which I gave to students before hand helped me (as well as
the students) to evaluate their work better and to communicate that to them. It provides
good feedback for the students.

Getting input from faculty in other disciplines and seeing how we all deal with similar
teaching challenges.

It helped me clarify my course outcomes in respect to critical thinking; in particular I
was able to revise a major assignment and make its objectives more clear to my students.
I also begun devoting more time and attention to the critical thinking aspects of my
course.

The small group discussions about thinking and the meaning of sub components in the
thinking process have helped me better understand what goes into the process.
2. Do you think that your work on CTAG has led to improvements in teaching and learning in
your classroom? If so, how?

Yes. I design assignments with assessment in mind more consciously now. I also try to
make my assessment more apparent to students by making rubrics available to them.

Yes. It makes me think about what I’m doing and make what I’m doing transferable to
student success in other courses/life. It makes me broaden out my instruction in a way by
helping students make these connections. For example, “These are typical questions
you’ll be asked.” This is HOW we think about reading/writing in the US or in college.

I will try and incorporate rubrics into all of my writing assignments rather than the
system I was using which was less clear. The words may be the same on some
assignments but the visual picture helps me to evaluate their work and get a picture of
how it looks and it also helps the students where they fall in the grading/evaluating
process.

Absolutely. I'm much more conscious now of not only knowing where I want to take the
class, but in letting them know where we're going.

Definitely. As said above, it helped me improve assignments and make more clear to
myself and my students what critical thinking really means and how it applies to geology
(and science in general),

Yes. I am more aware of the level of complexity and thinking difficulty I require of my
students in different tasks.
3. Additional comments and/or suggestions?
41

I received an added benefit from our meetings and discussions and work in that I realized
that having a visual picture helps me to organize my thoughts/information. I have started
using calendars in each of my classes with blocks for each class meeting to help me
visualize course content and what we've covered and where we're going. I think this will
help me with planning and organizing especially since I do not teach my specific classes
every quarter and some are only once a year.

I also appreciated interacting with other faculty members and brainstorming ideas and
learning from them.

More!

Working with folks from other depts. Helped broaden my understanding.

