Motlow State Community College
Program Student Learning Outcomes
Use of Assessment Results
Fall Semester 2012
Program Title: General Education, University Parallel Major
Course: ART 1030
Expected Student Learning Outcomes: Students will be able to
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Analyze significant primary texts and works of art, ancient, pre-modern and modern,
as forms of cultural and creative expression.
Explain the ways in which humanistic and/or artistic expression throughout the ages
expresses the culture and values of its time and place.
Explore global/cultural diversity.
Frame a comparative context through which they can critically assess the ideas,
force, and values that have created the modern world.
Recognize the ways in which both change and continuity have affected human
history.
Practice the critical and analytical methodologies of the Humanities and/or Fine
Arts.
Performance Measure(s): Pre-test, Post-test
Effectiveness Standard: From pre-test to post-test for each item, 70% of students will show an
incremental gain of 10%.
Assessment Results:
There were 9 questions, # 3, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, & 20 where there was not an incremental
gain of at least 10% from pre to post- test. The following table summarizes student
performance on pre-post test and the item relationship to the expected SLO.
Expected
Question
SLO
Q1
4,6
Q2
1,2,3,4,6
Q3
1,2,3,4,6
Q4
1,2,3,4,6
Q5
2,5
PreTest
#
Correct
182
95
116
87
101
PreTest
%
Correct
69%
36%
44%
33%
39%
PostTest
#
Correct
107
87
48
69
70
PostTest
%
%
Correct Difference
80%
10%
65%
29%
36%
-8%
51%
18%
52%
14%
70% of
students
will show
an
incremental
gain of 10%
Met
Met
Not met
Met
Met
Q6
Q7
Q8
Q9
Q10
Q11
Q12
Q13
Q14
Q15
Q16
Q17
Q18
Q19
Q20
1,2,3,5
1,2,4,5,6
1,6
1,6
1,6
1,2,3,6
1,2,4,5,6
1-6
1,2,6
1,2,4,5,6
1-6
1,2,4,6
1,2,3,5,6
1,4,5,6
1,4,5,6
96
164
167
217
135
149
127
155
61
144
182
177
96
208
233
37%
63%
64%
83%
52%
57%
48%
59%
23%
55%
69%
68%
37%
79%
89%
115
107
101
112
108
100
93
77
56
78
102
99
48
111
127
86%
80%
75%
84%
81%
75%
69%
57%
42%
58%
76%
74%
36%
83%
95%
49%
17%
12%
1%
29%
18%
21%
-2%
19%
3%
7%
6%
-1%
3%
6%
Met
Met
Met
Not met
Met
Met
Met
Not met
Met
Not met
Not met
Not met
Not met
Not met
Not met
262 students completed the pre-test and 134 students completed the post-test. It should
be noted that there were multiple questions which covered each SLO. An examination of
the items reveals that at least ever SLO was met with at least one question.
Use of Assessment Results:
The results indicate that an inordinately large number of students did not take the test.
There were 373 students enrolled in ARTA 1030 in Fall 2012. Of those only 262 completed
the pre-test and only 134 students completed the post-test. The full time faculty member
was disturbed by the low numbers of completion. It should be noted that the classes taking
the tests were all taught by adjuncts. For that reason a meeting with all adjuncts is being
planned to discuss the importance of the students completing both tests. The content of
the meeting will be to study each item on the test and determine if the item is too easy.
That could also be skewing the results. Other forms of assessment will be discussed for
validity for art and the importance of completing the tests will be encouraged.
Follow Up:
A meeting was held of the Art full time and adjunct faculty on February 22, 2013. The
discussion focused on a plan to ensure that the SLO’s were being met in all ARTA 1030
sections. The plan includes administering the tests in computer labs in the first week of
class. The group would like to return to the use of scantron sheets for the tests as opposed
to labs, but that needs to be investigated for the future. All agreed that the mindset of the
student and the faculty must be improved toward completion of the assessment tests. The
test is to be rewritten prior to the next administration of the test in fall 2014. All faculty are
studying the questions for improvement to move from the very specific questions to a more
broad based question approach. See minutes below from the meeting on February 22,
2013.
Present at the meeting: Debbie Zimmerman, Brian Robinson, Eric Claunch, Ann
Smotherman, and Angela Burks
Faculty were provided with the Program Student Learning Outcomes Use of
Assessment Results, Fall Semester 2012 report, the ARTA 1030 pre-post test
and the Tennessee Board of Regents Proposal for the Establishment of a Lower
Division General Education Core report.
The next General Education Assessment for ARTA 1030 takes place in the spring
2014 semester.
The following problems and possible solutions regarding the pre-post tests
were discussed:

The pre-test is not available the first day of classes. All agreed that having
the pre-test available the first day of classes would be beneficial. A printout of students who aren’t there on the first day would be necessary.

