Spring 2011 Assessment 1
Findings of Program Assessment, Spring 2011
Summary: Artifacts rated for the programs assessed in the Spring 2011 generally were rated higher than
those measuring the same PSLOs in the assessment immediately prior to this one, Fall 2010. Results
from the first assessment of this two-year cycle were probably artificially elevated due to several factors:
a new set of scoring rubrics newly created and focused Program Student Learning Outcomes, and a
general unfamiliarity across campus with the fundamentals of program assessment. Since that initial
foray into program assessment, the faculty has received development training to help them identify and
create more measureable and reportable means of assessment. The process of rating artifacts has
become more familiar to the participating faculty as well.
Methods Used: Each program has a program assessment manager who may or may not be the
department chair in the primary discipline of the program. After meeting with the campus program
assessment coordinator, the program assessment managers gathered representative artifacts from
student work. These artifacts included material from face-to-face, traditional delivery classes, as well as
from online and hybrid/blended courses. The material came from all classifications of students,
including high school scholars enrolled in co-enrollment courses. Some programs, notably CAD and
HVAC, are located at either federal or state prisons, which limits our ability to gather certain types of
artifacts.
Once the program assessment managers gathered the relevant artifacts, they submitted them to the
assessment coordinator, who scheduled and managed the artifact rating process. Most programs
collected between 20 and 40 artifacts per PSLO or subPSLO. Artifacts were distributed to raters who are
either familiar with the discipline or who share similar projects or processes with the discipline. No rater
scored his or her own artifacts. Generally, the assessment coordinator served as a reader to break
outlying scores. If the assessment coordinator’s own artifacts were used, the Dean of Academic
Programs served as outlying reader.
Once artifacts were rated, the assessment coordinator gathered them, figured mean, median, mode,
and standard deviation, and put them on a findings table. The coordinator made superficial
observations about the scores and wrote recommendations to each program coordinator for possible
action. The findings tables were returned to the program assessment managers, who then met with the
program faculty to determine what interventions were necessary to improve scores.
Program assessment managers completed three forms: a green form, that indicates whether or not the
previous interventions were successful, and if they were not, what further action would be taken; a blue
form, that indicates what changes were to be made to improve learning; and an orange form, that
serves as a sort of summary of the meeting between the managers and the program faculty.
Recommendations: Recommendations for interventions for each individual program, and the changes
we implemented to enact them, are prominently featured in each program section. They are on the
blue table entitled, “Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary.”
Spring 2011 Assessment 2
As for the overall assessment process, we have one more round of assessment in this cycle, of Fall 2011.
The program assessment cycle ends in January 2012; the process itself, PSLOs, ratings rubrics, and
reporting structure undergo their scheduled assessments and revisions in the Spring 2012 semester.
This assessment of the assessment process is an important part of the regular assessment cycle.
Description and Reading Instructions:
Program assessment information is presented alphabetically by program name. Within each program
section are the following components, in this order:
1.
A program overview, with general comments made by the assessment coordinator and a
graph comparing the mean scores of the program’s PSLOs from this assessment round to
the previous round(s). The Commercial Music programs material does not include this
preliminary document.
2.
A blue table, entitled “Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary,” that
identifies three Key Assessment Findings and their Related PSLOs, summarizes assessment
Results and Analysis, identifies Changes Implemented, and gives Evidence of
Improvement. These analyses, recommendations, and implementations of change come
from the program faculty.
3.
A solid blue table, entitled “2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary,” that
identifies the same information as the above table, but for the previous assessment
round.
4.
A green table, entitled “Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary,” that
tracks the success or continuation of the interventions implemented as a result of the
previous assessment round and identified on the “2009-2011 Education Programs
Assessment Summary.”
5.
The program’s findings tables that provide the Success Criteria, the mean, median, mode,
standard deviation, and percentages of ratings for the current round and previous rounds
of assessment. The table also includes the numeric and percentage of change from the
previous assessment.
6.
The program rubric, by which program artifacts were scored.
Spring 2011 Assessment 3
Associate of Arts and Associate of Arts in Teaching Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
The Associate of Arts and Associate of Arts in Teaching programs were assessed in the Spring 2011
semester. While data shows that while students met or exceeded the success criteria of a total mean
score of 4 or higher from two raters, the artifact scores vary widely from assessment cycle to assessment
cycle.
Designing quality assignments that produce excellent artifacts is still fresh to our general faculty, and
each assessment round produces better artifacts.
Scores from Fall 2009 are generally higher than those from Fall 2010 and Spring 2011, though peaks and
valleys occur throughout the spectrum.
7
6
5
4
FALL 2009
FALL 2010
3
SPRING 2011
2
1
0
1A
1B
1C
1D
2A
2B
2C
3A
3B 3C
3D
4A
4B
4C
6A
6B
Figure 1: Three-Year Comparison of PSLO Mean Scores
6C
7A
7B
7C
Spring 2011 Assessment 4
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Associate of Arts
Degree/Certificate Award: AA Degree
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Results and Analysis
Students will improve their ability 65% of students met or exceeded
to demonstrate awareness of
expectations for subPSLO 2a and 2b,
cultural differences and similarities
but 75% for 2c. Since all three are
closely linked, the committee
recommends that instructions
should try to link the three clearly.
The ENGL 2321 final essays are used
in the artifact ratings are were
selected for improvement.