This was a great experience for me. It provided me with much needed intellectual
stimulation and challenged my own way of teaching my course and designing writing
assignments. I enjoyed the discussions with my colleagues and learning about their
different perspectives and experiences. I also think it was very beneficial that we were
able to compare notes on what we ask students to do, clarify the terms we use when we
talk to students about writing and critical thinking and come up with a more interdisciplinary meaning.
Project Conclusions
1. Faculty workgroups such as used in this project are extremely effective at increasing
participants’ familiarity with GEOs, at improving the teaching and learning of GEOs,
and at improving the evaluation of student achievement of the GEOs. Indeed, such
groups directly lead to better student achievement of the learning outcomes this college
has deemed most important.
2. Washington State University’s Critical Thinking Scoring Guide provides a good base for
the evaluation of students’ critical thinking abilities. The WSU scoring guide addresses
the first and third sections of the General Intellectual Abilities GEO. The middle section
of GAI deals with interdisciplinary learning which is not addressed by the scoring guide.
3. Faculty used current assignments to evaluate their students’ critical thinking abilities.
They made some adaptations to teaching, to assignments and to scoring guides chick
they felt improved their students’ performances.
4. The development of criteria used in evaluating critical thinking helps faculty make their
expectations clear to students. Faculty participants believe their students produced better
work as a result of knowing the criteria beforehand. The use of a scoring guide is an
important component in teaching and assessing student achievement of learning
outcomes.
5. While all faculty measure their students’ learning, gathering examples of assignments,
scoring guides and student work provides evidence of student learning.
IEAR, 8/04
42
6. The evidence of student learning that is gathered in a process such as this one can be
taken to programs as models of assessment. A group of faculty within a program could
use this approach to gather evidence of student learning of one or a set of outcomes.
Evidence gathered in this way could be linked to program improvement efforts.
43
APPENDIX A:
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY’S CRITICAL THINKING
SCORING GUIDE
The Critical Thinking Scoring Guide
1) Identifies and summarizes the problem/question at issue (and/or the source's position).
Scant
Does not identify and summarize the problem, is confused or
identifies a different and inappropriate problem.
Does not identify or is confused by the issue, or represents the issue
inaccurately.
Substantially Developed
Identifies the main problem and
subsidiary, embedded, or implicit aspects
of the problem, and identifies them clearly,
addressing their relationships to each
other.
Identifies not only the basics of the issue,
but recognizes nuances of the issue.
2) Identifies and presents the STUDENT'S OWN perspective and position as it is important to the analysis of
the issue.
Scant
Addresses a single source or view of the argument
and fails to clarify the established or presented
position relative to one's own. Fails to establish other
critical distinctions.
Substantially Developed
Identifies, appropriately, one's own position on the issue,
drawing support from experience, and information not
available from assigned sources.
3) Identifies and considers OTHER salient perspectives and positions that are important to the analysis of the
issue.
Scant
Deals only with a single perspective and fails to
discuss other possible perspectives, especially those
salient to the issue.
Substantially Developed
Addresses perspectives noted previously, and additional
diverse perspectives drawn from outside information.
4) Identifies and assesses the key assumptions.
Scant
Does not surface the assumptions and ethical issues
that underlie the issue, or does so superficially.
Substantially Developed
Identifies and questions the validity of the assumptions
and addresses the ethical dimensions that underlie the
issue.
5) Identifies and assesses the quality of supporting data/evidence and provides additional data/evidence
related to the issue.
Scant
Merely repeats information provided, taking it as
truth, or denies evidence without adequate
justification. Confuses associations and correlations
with cause and effect.
IEAR, 8/04
Substantially Developed
Examines the evidence and source of evidence;
questions its accuracy, precision, relevance,
completeness.
Observes cause and effect and addresses existing or
potential consequences.
44
Does not distinguish between fact, opinion, and value
judgments.
Clearly distinguishes between fact, opinion, &
acknowledges value judgments.
6) Identifies and considers the influence of the context * on the issue.
Scant
Discusses the problem only in egocentric or
sociocentric terms.
Does not present the problem as having connections
to other contexts-cultural, political, etc.
Substantially Developed
Analyzes the issue with a clear sense of scope and
context, including an assessment of the audience of the
analysis.
Considers other pertinent contexts.
7) Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences.
Scant
Fails to identify conclusions, implications, and
consequences of the issue or the key relationships
between the other elements of the problem, such as
context, implications, assumptions, or data and
evidence.
45
Substantially Developed
Identifies and discusses conclusions, implications, and
consequences considering context, assumptions, data,
and evidence.
Objectively reflects upon the their own assertions.
APPENDIX B: FOUR SAMPLE ASSIGNMENTS
General Intellectual Abilities: Critical Thinking Assessment
Assignment No. 1
Discipline: Criminal Justice
Instructor: Linda Forst
Course: Sociology 280: Introduction to Criminology
Assignment Title: Letter from the Central Park Jogger
Assignment Description: After reading I Am the Central Park Jogger, students take on the persona of the
author and write a letter to another rape victim on what to expect from the criminal justice system and on
sources of help.
Student Population: Both criminal justice majors and non-majors take this class.
General Intellectual Abilities assessed by this assignment:
I.
Think critically within a discipline:
A.
Identify and express concepts, terms and facts related to a specific
discipline.
B.
C.
D.
E.
II.
Recognize how the values and biases in different disciplines can affect the ways in which
data is analyzed.
Discuss issues and questions within a discipline.
Identify, interpret and evaluate pertinent data and previous experience to reach
