Degree/Certificate: Bachelor of Business Administration Degree Program
Submitted by: Patricia Nemetz Mills
Date: November 18, 2014
Part I – Program SLO Assessment Report for 2013-14
Part I – for the 2013-14 academic year: Assessment for business programs underwent substantial
development during the 2013-14 academic year in order to comply with AACSB accreditation
standards. An assessment plan for years 2013-18 has been filed with the CBPA Office of the Dean and
with the university’s AOL Director. It is available on request from the CBPA Assessment Coordinator.
All future assessments during the time span 2013-18 will be conducted at the business-program-level,
not at the major-level. This report includes results for assessment of multiple student learning
objectives. AACSB standards require student learning objectives to be assessed twice (including the
“closing the loop” cycle) in a five-year period. “Closing of the Loop” may occur during the same
academic year as the initial assessment, but in a different quarter. Dates for each activity are
indicated.
1.
Student Learning Outcomes: The following student learning objectives were assessed
during Winter Quarter 2014:
Critical Thinking – Students will use appropriate information and/or concepts and skills from the common body of
business knowledge to bear upon the critical analysis of business issues and problems.
1. Using case studies, designed exercises, and/or real-life examples, our students know how to use an analytical
framework to apply the common body of knowledge to solve problems, resolve issues, or evaluate
situations.
2. Our students will be able to reference appropriate information for use as supporting evidence and
differentiate between fact, opinion, and extraneous data when producing reports, analyzing cases and
issues, and solving problems.
Ethical Awareness --Students will develop an understanding of ethical issues that affect business operations, along
with an awareness of various stakeholders affected by business activities.
1. Our students will know and understand relevant concepts and frameworks for making ethical decisions.
2. Using a case study, designed exercise, or investigatory report, our students will be able to apply an ethical
framework to analyze an ethical dilemma or ethical violation.
3. Using a case study, designed exercise, or investigatory report, our students will be able to determine a
variety of interests, differences, or conflicts arising among stakeholders affected by business activities.
Written Communications – Students will communicate effectively in writing.
1. Our students will write logical and clear reports and documents.
2. Our students will demonstrate knowledge and awareness of mechanical errors in their writing and learn to
correct them.
3. Our students will know how to use application software to properly format documents and review their writing
1
2. Overall evaluation of progress on outcome: Indicate whether or not the SLO has been met,
and if met, to what level.
Critical Thinking
_____SLO is met after changes resulting from ongoing assessments, referencing
assessment results from the previous year to highlight revisions;
__X__SLO is met, but with changes (collaboration) forthcoming;
_____SLO met without change required
Ethical Awareness
_____SLO is met after changes resulting from ongoing assessments, referencing
assessment results from the previous year to highlight revisions;
__X__SLO is met, but with changes (collaboration) forthcoming;
_____SLO met without change required
Written Communication
___X__SLO is met after changes resulting from ongoing assessments, referencing
assessment results from the previous year to highlight revisions;
_____SLO is met, but with changes (collaboration) forthcoming;
_____SLO met without change required
3. Strategies and methods: Description of assessment method and choices, why they were
used and how they were implemented.
Critical Thinking – a legal case was analyzed by students in several sections of ACCT 261. The collaboratively
developed “Critical Thinking” rubric was used to evaluate the results.
Ethical Awareness – an ethical dilemma case was analyzed in MGMT 423 and various scenarios were analyzed in
MGMT 326. The collaboratively developed “Ethical Awareness” rubric was used to evaluate the results.
Written Communications – Papers from several classes (MGMT 423 and MGMT 490) were collected and
evaluated by a business faculty using the collaboratively developed “Written Communications” rubric.
All rubrics referenced above are attached.
4. Observations gathered from data: Include findings and analyses based on the strategies and
methods identified in item #3.
a. Findings: Aggregate Summary Sheets are attached for all Assessments. The
percentage of students meeting and/or exceeding the criteria on each rubric are
reported on the respective summary sheets. Problem areas are identified in
curriculum committees by reviewing and discussing possible reasons where
percentages tend to be lower (a specific standard based on percentage of students
2
meeting the expectation has not yet been set, as this is a pilot year for evaluating the
new assessment plan)
b. Analysis of findings:
Critical Thinking:
Many students used a method compatible with critical thinking. The method employed for
teaching was deemed as useful in aiding the critical thinking skills developed in students. In
general, the results of the assessment were found to be adequate due to the high percentages of
students meeting or exceeding expectations for each criterion.
ii.
