2014-2015 ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT
BS/BA Management Major
Mission
The Management Major is intended to help students obtain the necessary knowledge, skills, and abilities to function successfully in
public, private, and not-for-profit organizations. Students increase their content knowledge through hands-on activities in the classroom,
as well as from out-of-class assignments. In addition, students further develop their communication and critical thinking skills through a
variety of class discussions, cases, team projects, and presentations.
Student Learning Outcomes
Students will be able to:
1. Explain the major theories of motivation.
2. Explain key theories of leadership and power.
3. Understand the implications of effective human resource management.
4. Understand what U.S. firms should do to ensure successful business operations in selected foreign countries.
5. Assess management problems/issues, generate alternative solutions, and make recommendations.
6. Communicate effectively in oral and in written form.
1
Means of Assessing Student Learning Outcomes
Embedded Questions: Discipline specific knowledge is measured in Organizational Behavior (MAN 3240) and International
Management (MAN 4600) through embedded questions.
Case Analysis: A case analysis is assigned in MAN 3301, Human Resource Management, and is scored on a rubric designed to
evaluate three learning outcomes for management majors: (1) Understanding the implications of effective human resource
management, (2) critical thinking, and (3) written communication skills. The case is an assignment will normally be completed during
the fifth week of class. The title of the case is, “SF Cowen: New Recruits,” and is a Harvard Business School Case written by Thomas
Delong and Vineeta Vijayraghavan. The rubric uses the following scale: 1 = fails to meet expectations, 2 = meets expectations, and 3
= exceeds expectations.
Graduation Survey - Institutional Research & Effectiveness gives the Graduation Survey to all USF Sarasota-Manatee students upon
the completion of their degree. Graduates select to what extent on a 1 (None) - 5 (A Great Deal) scale they feel their experiences at
USF contributed to their growth and development in their ability “to communicate effectively” and “to critically analyze ideas and
information.”
ADDITIONAL MEANS OF ASSESSMENT
ETS Major Field Test in Business: Students in the College of Business take the Major Field Test (MFT) in Business, developed by the
Educational Testing Service (ETS), during the strategic management and decision making capstone course in their last semester of the
undergraduate program. The exam contains 120 multiple-choice questions designed to measure students’ subject knowledge and the
ability to apply facts, concepts, theories and analytical methods in the areas of accounting, economics, management, quantitative
business analysis, finance, marketing, legal and social environment, information systems, and international issues. Test questions are
developed by experienced faculty committees in all relevant areas and are revised every five years. ETS assessment experts conduct
rigorous test of sensitivity and reliability on each question.
2
USF SARASOTA-MANATEE
ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT PLANNING RECORD
2014-2015
Academic Program: BS/BA Management (52.0101)
Student Learning
Outcomes
Means of Assessing
Outcome
1. Students will be
able to explain the
major theories of
motivation.
Embedded
Questions: Program
faculty have developed
questions designed to
assess students’ ability
to explain the major
theories of motivation.
Data collected in MAN
3240, Organizational
Analysis.
ETS Major Field Test
Management
assessment indicator
Target
Embedded
Questions:
Students will
average at least
80% correct on
questions. The
faculty will work with
the Office of
Institutional
Research and
Effectiveness to test
the validity and
reliability of the
embedded
questions.
At least the 50th
percentile.
Assessment Results
Motivation
N=28
SP15
Q#
%
1
89%
2
97%
3
91%
4
74%
5
85%
Motivation Questions Avg. = 87%
> 70% = 100%
> 80% = 80%
> 90% = 40%
Overall Test Avg. = 84%
> 70% = 93%
> 80% = 60%
> 90% = 27%
(AY14-15, SU14, FA14, SP15)
Combined Results N=99
Management: 51st percentile
USFSM % Correct: 56, NATION % Correct: 54
3
Student Learning
Outcomes
Means of Assessing
Outcome
2. Students will be
able to explain key
theories of
leadership and
power.
Embedded
Questions: Program
faculty have developed
questions designed to
assess students’ ability
to explain key theories
of leadership and
power.
Data collected in MAN
3240, Organizational
Analysis.
Target
Embedded
Questions:
Students will
average at least
80% correct on
questions. The
faculty will work with
the Office of
Institutional
Research and
Effectiveness to test
the validity and
reliability of the
embedded
questions.