conclusions.
Evaluate decisions by analyzing outcomes and the impact of actions.
Identify connections and relationships among disciplines:
B.
Discuss consequences of expressed and tacit assumptions in specific
disciplines.
C.
III.
Collect and analyze relevant data for a specific issue.
Use an integrated approach to problem solving in new and potentially ambiguous situations.
A.
Identify information, skills, experience and abilities acquired in various academic and
professional fields to facilitate problem solving in new circumstances.
B.
Describe how one's own preconceptions, biases and values affect one's response to new
and ambiguous situations.
C.
Use various strategies of inquiry, to reach conclusions in new and ambiguous situations.
IEAR, 8/04
46
Soc 280
jogger assignment
Linda Forst
After reading the assigned book entitled “I am the Central Park Jogger” by Trisha Meili, the
following writing assignment will be completed. This assignment is worth 30 points. A
reminder that this must be turned in on the due date and 5 pts will be subtracted for each
day late.
Put yourself in the position of Trisha Meili – YOU ARE TRISHA MEILI- and you have
received a letter from a cousin who lives in another state. She knows what you have been
through and the two of you have talked during your long fight back. She has a co-worker
(Sarah) that was recently raped as she was leaving work. A subject unknown to her grabbed
her as she was walking to her car in the deserted parking garage adjacent to their building.
She did report it to the police and they are currently investigating it. She received only
minor injuries and is back to work. Your cousin is concerned as Sarah is emotionally fragile
and afraid of what is going to happen if the rapist is caught. She is concerned about her
emotional reaction to the rape – as it seems so unlike her normal behavior.
Your cousin has asked you to write a letter to Sarah explaining some of the psychological
reactions you had and what helped you in dealing with the crime. She would like you to give
Sarah advice on what to expect from herself and from the Criminal Justice system and
perhaps what she should request if she is not getting it.
You are to write a 2-3 page letter (double spaced, font no larger than 12 and margins no
larger than 1”) to Sarah addressing your cousins concerns. You must cite the pages from
which you get these bits of information. Below is a brief example (TOTALLY FICTITIOUS):
Dear Sarah:
I was so sorry to hear about your rape. My cousin Elizabeth wrote to me and told me what
happened. I can relate to a little of what you’re going through. When I was raped, I found
that I hated all men and couldn’t even look at them (P. 505)…..As I worked with people in the
Criminal Justice system I found that the police officers didn’t care anything about my
feelings and the lawyers only cared about a “win” (p. 999).
You only need a couple of cites throughout the letter- for major conclusions. I cited 2
sentences in a row simply to provide an example. You should elaborate on each item to try
and help Sarah.
This assignment will be done by all students and while male students may have a harder time
relating to the exact situation, I am sure that reading the book coupled with perhaps trying
to correlate another victimization possibility will help you put yourself in the position of the
victim and imagine how you would feel, cope and try and help someone else.
Rape is a crime that touches many lives. Rape includes stranger rape (as in this book) and
acquaintance rape in which a victim is acquainted in some way with her attacker. The
individual can be a neighbor, friend, co-worker or date. The crime of rape is very
underreported especially acquaintance rape. There are also male victims of rape/sexual
battery and this crime is also extremely underreported.
47
Acquaintance rape is particularly prevalent on college campuses, partially due to the lifestyle
of individuals in that age group. Part of the maturing / growing process is spending time with
various individuals often in private or isolated situations which may place an individual at
increased risk especially when coupled with alcohol consumption. Studies indicate that 25%
of college students have been victims of rape or attempted rape and 90% of their victims
knew their attacker. Whether an individual is assaulted by someone they know or a complete
stranger, many of the emotions and reactions are the same. Studies also indicate that most
college students know someone who was coerced to have sex or coerced or physically forced
someone to have sex. Knowing an offender or victim also emotionally impacts others and
influences their views toward rape and some of the “myths” that exist within our culture.
These include that “women ask for it” through their dress or behavior; that women say “no”
but mean “yes”; all women secretly want to be raped; and rape by an acquaintance is not as
traumatic as rape by a stranger.
You may draw upon some of your emotions and experiences as ways to build upon what the
author is going through in writing your letter. One of the goals of the assignment is to think
critically about the situation and the assumptions surrounding it. This assignment must be
turned in via Blackboard for full credit. (5 pts will be deducted if it is turned in by hand).
IEAR, 8/04
48
Soc 280
Jogger Assignment
Linda Forst
Grading Rubric
Criteria
Excellent
5
Responds fully to the assignment. An
excellent paper will respond to the
issue of the assignment and direct the
response in a letter format to a sex
crime victim from Trisha Meili.
Expresses its purpose clearly and
persuasively. An excellent paper will
have a clear, logical and inventive
organization of ideas in relation to one
another and to the essay’s focus with
smooth transitions between paragraphs.
There will be an individualized voice
appropriate to the audience/purpose
which will be consistent throughout and
utilizes varied sentence structure.
Identifies and assess the quality of
supporting data or evidence and
provides this evidence as is relevant to
the issue. An excellent paper will
examine the source, accuracy and
relevance of evidence. It will observe
cause and effect and address existing or
potential consequences. It distinguishes
between fact and opinion and
acknowledges value judgments.
Identifies and considers other salient
perspectives and position that are
important to the analysis of the issue.
An excellent paper will draw upon
personal perspectives as well as the
“jogger’s” perspectives and other
diverse perspectives as needed.
Identifies and assesses the key
assumptions. The excellent paper will
identify and questions the validity of
assumptions and myths and address