Other instructors should be encouraged to use a similar method (IRAC, described below) as an
instructional aid for critical thinking.
i.
Ethical Awareness:
Many students followed a process for ethical analysis when making a decision. In general, the
results of the assessment were found to be adequate due to the high percentages of students
meeting or exceeding expectations for most criteria. Lower percentages for the “Mission and
Values” and “Universalism/Relativism” criteria were probably related to the fact that the case did
not address those issues as directly as the other issues, therefore, it would be pre-mature to
suggest that students lacked an adequate understanding of these issues. However, the percentage
of students who applied a decision-making or ethical framework (53%) is a bit low.
ii.
Instructors should be encouraged to share methods and techniques that enhance the use of an
ethical framework or decision process when analyzing ethical dilemmas.
i.
i.
ii.
iii.
Written Communications
Few strengths were identified.
This assessment found the most critical problems of all the assessments completed W2014.
What program changes will be made based on the assessment results?
a) Describe plans to improve student learning based on assessment findings (e.g.,
course content, course sequencing, curriculum revision, learning environment or
student advising).
Critical Thinking:
Without a structure identified, some students may be at a loss for how to think about problems in a
critical way. The IRAC method (Identification of Problem, Rule Application, Analysis, Conclusion) will be
applied by different instructors across several sections of ACCT 261 (Business Law) in the future. The
IRAC method of analyzing legal cases will be presented to students with an explanation of what is
expected in each category. Practice assignments will be given for use with the IRAC method throughout
the quarter. The IRAC method is the teaching improvement and is designed to pose an analytic
framework for thinking about complex conceptual cases. An additional assignment will be given along
with the Critical Thinking rubric toward the end of the quarter to determine an individual student's
ability to apply IRAC method to a complex legal case.
Ethical Awareness:
Though many students followed a process, use of a decision framework was a shortcoming for some
students. The following improvement was developed and will be applied Fall 2014: Decision-framing
worksheets will be presented to students along with short dilemma cases and/or exercises. Either
working in groups or individually, students will be asked to use the practice worksheets to guide their
thinking when analyzing each case. The practice worksheets are the teaching improvement and are
designed to frame the decision for students using a systematic methodology. Worksheets samples are
included for viewing on Canvas along with this Improvement log. Subsequent to using the worksheets
3
for practice, students will be asked to formally analyze a case individually and in written form.
(Worksheets are attached)
Written Communications
To make improvements, a Writing Error Elimination Policy (WEEP) and “standard” format for writing
formal papers was developed (document included as attachment). A Writing Assessment Board was set
up for evaluating written assignments so the instructor doesn’t have to take the “heat” for initiating the
assessment for later re-assessment.
b) Provide a broad timeline of how and when identified changes will be addressed in
the upcoming year.
All listed improvement activities will be applied Fall 2014. Re-assessment of the same
SLOs will take place in Fall 2014 as well.
iv.
Description of revisions to the assessment process the results suggest are needed and an
evaluation of the assessment plan/process itself.
The plan and process appears to be adequately addressing the needs of the business
program at this time. The process will continue to improve as more faculty understand the
procedures and gain experience in making collaborative improvements.
Attachments Included:
Critical Thinking Rubric
Ethical Awareness Rubric
Written Communications Rubric
Critical Thinking Summary Sheet
Ethical Awareness Summary Sheet
Written Communications Summary Sheet
Ethical Awareness Worksheets (for Improvements)
Writing Error Elimination Policy (for Improvements)
4
Critical Thinking Rubric
Critical Thinking Learning Objective – Students can use appropriate information and/or concepts and skills from
the common body of business knowledge to bear upon the critical analysis of business issues and problems.
