College of the Canyons Program SLOs
The Process for Existing Programs
All departments identified at least two or three potential student learning
outcomes for their program in the Annual Program Review for 2002-2003. During
Program Review for 2003-2004, departments revisited those outcomes and applied the
same standards as those stated for course outcomes above:
1. Does the outcome identify something important that students will be able to do
or know at the end of the program?
2. Does the outcome identify an overarching goal of the program rather than a
discrete task that you would not consider an end result of the entire program?
3. Does the outcome involve the highest level of critical thinking appropriate to
the goals of the program?
4. Can the outcome be assessed so that you can determine whether or not students
have actually met the goal?
Keep in mind that departments will probably want to declare separate SLO’s for different
segments or threads of the department based upon the different populations of students
served. For example, the English Department declared SLO’s for four different programs
representing the different levels of its curriculum: developmental English; Associate
degree English requirement; transfer composition, literature, and critical thinking; and
English major. Also keep in mind that it is most desirable that the program SLO’s be
closely aligned with the SLO’s of cumulating or capstone courses so that the program
SLO’s are actually embedded in the course SLO’s. However, a department may decide to
conduct separate assessment of program SLO’s if it wants to establish SLO’s for the
program that are not assessed through the courses. Appendix D contains some examples
of program SLO’s.
The Process for New Programs
New programs should follow the same guidelines described above.
The Assessment Stage
Setting goals for their courses is not a new idea to faculty; it is an integral part of
teaching. And assessing students also is not a new concept; teachers know that they have
to give grades, and to do that they have to assess students. In the day-to-day flurry of
teaching, however, it is possible for the connection between a teacher’s goals and the
1
assessment of student learning to lose some clarity. The new Student Learning
Outcomes Assessment mandate refocuses all of us on the strong links between
statements of goals (SLO’s) and their assessment. Here is a concise definition of
assessment that explains those connections:
Assessment is an ongoing process aimed at understanding and improving student
learning. It involves making our expectations explicit and public; setting appropriate
criteria and high standards for learning quality; systematically gathering, analyzing, and
interpreting evidence to determine how well performance matches those expectations
and standards; and using the resulting information to document, explain, and improve
performance. When it is embedded effectively within larger institutional systems,
assessment can help us focus our collective attention, examine our assumptions, and
create a shared academic culture dedicated to assuring and improving the quality of
higher education (Thomas A. Angelo, AAHE Bulletin, November 1995, p. 7).
Moving into the Assessment Stage
Once the course outline has been revised to include student learning outcomes that
fulfill the criteria discussed above and assessment tools that have been deemed sufficient
to measure those outcomes, faculty must set the parameters of the assessment process
for each course and program. They should begin by asking the following questions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
How many assessment tools will be necessary to assess the student
learning outcomes?
If multiple sections of a course are offered, will all sections use the same
assessment tools?
If multiple instructors are using different assessment tools, how will
consistency between instructors and sections be achieved?
How will data that documents the results of the assessment be collected,
and in what form? For example, data can be quantitative (numeric scores)
or qualitative (narratives, observations, interviews).
Who will be responsible for collecting the data for a course with multiple
sections?
Who will be responsible for analyzing the data for a course with multiple
sections?
How will the analysis of the data be used to improve teaching and
learning?
The Assessment Stage: Collecting the Data
2
The WASC accreditation standard that has launched this project does not
micromanage the assessment process. Instead, it leaves to faculty the decisions that will
determine how useful the assessment process will be in improving teaching and learning.
In other words, faculty members decide how they will assess the student learning
outcomes.
Each department should undertake a commitment to developing strong principles
and practices of assessment. Appendix B and C in this manual, “Launching a LearningCentered College” and “Nine Principles of Good Practice for Assessing Student Learning,”
provide a foundation for understanding the purpose of assessment. There will also be a
number of Flex workshops focused on the subject of assessment. Additionally,
professional organizations and discipline-specific journals can also provide useful
information.