Assessment Results
Leadership
N=28
Q#
6
7
8
9
10
Leadership Section = 75%
> 70% = 80%
> 80% = 0%
> 90% = 0%
SP15
%
75%
76%
80%
68%
77%
Overall Test % = 84%
> 70% = 93%
> 80% = 60%
> 90% = 27%
4
Student Learning
Outcomes
Means of Assessing
Outcome
3. Students will be
able to understand
the implications of
effective human
resource
management.
Case Analysis:
Students demonstrate
their analytical thinking
abilities in a case
analysis that is
assessed by faculty
members using a
rubric.
Data collected in MAN
3301 Human Resource
Management
Target
Case Analysis: On
a scale from 3
(Exceeds
expectations) to 1
(Fails to meet
expectations) the
average student
performance will be
at least 2 (meets
expectations).
Assessment Results
Overall – Understanding of Effective Human Resource Mgmt.
%
%
Term
N
Mean Min Max SD
SP15
20*
1.93
1
3
0.10
Consensus
Agreement
Adjacent
Agreement
40%
85%
*Ten samples evaluated by 2 raters.
The extent to which the response
uses central HR principles in
explaining why the experience was a
negative one.
The extent to which the response
uses includes HR knowledge of
effective hiring decisions, including
but not limited to the reliability and
validity of selection tests, and
recognizing and addressing potential
problems with job interviews.
The extent to which the response
uses HR knowledge regarding hiring
criteria, include but not limited to
legal issues in the development of
criteria, the tradeoffs associated with
setting cutoff scores higher versus
lower (i.e., re false positives and
false negatives and their connection
to competitive advantage).
The extent to which the response
uses HR knowledge in the fair and
accurate evaluation of candidates,
including an understanding of the
research on the validity and legal
defensibility of hiring decisions.
Mean
Min
Max
SD
%
Consen
sus
%
Adjace
nt
1.90
1
3
.74
50%
100%
1.70
1
3
.95
50%
60%
2.10
1
3
.74
50%
100%
2.00
1
3
.82
10%
80%
5
Student Learning
Outcomes
Means of Assessing
Outcome
4. Students will be
able to understand
what U.S. firms
should do to ensure
successful
business
operations in
selected foreign
countries.
Embedded
Questions: Program
faculty have developed
questions designed to
assess students’ ability
to understand what
U.S. firms should do to
ensure successful
business operations in
selected foreign
countries
Data collected in MAN
4600 International
Management
Target
Embedded
Questions:
Students will
average at least
80% correct on
questions. The
faculty will work with
the Office of
Institutional
Research and
Effectiveness to test
the validity and
reliability of the
embedded
questions.
Assessment Results
MAN 4600 International Management
Course-embedded Assessment
SU15, N=44
Average
% of questions at or above 70%
63%
(5 of8)
% of questions at or above 80%
63%
(5 of8)
% of questions at or above 90%
25%
(2 of 8)
Overall Average
78%
6
Student Learning
Outcomes
Means of Assessing
Outcome
5. Critical Thinking:
Students will be
able to assess
management
problem/issue,
generate alternative
solutions, and make
recommendations.
Case Analysis:
Students demonstrate
their analytical thinking
abilities in a case
analysis that is
assessed by faculty
members using a
rubric.
Data collected in MAN
3301 Human Resource
Management
Target
Case Analysis: On
a scale from 3
(Exceeds
expectations) to 1
(Fails to meet
expectations) the
average student
performance will be
at least 2 (meets
expectations).
Assessment Results
Term
SP15
N
2
Overall – Critical Thinking
%
Mean Min Max SD
2.03
1
3
Consensus
Agreement
%
Adjacent
Agreement
63%
98%
0.17
*Ten samples evaluated by 2 raters.
Mean
Min
Max
SD
%
Consen
sus
%
Adjace
nt
The extent to which the response
reflects sound logic in analyzing the
experience.
The extent to which the response
reflects sound logic in analyzing
which decision points are “key,” and
what the company is doing well and
not so well.
The extent to which the response
involves rational arguments for
and/or against the company’s hiring
criteria.
1.60
1
3
.84
70%
100%
2.00
1
3
.82
50%
100%
2.40
2
3
.52
90%
100%
The extent to which the response
includes a careful evaluation of the
strengths and limitations of each
candidate and a logical explanation
for the recommendations.