College of Business and Public Administration
Eastern Washington University
Description of Situation and Problem
Identification
Student can clearly describe the situation
and/or identify the problem
Student can select which of the given
information can be used as factual evidence to
analyze the situation
Student can differentiate between fact and
opinion or can determine which of the given
information is extraneous, based too much on
“feelings” or opinion, or is too distorted to use
without further exploration
Information Exploration and Explanation
Student can locate and/or reference concepts,
theories, models, frameworks, formulae,
rules, and/or standards for analyzing the
situation
Student considers alternate concepts, theories,
models, frameworks, formulae, rules, and/or
standards which may also be applied to
analyze the situation
Student can accurately explain, in his/her own
words, relevant concepts, theories, models,
frameworks, formulae, rules, and/or standards
which may be applied to analyze the situation
Analysis
Student can apply the selected concepts,
theories, models, frameworks, formula, rules,
standards to analyze the specific situation
Student defines meaningful alternatives if
necessary
Student evaluates alternatives and makes a
recommendation or can clearly state a
conclusion
Limitations
Student can clearly identify assumptions
Student can clearly identify limitations of the
applied concepts, theories, models,
frameworks, formulae, rules, and/or standards
Student can clearly identify limitations of the
conclusion/recommendation
Overall Evaluation:
5
Exceeds
Expectations
(4)
Meets
Expectations
(3)
Marginally
Meets
Expectations
(2)
Does Not
Meet
Expectations
(1)
Ethics Rubric
Ethical Awareness Learning Objective --Students will develop an understanding of ethical
issues that affect organizations along with an awareness of various stakeholders affected by the
organization’s activities.
College of Business and Public Administration
Eastern Washington University
Exploration of Problem and Perspectives
Exceeds
Expectations
(4)
Meets
Expectations
(3)
Marginally
Meets
Expectations
(2)
Does Not
Meet
Expectations
(1)
Student identifies the problem(s) or issue(s)
Student identifies stakeholders and their
interests or perspectives
Student distinguishes among organization’s
stated or inferred mission, vision, and/or
values
Student Identifies Conflicts or Differences:
a) Individual v. Organization v. Society
b) Legal v. Ethical
c) Short-Term v. Long-Term
d) Ethically Universal v. Culturally Relative
Ethical Decision-Making
Student applies a decision-making process or
ethical framework
Student defines meaningful alternatives
Student determines action or takes a
considered position
Student evaluates possible results or
consequences
Overall Evaluation:
Instructions: After observing the exercise to be evaluated, place an X in the appropriate
space for relevant criteria. If a criterion does not apply, leave the row blank.
6
Written Communications Rubric
Written Communication Learning Objective -- Students are competent in written communications
College of Business and Public Administration
Eastern Washington University
Content Category
Exceeds
(4)
Expectations
Marginally
Meets
Meets
(3)
(2)
Does Not
Meet
(1)
Comments
Focus
Controls idea throughout the communication
Understands purpose of the communication
Completes all parts of the task
Content
Demonstrates knowledge of the topic
Provides supporting evidence
Avoids Plagiarism
Organization
Demonstrates an appropriate writing structure
Groups information logically
Creates appropriate transitions
Uses appropriate format
Composition
Implements clear writing
Uses concise composition
Develops ideas adequately
Language Use
Demonstrates awareness of audience
Displays professional tone
Avoids use of slang
Uses appropriate word choice
Mechanics
Reflects appropriate control of conventions
Uses correct English grammar
Free of spelling errors
Utilizes appropriate referencing
Use of Technology (If Applicable). If written document
was prepared with application software, it
Is formatted correctly, or as specified
Is devoid of errors that could easily be found using
software tools, like spell check or grammar check
Looks professional
Exceeds expectations -- student demonstrates considerably more knowledge, skills, and abilities than what students in collegiate
business programs are expected to know or do.
Meets expectations -- student demonstrates sufficient knowledge, skills, and abilities or does what is expected of students in
collegiate business programs
Does not meet expectations -- students does not demonstrate sufficient knowledge, skills, and abilities, or misses some element
of what is expected of students in collegiate business programs.
7
8
9
10
11
The Honda Auction
Evaluate Mr. Conant’s decision according to each of the following principles. Do you think his
decision was considered ethical or unethical based on each of the following principles?
Principles of Ethical Conduct
1
Categorical Imperative
2
Conventionalist Ethics
3
Disclosure Rule
4
Doctrine of the Mean
5
Ends-Means Ethics
6
Golden Rule
7
Practical Imperative
8
Intuition Ethics
9
Might-Equals-Right Ethics
10
Organization Ethics
11
Principle of Equal Freedom
12
Proportionality Ethics
13
Rights Ethics
14
Theory of Justice
15
Utilitarian Ethics
12
Ethical
Unethical
13
14
15
EWU’s Writing Error Elimination Policy
EWU’s business programs are instituting a new policy to improve writing by holding students
accountable for proofreading their papers, correcting their writing errors, and for learning how to
format a paper (see page 2) for formal writing assignments. A writing assessment board has
been created to monitor writing embedded in class requirements. This board will be reviewing
one of your papers, multiple times if necessary, before your instructor grades the assignment for
content required in the course. Instructors are required to follow these guidelines:
1. “Fatal errors” are listed below. A paper will be marked with errors indicated by the
abbreviations, up until a total of 4 errors appear in the paper. If that number of errors is
reached, the paper will be returned to the student for correction of ALL errors in the
paper. The paper will not be graded for course content until the errors are corrected. It
will be the student’s responsibility to find all remaining errors in the paper and correct
them. For example, if 4 errors are found in the first paragraph, the student has the work
of correcting those errors and all remaining errors in the rest of the paper.