In considering the type of assessment to be used, faculty should keep in mind that
any tool that measures the degree to which students have met a learning outcome
qualifies as assessment. Such tools include skills performances or demonstrations,
portfolios, productions (essay, oral presentation, visual artifact, speech), surveys,
quizzes, and tests. Most outcomes can be measured in a variety of ways.
The necessity of collecting data may sound like a burden, but the task can and
should be kept manageable. However, the results of the assessment need to be kept in
records that can be accessed during the analysis stage. It is probably a good idea for the
department chair to undertake this responsibility or to delegate it to a full-time
department member.
The Assessment Stage: Analysis of the Data
Recall that the purpose of this entire assessment process is to improve teaching
and learning. It is important to keep in mind that WASC Standard H: Section A 1c. does
not suggest that if the assessment process reveals that some outcomes are not being met
by a number of students, the institution or instructor will be punished. Rather, it
requires that the information gained through the assessment process be used to improve
teaching and learning. This is how the loop is closed: faculty return to the student
learning outcomes and reassess them and the teaching and learning process,
Important
making appropriate adjustments based on the specific knowledge of how well
guide for
students are meeting the outcomes.
Departments:
Keep minutes
and submit
them for your
SLO meetings
Departments should document both the assessment results and the
analysis stage. Just as there are a variety of ways to assess student learning
outcomes, there are many ways to provide this documentation. If
departments hold meetings to discuss the analysis of the data, minutes from
those meetings can be used. Surveys from individual instructors can ask for
3
suggestions for changes in curriculum and teaching practices. Department retreats can
be focused on specific courses or programs.
Ultimately, Academic Program Review will be the main place to provide
documentation of both data from student learning outcomes and the manner in which
the loop was closed: how faculty have used the information from the assessment of
student learning outcomes to improve teaching and learning.
Appendix D
Sample Program SLO’s forvarious kinds of departments
Sample Program SLO’s for a large department offering basic skills classes,
Associate degree requirements, transfer requirements, and an Associate degree.
English Department
We have chosen to declare student learning outcomes for each part of our program,
since they serve very different groups of students and incorporate very different
focuses.
Developmental English: (English 071 and 081)
SLO #1: Compose well-organized source-based paragraphs with parenthetical
citations.
SLO #2: Recognize and differentiate the basic elements of fiction and non-fiction,
including plot, setting, characterization, point of view, conflict, resolution, and theme
for fiction, and including thesis, main points, supporting details, and organizational
strategy for non-fiction.
SLO #3: Recognize and define patterns of development such as narration, description,
process analysis, illustration, definition, and problem/solution.
English Requirements for the Associate Degree (English 091 or 094):
4
SLO #1: Compose well-organized, source-based short essays with parenthetical
citations and a works cited page.
SLO #2: Explain the use of the elements of non-fiction, including thesis, main points,
supporting details, and organizational strategy, and apply this understanding in their
essays.
SLO#3: Apply a variety of patterns of development, including cause/effect,
compare/contrast, persuasion, and analysis.
Transfer English Composition, Literature, and Critical Thinking
(English 101 and 102 or 103):
SLO#1: Compose well-organized expository essays at least 5 pages long that include
appropriate supporting details and citation format and that develop the writer’s own
argument.
SLO#2: Analyze and evaluate the explicit and implicit meanings of a wide variety of
written and visual materials, including academic essays, short stories, poems,
advertisements, films, novels, and plays.
SLO#3: Explain the basic principles of argumentation and apply them in their essays.
English Major (Creative Writing and/or Literature Elective Courses)
SLO#1: Analyze a variety of literary genres in their social context.
SLO#2: Evaluate the artistic contributions made by key poets, writers, and dramatists
in the English and American literary traditions by analyzing the stylistic, formal, and
thematic elements of their works.
SLO#3: Compare and contrast the literary works of one historical period with literary
works from other periods.
5