ethical dimensions that underlie the
rape and victimization issue.
An excellent paper is free of errors in
grammar, punctuation, word choice,
spelling, and format.
49
Very Good
4
Adequate
3
Fair
2
Poor
0
General Intellectual Abilities: Critical Thinking Assessment
Assignment No. 2
Discipline: Geology
Instructor: Emma Baer
Course: Geology 101: Physical Geology
Assignment Title: Plate Tectonics Essay
Assignment Description: The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate understanding of
the scientific basis for plate tectonics. The paper will provide a wide range of scientific
evidence (hard data, physical observations, measurements etc.) that supports the scientific
validity of the theory of plate tectonics and confirm it as a viable and scientifically sound
model to explain how the Earth works.
Student Population: Science majors and non-majors alike take this class.
General Intellectual Abilities assessed by this assignment
I.
Think critically within a discipline:
A.
Identify and express concepts, terms and facts related to a specific discipline.
C.
Discuss issues and questions within a discipline.
D.
Identify, interpret and evaluate pertinent data and previous experience to reach
conclusions.
E.
Evaluate decisions by analyzing outcomes and the impact of actions.
III.
Use an integrated approach to problem solving in new and potentially ambiguous situations.
A.
Identify information, skills, experience and abilities acquired in various academic and
professional fields to facilitate problem solving in new circumstances.
C.
Use various strategies of inquiry, to reach conclusions in new and ambiguous situations.
IEAR, 8/04
50
Geology 101
Baer
Emma
Plate Tectonics essay
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific basis
for plate tectonics.
In order to do so you will need to provide a wide range of scientific evidence (hard
data, physical observations, measurements etc.) that supports the scientific validity of the
theory of plate tectonics and confirm it as a viable and scientifically sound model to
explain how the Earth works.
Scientists do not use terms as “proving” or “proof” as science is inherently uncertain.
They instead prefer more tentative terms such as “testing” and “scientific evidence.”
However, if it makes more sense to you, think as the purpose of the paper to be to
“prove” plate tectonics (the existence and motion of plates) as the cause for most of the
large- scale geologic processes occurring on Earth. You will want to bring into the paper
as many elements of the course as you can thoroughly and effectively discuss and clearly
explain how each of these elements confirm the theory.
CONTENT:
Almost anything we will study in this course can be tied to plate tectonics and, if
correctly used, can constitute supporting evidence for plate tectonics.
You should illustrate these lines of evidence clearly and you should logically
explain how they confirm and support the theory of plate tectonics. Keep in mind the
steps of the scientific method we studied at the beginning of the course and apply them.
Think of yourself as a geologist who has found some interesting data that seem to be
linked together and comes out with an explanation (plate tectonics) that fits and explain
them all together. Pretend that you are trying to convince your colleagues who do not
believe in plate tectonics. You will provide them with “arguments” to support your
claim.
Your paper will be evaluated both for content (which and how many arguments you
can use to support your paper) and effectiveness (the level of depth, accuracy and
effectiveness) of your arguments. The effectiveness of the arguments of your paper is just
as important as the content.
At the time the first draft of the paper will be due, you will have learned a great deal
about how the theory was developed and most of the evidence that supports it, but there
still may be a few more components of the course that tie into it that we will have not yet
discussed in class. Please feel free to document yourself on these as well and include
them in your final paper.
Resources:
Resource 1: The extensive list of “supportive evidence” that I included in the back of the
scoring guide will provide you all the ones I could come up with, but please do not feel
compelled to include all of them all and feel free to consider others. A minimum of 6 of
51
the ones I listed must be discussed but it is more important how you develop each topic
versus how many you can touch on. I will point out good arguments and how you can
use them as we proceed with the studying of new material throughout the quarter. Put
some highly visible marks in your notes in order to readily retrieve this information when
you begin to write this paper.
Resource 2: your book is a good source to consult. Especially look up in each chapter if
there is a section that relates the main chapter topic to plate tectonics.
Resource 3: There is an excellent website that discusses plate tectonics, how it was
developed and its supporting evidence:
(http://pubs.usgs.gov/publications/text/dynamic.html)
This is a good source to consult, but please be aware that it does not discuss the
information using the same approach required for the paper. In other word, it describes
very well what plate tectonics is, how it works and the geologic processes that plate
tectonics causes, but does not present them as supporting evidence for the theory. It will
be your job to turn this around and look at the geologic features and geologic processes
occurring on Earth as the observable evidence for the plate tectonics model of the Earth.
Also please be very careful not to plagiarize it. If you use information from it (or any
other external source) you need to paraphrase the ideas, cite in the paper and include a list
of cited references at the end of the paper. Please see the attached guidelines for citations
and bibliography format.
DRAFT SYSTEM, PEER REVIEWS AND DEADLINES
Draft system
In order to help you write a better paper we will use a system of multiple drafts
and peer-reviews. The first draft of your paper is due on February 19th 2004.
Outlines are not an acceptable alternative to a first draft and will receive no
credit. The first draft should be as extensive as the final draft and should include
all the arguments you are planning to use. The peer reviews and my corrections are
supposed to mainly help you improve your arguments and make the paper stronger
not to suggest what to write in the paper. This draft will be evaluated using the
same criteria of the final one (see scoring guide) but of a much smaller point value
(5 points). While you may find harsh that I assign points for a first draft, please be
aware that this is meant to give you meaningful feedback. The comments I will put