2. If a paper is returned to the student the first time, the paper automatically loses 10 points
on a 100 point scale (or 0.5 points on a 4.0 grading scale). The maximum grade the
student can attain is 90% (3.5 on a 4.0 grading scale).
3. The returned paper is then reviewed for writing again. If the entire paper has more than 2
writing errors, the paper will be returned to the student, and the maximum grade the
student can earn on the paper for course content is 75% (2.0). If the paper has two errors,
the student will lose an additional 5 points, so the maximum grade the student can earn
for course content is 85% (3.0).
4. If errors are still present after the third submission, the paper will be returned to the
student ungraded, and the student will receive a maximum of 65% (1.0) for the
assignment.
5. Due dates will be determined by the instructor, and all papers submitted after the due date
will not be eligible for re-evaluation. They will be graded 0.0
The following list includes errors to be avoided as part of this program:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
MS = Misspelled word
R = Run-on/fragment/incorrect paragraphing
CO = Comma error
CP = Capitalization error
P = Punctuation error
A = Agreement error
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
MA = Missing or inappropriate article (a, the)
PR = Preposition error
WC = Word choice
SS = Sentence Structure
F = Formatting
O = Other grammatical error
Proofreading Resources
Students are encouraged to seek help before the initial submission of the assignment, if given
permission by the instructor to do so. Students given such permission are encouraged to make
use of the following resources:
1. Be sure to turn on spell-check and grammar-check in your document software. Correct
the errors found. While this is helpful, it is not sufficient for catching all errors, and the
16
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
software may make a few incorrect changes. You must use your good judgment when
using spell-check and grammar-check.
Read the proofreading advice at Purdue OWL:
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/561/1/. Be sure to click on the “Next”
arrow on the bottom to see specific advice for certain types of problems.
Use self-arranged peer reviews. See if someone in your class is willing to work with you
as a team for checking the writing of each team member.
Use the CBPA adopted writing manual, HOW 13.
As a last resort, check with the Writers’ Center, http://access.ewu.edu/writers-center .
Please understand that the Writers’ Center does not edit papers, but they may be willing
to listen as you read your paper aloud and suggest places where errors exist.
Download free “Ginger” software at www.gingersoftware.com and integrate into your
word processing software.
The class instructor is not allowed to assist with editing of individual papers!
Format
If a specific format/organization is given by your instructor, you are to use that format.
If a specific format for writing the paper is not given by the instructor, the following guidelines
are to be used, even if specific questions are included as part of the assignment. Unformatted
answers to the questions alone are not sufficient. The paper must be in a prose format, with
proper paragraphs and organization, as follows:
“Standard” Paper Format If None is Specified by Instructor
Name, Date Due, Title of Paper (Clearly indicated)
Introduction – Should describe the purpose of the paper and a short summary or background of
the information provided as the writing “prompt.” (The prompt is the assignment provided by the
instructor, such as, a case, a set of questions, or a paper topic). It may also include a problem
identification or situation description if warranted by the assignment. Normally the introduction
is one short paragraph.
Body of Paper -- This section of the paper should include “analysis” or provide supporting
evidence for critically thinking about the subject matter. If the instructor has provided a rubric
for grading the course content in the paper, it should be used as guidance or as an outline for
developing your thoughts. If no rubric is provided, the student should develop the body of the
paper by applying concepts learned in class to the specific assignment.
Summary/Conclusion/Closure – The final part of the paper should clearly indicate your
concluding thoughts about the subject matter. It may include a brief summary statement of your
analysis, a recommendation, a list of possible consequences, or your “educated” opinion of the
subject matter.
17
If a different format is required by your instructor, you are to follow that format instead of
using the above guidelines.