2.10
1
3
.88
40%
90%
7
Student Learning
Outcomes
Means of Assessing
Outcome
Graduation Survey
Target
Graduation
Survey: Using a
scale of 1 (None) to
5 (A Great Deal),
75% of respondents
will select either a 4
or a 5 in response to
the following
statement: “To what
extent do you feel
your experiences at
USF contributed to
your growth and
development in your
ability to critically
analyze ideas and
information.”
Assessment Results
Critical Thinking
Year
N
A
Great
Deal
(5)
201415
29
10
(4)
(3)
(2)
None
(1)
%4
or 5
Mean
SD
14
3
0
2
83%
4.0
1.05
8
Student Learning
Outcomes
6. Communication:
Students will
communicate
effectively in written
form.
Means of Assessing
Outcome
Case Analysis:
Students demonstrate
effective written
communication in a
case analysis that is
assessed by faculty
members using a
rubric.
Data collected in MAN
3301 Human Resource
Management
Target
Case Analysis: On
a scale from 3
(Exceeds
expectations) to 1
(Fails to meet
expectations) the
average student
performance will be
at least 2 (meets
expectations).
Assessment Results
Term
SP15
N
20*
Mean
2.05
Overall – Communication
%
Min Max SD
1
3
0.10
Consensus
Agreement
%
Adjacent
Agreement
68%
100%
*Ten samples evaluated by 2 raters.
The extent to which the student
effectively communicated the
Content Criteria.
Reflect upon a time you had a
negative recruiting/hiring experience.
What were the signs the experience
was not going well?
What are the key decision points
used by S.G. Cowen in making
hiring decisions? What is your
evaluation of the process used by
the company?
What is your evaluation of the
criteria (standards, rules, cutoffs)
used by this organization in making
hiring decisions?
Which two candidates would you
select if you were a member of the
recruiting committee – and why?
Mean
Min
Max
SD
%
Consen
sus
%
Adjace
nt
1.80
1
3
.79
80%
100%
2.00
1
3
.67
60%
100%
2.30
1
3
.67
70%
100%
2.10
1
3
.88
60%
100%
9
Student Learning
Outcomes
Means of Assessing
Outcome
Graduation Survey
Target
Graduation
Survey: Using a
scale of 1 (None) to
5 (A Great Deal),
75% of respondents
will select either a 4
or a 5 in response to
the following
statement: “To what
extent do you feel
your experiences at
USF contributed to
your growth and
development in your
ability to
communicate
effectively.”
Assessment Results
Communication
Year
N
A
Great
Deal
(5)
201415
29
12
(4)
(3)
(2)
None
(1)
%4
or 5
Mean
SD
13
2
0
2
86%
4.1
1.06
Use of Results for Program Improvement
1. Faculty will revise the instructions to the case analysis (SG Cowen: New Recruits) and grade student papers instead of including them as an
activity counting toward class participation. The revised instructions will emphasize the importance of applying HR principles, evaluating the
reliability and validity of the firm’s hiring practices, and using correct grammar and style. Explicitly grading the assignment should improve
the motivation of students to do their best.
2. Faculty will re-assess the extent to which motivation and leadership topics are taught in MAN3240. This will include consideration of which
specific topics will be taught and in what level of depth. It will also include potential revisions to the ways that learning of these topics is
evaluated in the course.
3. In GEB490, Faculty will continue to hand out study guides for the ETS exam and, in addition, he will base 5% of the total grade in the course
on performance on the exam. We believe this will encourage students to study harder for the exam – for example, by reviewing their notes
and other materials from their management courses.
10
4. Faculty will revise the rubrics to include 5-point rating scales (rather than the current 3-point scales). This will allow raters to make finer
distinctions in performance, which we believe will provide better diagnostic information. They will also create explanations for some of the
scale anchors so, for instance, raters will better understand what “meets expectations” means.
5. IR will provide more relevant comparative information for the ETS exam. Although it is helpful to know that our students are scoring at the
51st percentile nationally on the management portion of the test, faculty question how students are doing compared to schools similar to
USFSM.
Dean’s Response (James M. Curran)
The faculty are taking positive steps with the changes in rubrics and the examination of multiple courses. I think that some attention must be given
to the element of critical thinking which is part of the mission statement and will be a focus of the campus and its new QEP.
11