on it will be helpful to improve your paper, but the grade you get will give you an
idea on how much work you have to put in it to get to your final grade goal. Late
first drafts will loose 2 points per day.
When you turn in this first draft, you must bring 3 copies of your paper, one for
me and two for two of your classmates who will act as peer reviewers. You will also
get two papers of other classmates to review. If you do not turn in a first draft
IEAR, 8/04
52
you will lose the opportunity to get feedback from me and from your peers AND you
will not receive other drafts to review, losing the point given for peer reviews.
The peer reviews are supposed to point out the strengths of the paper, discuss
its major weaknesses, and suggest ideas on how to improve it. The peer reviews will
not affect the grade of the paper but they will be themselves graded for how well
they help improve the paper. The peer reviews must follow a specific format
illustrated in the next page. Each of the reviews will be worth 5 points and will be
due on February 26th, 2004. On that same day you will also get back the reviews of
your paper from your classmates. Late peer reviews will loose 3 points per day.
The final draft of the paper will be due a week later, on March 4th, 2004. The final
draft will be worth 50 points. Late final drafts will loose 5 points per day. No final draft
will be accepted after the day of the final exam.
LENGTH AND FORMAT
This paper should be at least 6 pages long. Good papers are typically 8-10
pages long. Figures and bibliography do not count toward the minimum page number
requirement.
The paper (including the first draft) must be typed and double-spaced with a font no
larger than 12. The paper must have an introduction and conclusion, and in textcitations and bibliography if external sources are used.
PLAGIARISM AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
If you use information from any external sources, you need to paraphrase the ideas,
cite the sources in the paper and include a list of cited references at the end of the paper.
Please see the attached guidelines for citations and bibliography format.
Plagiarism (copying phrases or sentences from books, articles or the Internet into
your papers and/or using other people ideas without citing them) is a very serious
academic offense and will not be tolerated. The first time you plagiarize in any part
of your paper, the penalty will be a zero in the assignment. If you repeat the offense
twice in the same quarter (i.e. in the first and final draft) you will receive a failing
grade for the class.
53
Plate tectonics paper peer-reviews
The paper reviews should be in Memo format:
To: (Author)
From: Your name (optional)
G. CC: Emanuela Baer
The text should have at least 4 paragraphs. The first paragraph will summarize
the author’s arguments. The second will note strong points of the text. The third
will discuss shortcomings of the text. The fourth (and perhaps fifth, 6th, etc.)
should give suggestions to the author on how she/he can improve the paper,
including giving new ideas to include and/or discussing how to make improvements on
existing arguments.
You must be VERY specific. Use quotations from the paper if necessary. Be
constructive in your criticisms, and include specific suggestions to strengthen the
paper. You may key your points to the text by using a numbering system. Please
mark specific spelling and grammar errors on the paper itself as well.
You will print out 2 copies for each review (you are not required to make copies of
the paper itself, but you may if you wish to show comments you made on the paper
itself), submitting a copy of each to me and returning the paper with the attached
review to the original writer. If you want your review to be anonymous, write your
name ONLY on the memo to me or attach a cover sheet with your memo.
I will grade this part of the assignment mostly on how well you improve the
paper you are reviewing. Criticisms are great, and will help a lot. However, the best
way to help someone is to give him or her a relevant, well-explained idea that they
had not thought of, so they can include it. Doing this will help you to improve your
paper as well!
Each review will be worth 5 points. Late reviews will be penalized with 2 points
deducted per day.
IEAR, 8/04
54
Citation and bibliography guidelines
This paper is NOT supposed to be a research paper. You should be able to write an
excellent paper simply using appropriately the knowledge you gained in class and through
the reading of your textbook. If this is how you are planning to do this paper, you can
ignore the citation and bibliography guidelines because you are not required to cite lecture
notes and your own textbook unless you are quoting word by word (I do not recommend
that). However, if you decide to use any other external sources you need to paraphrase
the ideas, cite them appropriately throughout the body of your paper and include a
bibliography at the end of the paper.
In text-citations:
In any research paper, sources must be properly cited throughout the body of the
paper. Each citation from books, magazines or journals should have the following
format:
 If there is only one author: the last name of the author of the
publication, a comma and following the year of publication (Ex.: Baer,
1999).
 If there are 2 authors: both last names separated by & and year of
publication (Ex.: Baer & Whittington, 1999)
 If there are more than 2 authors: Last name of first author, “et al.,” and
year of publication (Ex.: Baer et al., 1999).
Bibliography
Make sure you include a bibliography (or reference section) at the end of the
paper. This should include for each source cited:
 the names of the all the authors (last name and first initial)
 the year of publication,
 the complete title of the article or book
 the volume and issue, and pages of the journal (or magazine), or the
chapter of the book, the pages and the editor.
Internet sources
If you used Internet sources you also are expected to cite them properly. The
complete website (URL) address is sufficient in the bibliography. For in-text
citations you may use a note number that refers to the bibliographic reference,
unless information about the author and year is available.
Note: Failure to cite the sources of your research is plagiarism and may result in
failure in the assignment or other disciplinary penalties.
55
Writing checklist
This is not an exhaustive checklist, nor is it a replacement for taking one of the
excellent English courses taught here at Shoreline. However, this is a check off
you should go through before you submit written work to me.
Organization
 All written work, from a paragraph to a book, must have an introduction and a
conclusion.