18
Writing Review Flowchart
1. Student submits paper
Paper is forwarded to
Writing Assessment
Board
If less than 4 errors
Paper is graded for
content by course
instructor. Maximum
possible grade is 100%
(4.0)
If 4 or more errors
2.Student revises paper and
resubmits according to
due date established by
instructor. Late papers
are not accepted.
Paper is forwarded to
Writing Assessment
Board
If 2 errors or less
If more than 2 errors
Paper is graded for
content by course
instructor. Maximum
possible grade is 90%
(3.5) for less than 2
errors or 85% (3.0) for 2
errors.
3.Student revises and
resubmits paper. Late
papers are not accepted
Paper is forwarded to
Writing Assessment
Board
If 2 errors or less
If more than 2 errors
19
Paper is graded for content by
course instructor. Maximum
possible grade is 65% (1.0)
Paper is graded for
content by course
instructor. Maximum
possible grade is 75%
(2.0)
NEW: PART II
FOLLOW-UP FROM THE 2012-13 PROGRAM ASSESSMENT REPORT
Business programs have substantially revised their assessment procedures to be in alignment with
AACSB accreditation requirements. Prior assessments were completed at the “course” level.
Current assessments are completed at the “program” level. This portion of the assessment report
“closes out” the assessments completed at the “course” level in 2012-13.
1.
Student Learning Outcome(s) assessed for 2012-13
☐ Goal #1: Ethics (assessed in MGMT 326 & MGMT 423)
Students will develop an understanding of ethical issues that influence business operations along with an
awareness of various stakeholders affected by business activities.
☐ Goal #2: Multiculturalism and Global Awareness (assessed in MGMT 423 & MKTG 310)
Students will develop an awareness and understanding of the cultural issues that impact business operations in a
global society.
☐ Goal #3: Teamwork and Collaboration (assessed in MGMT 326 & MGMT 490)
Students will understand and use team building and collaborative behaviors to accomplish group tasks.
☐ Goal #4: Understanding Financial Statements (assessed in ACCT 251 & FINC 335)
Students will understand and utilize financial tools and analytic techniques (e.g., financial statements analysis,
budgeting, and valuation) to make and justify important financial decisions.
☐ Goal #5: Data Analysis Skills (assessed in DSCI 346 & OPSM 330)
Students will identify and perform appropriate quantitative analyses when given a particular business problem.
2. Strategies implemented , Summary of Results, and Changes during 2013-14 to improve
student learning, based on findings of the 2012-13 assessment activities.
A summary of results and changes is included on the following pages.
20
UG Business Program Assessment “Closing of the Loop”
Summary of Observations, Improvements, and Actions Taken
2012-2013
Qtr/Year Qtr/Year
of:
of:
Pilot
Re-Test
F2012
W2013
Learning
Objective Assessed
Ethics
Met
Std 1st
Time?
No
Observation/Improvement/Action Advised
or Taken
Re-evaluate lectures to determine how
ethics/stakeholder concepts can be clearly
communicated in MGMT 326. Additionally,
small-group exercises that improve class
interaction when this topic is covered may be
used to enhance topic engagement. While
cognitive coverage of ethics may be adequate
for MGMT 326, MGMT 423 must emphasize
ethical reasoning. Be sure to include ethics
readings and exercises in MGMT 423.
(Review syllabi and inform faculty of
importance of including exercises in ethics
reasoning).
Provide more focus on text concepts and spend
less time on discussions that “go beyond the
book”. This should help students to master the
basics. They may not be ready to engage in
more analytical discussions. Provide an
opportunity for students to test their
knowledge so that they can see what they
don’t know. Hopefully, this will encourage
them to either ask questions or reread the
material. Emphasize the importance of reading
the material.
21
Champion(s)
(List Committee
and/or Instructor
Applying
Improvement)
Effective? (2nd
Data Set
Shows
Improvement)
MGMT faculty
Yes
In some cases,
additional
improvement
in scores is
needed.
Continue to
monitor this
learning
objective.
Assessment
methodology is
changed in
W2014. Ethics
Reasoning
Rubric has
been developed
for use across
classes
In addition, add more real world business
practices such as sample Corporate Social
Responsibility Reports to course content.