The group agreed that the challenge is getting all students to take the
pre-post tests because it isn’t a requirement and there is no penalty for
not taking them. Mr. Claunch inquired if it would be possible to require
students to present the receipt, generated after taking the test, for
attendance, or if attendance could be linked to the test. Ms. Zimmerman
explained that checking role the first day of class would still be required.
Ms. Smotherman suggested awarding bonus points when students turn
in their receipt. Mr. Robinson wondered if this would be an incentive for
students who had already earned a good grade. Ms. Zimmerman felt that,
in most cases, conscientious students would still take the tests.

Art classes are not taught in classrooms that have computers; therefore,
students must take the tests outside of class. Ms. Zimmerman suggested
that teachers take their entire class to an available computer lab or the
library to take the test. This would increase the number of students
taking the test. This could be done the first day of class (providing the
test is available) after the syllabus was discussed. She encouraged faculty
to do a facilities request, through the secretary, to reserve labs in
advance.

Mr. Claunch inquired as to whether the test could be administered using
Scantron sheets. Ms. Zimmerman explained that in the past, this was the
method used. Some of the problems with that method were the expense
and the risk of human error in the manual calculations required in
compiling the scores, as well as, storing the score sheets once they are
completed.

All agreed that faculty must convey to their students that taking the tests
is something they want students to do. There needs to be an improved
mindset of the faculty.
The following discussion took place regarding the test:

Mr. Robinson stated that he preferred to continue using the pre-post
tests in lieu of switching to embedding questions in the course.

Ms. Burks asked if images could be imbedded with the questions on the
tests since this the learning method used in class. The group readily
agreed that this was an excellent idea. The group reviewed each question
and decided which image would be used for each question. Mr. Robinson
needs access to D2L to imbed the appropriate thumbnail image to each
question.

Ms. Burks also suggested the “language” of the tests be reviewed since
the material can sometimes be described in more than one way. In
posing a question, include both terms, if appropriate, so as to not confuse
students. The consensus was that this too would help alleviate confusion.

Ms. Smotherman inquired if, perhaps, the test should be re-written or if
some questions should be omitted. A discussion followed regarding the
length of the test (20 questions). Mr. Robinson explained that revising
the test was allowed as long as SLO’s are met. It was decided that a tenquestion test would serve just as well. Mr. Claunch suggested that the ten
questions that met the benchmarks be kept. Each question was reviewed,
and initial changes were made. The question was also raised as to
whether the pre and post tests should be identical. Mr. Robinson asked
the faculty members to continue to review the test and submit their
additional thoughts and ideas to him. He will then update the test by the
end of this semester, spring 2013, and send it back to them.
There was discussion of the TBR Learning Outcomes. Art is covering all of the
Student Learning Outcomes. Ms. Zimmerman posed the question, “Are they
appropriate for what you want to accomplish?” They are appropriate, and
Motlow art faculty covers all of them. Ms. Zimmerman has observed these being
done in her classroom observations. The consensus of the group was that each
SLO is covered in class.

Each of the SLO’s and assessment results was discussed. Ms. Zimmerman
noted that if an SLO wasn’t met in one area, it was actually met in
another area. Ms. Zimmerman pointed out that some questions had high
scores on the pre-test which limited the opportunity for improvement on
the post-test. She commented that perhaps administering questions that
were less obvious might be a better gauge of learning. Ms. Burke
commented that it might be helpful if students could see their scores for
the test. Mr. Robinson speculated that the same students are not taking
the pre and post tests. If not, the results may be skewed. He also noted
that even if all objectives are met, there still needs to be continued
improvement.
There was discussion regarding the post-test end date. The consensus was that
the current end-date, one week before the semester ends, works well.