All paragraphs should have a point/focus that make its critical point. All the
subsequent sentences should support the topic sentence.
Editing/ Formatting
 PROOFREAD everything before submitting it. Spell-checkers are not an
acceptable alternative to a good, careful read-over.

Revision is a very important part of the writing process. Do not expect that
your first draft will be acceptable. Plan to rewrite.

All submissions >1 page should be typed, or, better yet word-processed. If you
do not have a computer, go to the student computer center in the library. They
do charge a fee, but this is worth it. If you cannot afford this, please see the
instructor.

Present any submissions in a readable format. Staple all pages together (before
you get to class), and if the paper is from a spiral notebook, cut off the paper
fragments.
Evidence/Observations
 You should support all of your interpretations/assertions with one or more
observations, quotations or citations.

You must cite any outside sources from which you received ideas and or
information. To not do so is plagiarism and will result in serious penalties. Please
see the guidelines for proper citations and bibliography enclosed in this packet.
Style
 The passive tense is a good thing to avoid. It is boring and weak. You should use
the active tense. (The first sentence here is passive the last two are in active
tense.)

Avoid the use of contractions. “It’s” is a contraction and should be avoided.
Purpose
 Make sure your writing responds to the question or assignment. Check with the
instructor if you have any doubts.
IEAR, 8/04
56
57
Emma Baer, Geology 101
Scoring guide for PLATE TECTONICS ESSAY
Part 1: Overall evaluation of paper:
1) Identifies the problem/question at issue (i.e. PURPOSE: To provide scientific observable evidence to
support the scientific validity of the plate tectonics theory)
Low 1
2
3
Does not identify purpose of the paper, is confused or
identifies a different and inappropriate issue to the one
indicated in the assignment. Merely describes what the
theory states and the resulting geologic consequences,
instead of using geologic features and processes as
evidence for plate tectonics.
4
5
High
Clearly identifies the specific purpose of the assignment
and identifies the methods and evidence that will be
used to address the issue. Paper appropriately
addresses the purpose of the assignment (see above),
analyzing the physical evidence (geologic processes
and features) that suggests plate tectonics as a viable
model of how the Earth works.
2) Identifies and critically discuss supporting data/evidence using appropriately at least 6 from the
examples provided (see list of suggested lines of evidence in the back) as well as any other
data/evidence relevant to the issue. Feedback on specific lines of evidence addressed will be provided
in the back.
Low 1
2
Does not distinguish or is confused between
observations and interpretations . Confuses
associations and correlations with cause and effect.
Merely repeats information provided in lecture or
gained through readings. Present evidence without an
adequate explanation on how it supports the plate
tectonics theory.
3
4
5
High
Clearly distinguishes between observations and
interpretations. Clearly demonstrates the understanding
of cause and effect relations. Examines the observations
and data, their sources and the methods used to obtain
the data; addresses their accuracy, precision, relevance,
and completeness. Clearly explains how the evidence
provided supports the model of plate tectonics.
3) Identifies patterns in the data and present hypotheses to explain them. Presents experiments used to
test the hypotheses.
Low
1
2
3
4
5
High
Merely describes data without searching for the
Recognizes presence or absence of patterns in data.
presence or absence of patterns or correlations. Does
Presents plausible hypotheses to explain the data.
not present hypotheses to explain patterns or presents
Reports the results of experiments conducted to test the
poorly conceived, inappropriate hypotheses. Does not
hypotheses. Explores other factors that could be
report on experiments conducted to test the hypothesis. responsible for observations.
4) Identifies and assesses conclusions, implications and consequences.
Low
1
2
3
4
5
High
Does not identify conclusions, implications, and
Identifies and discusses conclusions, implications and
consequences of the evidence presented to the overall
consequences of the evidence provided to the overall
purpose to “prove” the theory. Fails to connect the
purpose of the assignment. Clearly connects various
various lines of evidence and explain how they
lines of evidence and explains how they collectively
collectively provide support to the plate tectonics
provide support to the plate tectonics theory.
theory.
Part 2: Specific evidence assessment (from part 1, #2):
IEAR, 8/04
58
Suggested lines of evidence to use as supportive evidence for the theory and feedback on the ones selected
(minimum 6).
H.
J.
I.
Line of evidence
Wegener – Continental fit
Wegener – Fossil & living
organism distribution
Wegener – Rocks &
Mountain Belts Matching
Wegener – Glacial
evidence
Sea Floor Topography
Sea floor ages
Magnetic Anomalies
Location of earthquakes
Location of volcanoes
Location of Mountain
Ranges
GPS measurements
Hot Spots
Location of structural
deformations (folds and
faults)
Distribution of igneous
rocks
Occurrence and location of
foliated metamorphic rocks
Other:
59
Excellent
K. Good
Needs improvement
Fair
Lacking in detail
and support
Incorrectly
argued
General Intellectual Abilities: Critical Thinking Assessment
Assignment No. 3
Discipline: Mathematics
Instructor: Jason Gardner
Course: Math 80: Elementary Algebra
Assignment Title: Hospital Administration Analysis and Decision-Making
Assignment Description: Students receive a scenario about a hospital. They must use various math
concepts and processes learned in the class to analyze and make a recommendation based on the details of
the scenario.
Student Population: Students have varying levels of mathematical competence; this course is two courses
before college-level mathematics.
General Intellectual Abilities assessed in this assignment:
I.
Think critically within a discipline:
A.
Identify and express concepts, terms and facts related to a specific discipline.
B.
Recognize how the values and biases in different disciplines can affect the ways in which
data is analyzed.
C.
Discuss issues and questions within a discipline.
D.
Identify, interpret and evaluate pertinent data and previous experience to reach
conclusions.
III.
Use an integrated approach to problem solving in new and potentially ambiguous situations.
A.
Identify information, skills, experience and abilities acquired in various academic and
professional fields to facilitate problem solving in new circumstances.
B.
Describe how one's own preconceptions, biases and values affect one's response to new
and ambiguous situations.
C.
Use various strategies of inquiry, to reach conclusions in new and ambiguous situations.
IEAR, 8/04
60
MATH 80
Spring 2002
Project #2
Due:
100 points
Hospital Administration
Background:
Southwest Hospital has an operating room used only for eye surgery. The annual cost of rent, heat, and
electricity for the operating room and its equipment is $180,000 and the annual salaries for the people who
staff this room total $270,000. Each surgery performed requires the use of $380 worth of medical supplies
and drugs. To promote goodwill, every patient receives a bouquet of flowers the day after surgery. In
addition, one quarter of the patients require dark glasses, which the hospital provides free of charge. It
costs the hospital $15 for each bouquet of flowers and $20 for each pair of glasses. The hospital receives a
payment of $1000 for each eye operation performed. Currently, Southwest Hospital currently averages 70
eye operations per month.
Scenario:
You are the administrative assistant for the CEO of Southwest Hospital. She has asked you to determine
whether an option is financially beneficial to the company. Use the following questions as a general
outline in a well -written report that you will give to the CEO reporting your findings (DO NOT SUBMIT