These samples could help students to make
connection between topics and actual business
practices. Consequently, they would be more
capable in applying topics. An additional
pedagogical tool is to use a fishbowl technique
to enhance student approaches to ethical
reasoning
Sp2013
W2013
22
Sp2013
Teamwork
No
Next, go beyond cognitive understanding;
teaching only cognitive concepts about ethics
is insufficient to many business situations; we
need to teach ethical reasoning. Using only
textbook cases is too limited since typical
textbooks do not question the ethics of the
ubiquitous business concept of “maximizing
shareholder return” –no matter the impact on
other stakeholders. All of our classes that
address this goal should include student
practice in ethical reasoning and should
employ a much wider application to many
current business “principles” and practices.
Develop Ethics Rubric for assessment of
ethical reasoning. Revise the assessment
approach so that reasoning is evaluated instead
of simple cognitive knowledge.
Overall, three particular issues stood out as
priorities for improvement. First, students
displayed extremely weak understanding of
those qualities that distinguish effective team
process. In other words, they don’t understand
the issues that affect team effectiveness. This
makes it difficult for them to intervene
constructively. Second, students do not
Assessment
Coordinator
Rubric to be
put into use
W2014
UG Program
Committee/Instructors
making extensive use
of teams
Yes, though
not as much as
needed (14%23%).
Additional
Review
Needed
understand how team goals can be made more
meaningful for team member. And, finally,
they do not appear to understand the observed
approaches shared by successful teams. These
three issues all relate to the broad idea that our
students do not really understand the
distinction between group work and
teamwork, much less the difference between a
group and a team. This is where improvement
must begin. Instructors using teams should
provide lectures with a focus on a) the
distinction between a group ad a team, and b)
the characteristics of effective team process.
We need to really look at our use of groups in
courses. We need to evaluate whether we are
truly creating circumstances where teamwork
is required, or whether group work is being
used to simplify the instructor’s grading work.
Group work is clearly confusing the students
about the true concept of teamwork and
undermining the performance of our college
on this objective.
As opposed to the last assessment, students
performed much better with respect to
understanding how to make team goals more
meaningful to individuals, and with respect to
understanding those qualities that are typically
exhibited by high performing teams. However,
students still struggle with distinguishing
teams from working groups. Additionally, the
results indicate a poor understanding of the
phases through which teams develop, and how
teams influence individual behaviors.
23
W2013
W2013
W2013
24
Sp2013
Teamwork
Yes
F2013
Teamwork
Yes
Sp2013
Financial
Statements
Yes
Multiculturalism
Yes
In addition to lectures on task initiatives,
professors should teach some tools and
techniques of soliciting cooperation and
expected-result-compliance from some
malingering team members who have
exhibited some behaviors of being hitch-hikers
and free-loaders, including use of social
controls and consultations with professors.
Students need to be instructed on proper use of
peer evaluations so that response bias in favor
of high ratings is minimized. Peer evaluations
must be confidential and the assessment
should include professors’ scorings as well.
Students should possible be penalized if they
rate all team members high
Team concepts need to be taught throughout
the class instead of in a single class. Class
attendance requirements when teams are used
is suggested
Developed an interactive web page that will
take the students through the steps of finding
the yield to maturity of a bond that makes
semiannual interest payments. The page also
includes videos on how to calculate YTM
using a Tl84 calculator, A TIBAIIPlus
calculator, and a spreadsheet. The web page is
available at
http://Finance.ewu.edu/fincc335/lectures/Ross
Westerfield Jordan/yeild to maturity.html.
These tools should also be useful for
traditional sections of 335.
In marketing classes, though some concepts
are well-understood, improvements can be
made by placing more emphasis on word
definitions and using more examples of
Faculty making use of
teams
Yes
Faculty making use of
teams
Marginally
better
Finance Faculty
Re-test
Pending; No
improvement
noted so far
Marketing Instructors
N/A
international business decisions based on
culture. In addition, more emphasis may be
placed on the subject in the global marketing
section of the course.
For international students who experience
culture shock and multiculturalism in a realworld setting when coming to the United
States, allocate more time for class discussion
on:
- The relationship between national culture
and subcultural settings.
- Common parameters used to define
subcultures
- Subcultures and firm’s global operations
Hence, what needs to be improved is our effort
to relate the theory to the real life experiences
of the students. That way they can understand
it better.
W2013
Multiculturalism
Yes
W2013
Global Awareness
Yes
In Business & Society classes, differentiate
between traditional cultural etiquette in global
trade and actual business practices (beliefs in
action) as they concern corporate social
responsibility. In class discussions, make a
more definitive distinction between traditional
cultural belief and the beliefs in action that are
practiced in global corporations today. A
number of critical books and articles should be
required along with any texts used.
MGMT 423
Instructors
Global Awareness
No
Some pedagogical approaches for improving
understanding of global concepts include:
 Using handouts to help students
process the new information more
effectively. It will focus more
attention on important topics and
MGMT 423
Instructors
W2013
25
Sp2013
MKTG 310
Instructors, esp
Bellevue
N/A
Yes (# of
students
passing
assessment
instrument
increased 9%
repeat them in a format different from
the text.
 Spending more time discussing the
more complex material.
 Emphasizing the importance of
reading assigned material.
 Assigning as homework the
requirement to complete chapter
outlines
Ultimately, higher order learning should be
implemented through additional activities for
making use of textbook knowledge as the basis
of application, evaluation, and integration of
cultural knowledge (such as, debates, reports,
case analysis, interpretations of media).
W2013
Global Awareness
Yes
W2013
Data Analysis
No
W2013
Sp 2013
Data Analysis
No
W2013
W2013
Su2013
F2013
Data Analysis
Data Analysis
No
No in
one
class;
Yes in
other
class
26
Knowledge of student performance in this area
may be supplemented with assessments in
International Business Management
(MGMT/IBUS 470) and Multinational People
Management (MGMT471)
Adjuncts meet with “best practices” instructors
to enhance their teaching “know-how.”
Pedagogical improvements include use of
random quizzes, use of student-led teaching of
core concepts (the best way to learn is to teach
others), improvements in Powerpoint slides,
and allowing students to complete homework
twice
Use of a simulation to engage students
Developed the HBAT process of instructing
quantitative reasoning. Difficulties seem to be
in the final three steps, which require the
student to extract the quantitative information
from the problem and develop the necessary
variables for computation. Additionally, the
where
improvements
were applied)
UG Program
Committee/IBUS
Instructors
N/A
Adjunct Professors
N/A
OPSM Professors
Yes
OPSM Professors
DSCI Instructors; Jeff
Culver lead
No
Yes
students seem to have difficulty in arriving at a
conclusion and interpretation based on the
mathematics but expressed in such a way as
the unsophisticated user of statistics would
understand. Instructors using the HBAT
method will adopt additional exercises into the
lecture aspect of instruction, which will
require students to extract variables and
convert into equations. They will also include
more exercises during lecture that emphasize
expressing the findings of the analysis so that
unsophisticated users of statistics may benefit
from the analysis.
Instructional adjustments should also address
the computational aspects of developing the
actionable outcomes. While in class discussion
seems to be helping with interpreting the
outcomes of the analysis, the ability of
students to manually compute and match
computational outcomes provided by the
software remains a challenge. Instructors will
begin utilizing unit quizzes to reinforce
retention of computational techniques and
concepts. Quiz results will also be used to
assess comprehension on a timelier basis and
thereby undertake measures to address
weaknesses in their computational abilities.
27
Definitions:
1.
Student Learning Outcome: The student performance or learning objective as published either in the catalog or elsewhere in your
department literature.
2. Overall evaluation of progress on outcome: This checklist informs the reader whether or not the SLO has been met, and if met, to
what level.
3. Strategies and methods used to gather student performance data, including assessment instruments used, and a description of
how and when the assessments were conducted. Examples of strategies/methods: embedded test questions in a course or courses,
portfolios, in-class activities, standardized test scores, case studies, analysis of written projects, etc. Additional information could
describe the use of rubrics, etc. as part of the assessment process.
4. Observations gathered from data: This section includes findings and analyses based on the above strategies and methods, and
provides data to substantiate the distinction made in #2. For that reason this section has been divided into parts (a) and (b) to
provide space for both the findings and the analysis of findings.
5. Program changes based on the assessment results: This section is where the program lists plans to improve student learning, based
on assessment findings, and provides a broad timeline of how and when identified changes will be addressed in the upcoming year.
Programs often find assessment is part of an ongoing process of continual improvement.
6. Description of revisions to the assessment process the results suggest are needed. Evaluation of the assessment plan and process
itself: what worked in the assessment planning and process, what did not, and why.
28
Some elements of this document have been drawn or adapted from the University of Massachusetts’ assessment handbook, “Program-Based Review and
Assessment: Tools and Techniques for Program Improvement” (2001). Retrieved from
http://www.umass.edu/oapa/oapa/publications/online_handbooks/program_based.pdf
29