A SHEET WITH JUST ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS 1,2,3,…).
Analysis:
1. Give a current financial summary of the hospital operating room including the revenue per case,
the total revenue, the annual fixed and variable costs, the total cost of running the operating room,
and the total profit.
Revenue is the total amount of money brought in (not counting
costs) from the sales of a product.
The fixed costs of producing a product are the costs that a business will have to pay even if no
products are produced. (For example, rent of manufacturing space, insurance, equipment costs,
salaried wages, etc,)
The variable costs are the costs of producing a product that depend on the quantity produced. (For
example, hourly wages to employees, material costs, etc.)
2.
How many eye operations must the hospital perform each year in order to break even?
3.
One of the nurses has just learned about a machine that would reduce by $50 per patient the
amount of medical supplies needed. It can be leased for $50,000 annually. Keeping in mind the
financial costs/benefits, advise the hospital on whether or not they should lease this machine.
4.
If the number of operations per month increases, how would you revise your advice in part (3)?
5.
What other factors should you consider when advising the hospital administrator?
Report:
Your technical report should include
1)
A title page including each group members name and their point designation (See
Scoring)
2)
A one half or one page written summary highlighting the current financial outlook of the
operating room and your advice about the leasing the machine.
61
3)
4)
A 1- 3 page appendix detailing your assessment of your conclusion in part (2) including
your calculations and equations used to model this scenario. This portion of the project
may be hand written.
Supporting material such as graphs and/or charts which effectively illustrate your points.
Scoring:
The project is worth 100 points for a group of four (75 pts. for those groups of three). Each person is
expected to do and understanding each part of project. I may ask any of the group members to discuss the
project your group submits. As a group, you must decide how you want to distribute the points amongst the
people in the group based on each persons overall contribution to the completeness and quality of the
project. On the title page of the report, you designate each person’s portion of the 100 points next to their
name. For example, Latrell Sprewell (26), Kevin Garnett (22), etc.…. These points will be taken as a
percentage of the group’s grade on the project. Each person will be graded out of a possible 25 pts.
Expectations and Grading:
An excellent report will include but is not limited to the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Correctly identifies all relevant factors and assumptions of the hospital’s financial outlook and uses
them in a complete analysis when advising the hospital.
Uses the analysis to make conclusions to advise the hospital. Effectively discusses their
conclusions and their implications on the hospital’s operating room financial outlook.
Uses correct mathematical equations to model this situation.
Provides supporting material such as graphs and/or charts to illustrate their advice and analysis.
Discusses and includes other relevant factors and perspectives which would impact the
administrator decisions about leasing the machine or the financial outlook of the operating room.
Uses correct mathematical language and notation.
Includes a well written summary in written as a paper with an introduction, supporting paragraphs,
and a conclusion.
IEAR, 8/04
62
MATH 080
Jason Gardner
Project #2
Hospital Administration
Expectations and Grading
An excellent report will include but is not limited to the
following:
1. Correctly identifies all relevant factors and
assumptions of the hospital’s financial outlook and
uses them in a complete analysis when advising the
hospital.
2.
Uses the analysis to make conclusions to advise
the hospital. Effectively discusses their
conclusions and their implications on the hospital’s
operating room financial outlook.
3.
Uses correct mathematical equations to model this
situation.
4.
Provides supporting material such as graphs and/or
charts to illustrate their advice and analysis.
5.
Uses correct mathematical language and notation.
6.
Includes a well-written summary written as a paper
with an introduction, supporting paragraphs, and a
conclusion.
7.
Discusses and includes other relevant factors and
perspectives which would impact the
administrative decisions about leasing the machine
or the financial outlook of the operating room.
63
Excellent
Satisfactory
Not
Satisfactory
General Intellectual Abilities: Critical Thinking Assessment
Assignment No. 4
Discipline: Physics
Instructor: Stephanie Diemel
Course: Physics 122: Waves, Sound and Light
Assignment Title: Quiz Four: Rowboat Problem
Assignment Description:
Students must answer this question: When a person in a rowboat in a small pond throws an iron anchor
overboard, does the water level of the pond go up, go down, or remain the same? They must justify their
answer using physics concepts; they may use well-labeled diagrams in addition to the written explanation.
Student Population: Both majors and non majors take this course.
General Intellectual Abilities assessed in this assignment:
I.
Think critically within a discipline:
A.
Identify and express concepts, terms and facts related to a specific
discipline.
C.
D.
IEAR, 8/04
Discuss issues and questions within a discipline.
Identify, interpret and evaluate pertinent data and previous experience to reach
conclusions.
64
Physics 122
Quiz 4
Stephanie Diemel
When a person in a rowboat in a small pond throws an iron anchor overboard, does the water level of the
pond go up, go down, or remain the same?
Justify your answer using physics concepts. Feel free to use well-labeled diagrams in addition to written
explanation.
65
A total of ten (10) points are possible on the assignment. Between zero (0) and two (2) points will
be assigned for each of the following five categories. The “low” and “high” scores are explained
below. An intermediate score of one (1) point is earned if the goal for the “high” score is met in a
partial or otherwise incomplete manner.
1.
Identifies and summarizes the problem/question.
(LOW)
0
1
Does not identify the issue, is confused about
the issue, or represents the issue inaccurately
or incompletely.
2.
2
(HIGH)
Identifies not only the basics of the issue, but
recognizes the nuances of the issue.
Identifies the law(s) of physics that are applicable to the problem.
(LOW)
0
1
Does not identify the law(s) of physics
applicable to the problem.
3.
2
(HIGH)
Identifies applicable law(s) and clarifies
distinctions at many levels.
Demonstrates how the law(s) of physics apply to the problem.
(LOW)
0
1
Fails to describe how the relevant law(s) are at
work with the problem. Does not attempt to
apply the law(s) to the specific circumstance by
creating a specific representation of the more
general law.
IEAR, 8/04
2
(HIGH)
Clearly articulates how the general law can be
applied to the specifics of the problem. Sees
multiple ways of approaching the problem.
66
4.
Identifies and applies other supporting definitions or relationships.
(LOW)
0
1
Fails to identify or apply any supporting
definitions or relationships which would allow
the student to completely apply the laws.
5.
2
(HIGH)
Identifies and applies all supporting definitions
and relationships to the problem solution.
Uses information above to derive a physically consistent solution.
(LOW)
0
Merely repeats information previously
provided, taking it as absolute truth, or denies
the information provided. Restates laws rather
than providing specific applications. Does not
engage the supporting data or evidence
critically in any way.
67
1
2
(HIGH)
Examines the information provided
previously, questioning its applicability and
completeness. Considers differences between
theory (general) and application (specific) and
evaluates the information source
APPENDIX C
Critical Thinking and Mathematics: Critical Thinking Assessment Project
By Jason Gardner, Instructor of Mathematics, Shoreline Community College
“Why math?”, a frustrated student typically asks. “Why do I have to take this course? I’m not an engineer
or scientist. I don’t need to solve equations. I’m going to be a writer.” Every math teacher is confronted with this
argument or a similar one a few times a year. The natural response for many teachers is usually quick and layered in
educational rhetoric. “Well, problem solving, of course, and critical thinking.” Yet, this easy response leads to
much deeper and far reaching questions. Critical thinking and problem solving is an essential learning outcome for
mathematics, but what is critical thinking and what role does it play in mathematics? How do you develop critical
thinking? How do you asses it? In the course of my participation on this project on critical thinking, it has been
illuminating, both personally in my classroom and on a broader spectrum, pondering the crucial role that critical
thinking plays in a mathematics curriculum and the mechanisms by which it is developed and assessed.
For many mathematicians, critical thinking is higher order problem solving. By problem solving, I refer to
the skill by which one can take a problem situation, identify the given and known information, discover relationships
between quantities, and assemble them into a multi-step argument to obtain a solution. Since mathematics models
the real world, critical thinking also involves being able to translate a real world situation into mathematical
language, obtain a solution, and translate it back into the context of the real world situation. For some, including
myself, critical thinking in mathematics also includes the ability to put the mathematics into perspective. In
modeling the real world, the mathematical model and its assumptions need to be put into the perspective of what
situation it is attempting to model. (For example, is using an exponential model to model population growth, one is
assuming that the population is growing at a constant percentage rate, a gross oversimplification of reality)
Moreover, the conclusions drawn from a mathematical argument or model must be put into perspective with those of
other fields in order to get a full picture of the situation. (For example, once the problems of a large population
growth are understood, a quantitative (mathematical) analysis would yield a simple solution: decrease the population
growth rate. Yet, culturally, this would be challenging in some societies.) Even though discussion on exact
definition of critical thinking continues among math faculty, there is agreement on its essential role in our
curriculum.
The critical thinking project provided a forum for me to reflect on critical thinking and its role in my
classroom. It helped clarify critical thinking for me, its role, and how I develop it, and how I assess it. It allowed me
to observe what teachers in other disciplines were doing to develop and assess critical thinking. It illuminated their
challenges and provided perspective on my own. This was probably the most valuable portion of the project for me.
In addition, the project helped foster some discussion on critical thinking within the mathematics
department. We all agreed that critical thinking takes time, yet were left with critical questions. Is it appropriate to
assess critical thinking on a test? Is the time spent developing critical thinking going to sacrifice some of the time
spent on mathematical content? How essential is putting the mathematics into perspective? I found that each teacher
answered this in their own way. Ultimately, these discussions led to a valuable sharing of ideas.
Although the idea of critical thinking is easy to describe, assessing critical thinking in a formal manner is
much more difficult. In our project, we used the Washington State University’s Critical Thinking Scoring Guide. I
found it a valuable starting point for forming my own rubric for assessing student critical thinking. Developing a
rubric posed challenges, but ultimately opened new doors on how I developed and assessed critical thinking. I found
that developing a formal rubric helped clarify my intentions to my students and improve the work they produced.
Some of the WSU Scoring Guide criteria were essential to measuring critical thinking: identifying the problem (1),
identifying key assumptions (2), and identifying the conclusions (7). The other criteria were applicable in some, but
not all circumstances. However, I don’t feel it was a complete guide for assessing critical thinking in mathematics.
It had a bent towards a liberal arts perspective of critical thinking, as if one were grading a research paper.
I typically assess critical thinking in two ways: as a part of a project or a question on a test. The projects
typically involve in depth modeling of a real world problem (see hospital profitability in Appendix I, question #4).
Secondly, I typically put a question on a test which requires a degree of critical thinking (see Appendix II). Yet,
assessing critical thinking in this manner poses some challenges. In developing a rubric for the projects, I struggled
to find a balance between clarifying my intentions for the project, refraining from outlining the solution to the
problem at hand, and leaving the project open to multiple approaches. A test question which involves critical
thinking takes time for students. It is challenging to find the appropriate balance between a question with a
IEAR 8/01
68
significant degree of critical thinking, the time answer it, and the time for other content that must be assessed.
Finding the right balance is the key.
Developing critical thinking is always a challenge at all levels of mathematics. Many students are looking
for a set of directions to follow to obtain a particular result, a “cookbook” approach to mathematics. There are some
problems in mathematics can be solved in this manner, but only a limited number. Most of the broader problems in
mathematics don’t fit so easily inside this kind of box and involve a much deeper level of critical thinking and
understanding of mathematics. Unfortunately many classrooms, math is taught as a set of specific skills, especially
at the pre-college level. Critical thinking gets at a deeper level of understanding, being able to make associations
between a diverse array of mathematics and other fields.
I develop critical thinking in a variety of ways. In a College Algebra or Precalculus course, I start the class
with a multipart interactive group and class activity on problem solving strategies (see appendix IV). In this activity,
we talk about the different approaches to problem solving, investigate a group of problems which can solved by a
variety of different strategies, and, through the course of the activity, highlight the multitude of problem solving
strategies we can employ to solve a problem: draw a picture or table, make a model, act it out, look for a pattern, etc.
This forms the basis for our approach to problem solving the rest of the quarter. Secondly, I have students
investigate problems or questions which involve a particular degree of critical thinking and are related to the content
we are investigating. These problems take many forms: a class discussion, a student in class group activity, or part
of homework assignment. Typically, I prefer to follow up with a class discussion on any question involving a
significant degree of critical thinking. Finally, more in depth questions involving critical thinking are given as a part
of a large project (See Hospital Profitability, Appendix 1, and Population Growth, Appendix III). With this
multifaceted approach, I seek to develop my student’s own ability to think critically.
Overall, I have found my participation in Critical Thinking Assessment Project very valuable and
illuminating for myself and the college as a whole. It has made me more aware of critical thinking in my class, how I
develop it, and how I assess it. The project provided valuable discussion and perspective on critical thinking across
disciplines. Ultimately, I feel the CTAG improved my teaching and has helped me more effectively develop and
assess critical thinking in my teaching.
<<Return>>
69
IEAR, 8/04
70