Related PSLO
PSLO 2: Demonstrate awareness
of cultural differences and
similarities
2a; 2b; 2c
Results and Analysis
2 Key Assessment Findings
Students will demonstrate
Though ratings were high, raters
improved technology literacy with
were not always clear about how to
online and computer-generated
evaluate artifacts from the Art
assignments
faculty. Committee recommends
using rubrics for grading subjective
material.
Related PSLO
PSLO 4: Demonstrates technology
literacy
4a; 4c
3
Key Assessment Findings
Students will improve their
ability to apply problem-solving
skills in mathematical or scientific
principles needed to complete task.
Related PSLO
PSLO 6: Applies mathematical
and scientific principles
6c.
Results and Analysis
Only 75% of students met or
exceeded expectations for subPSLO
6c. The other two ranked in the mid
to high 80th percentile. Focus on 6c
to bring its scores up, since they are
interrelated
Changes Implemented
ENGL 2321 British literature, has a
relevancy component on each
exam. The instructions for Part IV as
of Fall 2011 give very specific
guidelines to improve students
ability to demonstrate awareness of
cultural differences and similarities
in all 3 PSLOs
Evidence of Improvement
Support 1: Part IV Relevance for
ENGL 2321
Changes Implemented
1. ARTS 1301: added a new grading
rubric for PowerPoint presentations
2. ARTS 1303: added new grading
rubric for PowerPoint presentations
Evidence of Improvement
1. ARTS 1301 grading rubric
2. ARTS 1303 grading rubric
3. MUSI 1306 visual guide
instructions for accessing online
material
Changes Implemented
1. ENGL 2321 British literature
added math application element to
Part IV Relevance
2. BISC 1305: Revised instructions
for online Mileage-Payments
calculations
Evidence of Improvement
1. ENGL 2321 British Literature Part
IV instructions
2. BISC 1305 Mileage payments
calculations instructions
Spring 2011 Assessment 5
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Associate of Arts
Degree/Certificate Award: AA degree
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLOS
Results and Analysis
Students will improve ability to
distinguish if information is based
on fact or opinion.
With only an 82% rating in PSLO 3.b it was
recommended that assignment instructions
be clearer this semester and more class time
PSLO 3: Uses critical thinking skills. spent in discussing the significance of
recognizing the difference between facts and
3 b. Differentiates the facts from
opinions. Implemented revised instruction
opinion as relates to situation
sheet and added lecture time to this topic.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Students were able to identify
supportive information in the
informative speech as being either fact
or opinion by labeling the analytical
outlines clearly.
Support 1. SPCH 1315 Outline
instructions
Support 2. Samples of Spring 2011
SPCH 1315 student outlines
Support 3. Samples of Fall 2010 student
outlines
Students will improve ability to
justify their use of logical, sound
reasoning when explaining their
conclusions.
Only 74.6% of students met or exceeded
expectations.
This score is very similar to the 2009 scores
PSLO 3: Uses critical thinking skills. showing that students need further practice at
3d. Uses logical, sound reasoning to justifying their conclusions. It is
recommended that course assignments
justify conclusion
specifically ask for students to explain why
they have constructed their possible solutions
or consequences.
Students will improve their ability to
demonstrate awareness of cultural
differences and similarities
PSLO 2: Demonstrates awareness
of cultural differences and
similarities.
2a. Identifies cultural characteristics
(beliefs, values, perspectives, or
practices)
2b. Interprets works of human
expression within cultural context
2c. Shows awareness of one’s own
culture in relation to others.
63.3% of students met or exceeded
expectations for PSLO 2. a and 86% of
students met or exceeded expectations for
PSLO 2. b and 81.5% of students met or
exceeded expectations for PSLO 2. c.
The score of PSLO 2.a is lower than 2009
scores in this sub criterion and is still the
lowest of PSLO 2. Recommended that course
assignments have clearer instructions to
improve identification of cultural
characteristics or additional assignments that
are looking for multiple examples of cultural
characteristics and increase the students’
ability to interpret works of human expression
within cultural contexts and to show
awareness of one’s own culture in relation to
others.
Added online essay using critical
thinking skills particularly asking for
justification of their conclusion for all
sections of PHIL 1301 on campus
sections and online sections.
Support 4. Student Essay Exams PHIL
1301
ENG 2326 Literature implemented an
online Essay that specifically addresses
the issues of PSLO 2 .
Support 5. ENG 2326 On line Essay
Instructions
Support 6. ENG 2326 Student Essay
Samples
Spring 2011 Assessment 6
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Associate of Arts
Degree/Certificate Award: AA
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students will improve
ability to distinguish if information
is based on fact or opinion.
Changes Implemented: Longer essays
or reports should be submitted for
artifacts.
Resolved? yes
Continuing? This was a process
problem that we had to work
out.
Related PSLO: PSLO 3: Uses critical
thinking skills.
3 b. Differentiates the facts from
opinion as relates to situation
Evidence Used: artifacts of fall 2011
assessment
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students will improve
ability to justify their use of logical,
sound reasoning when explaining
their conclusions.
Changes Implemented: longer essays
or reports should be submitted for
artifacts
Resolved? yes
Continuing? This was a process
problem we had to resolve.
Related PSLO:
PSLO 3: Uses
critical thinking skills.
3d. Uses logical, sound reasoning to
justify conclusion
Evidence Used: artifacts of fall 2011
assessment
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Students will improve
their ability to demonstrate
awareness of cultural differences
and similarities
Changes Implemented: Improved
instructions for Relevancy Part IV of
British literature exams
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor for
progress.
Related PSLO: PSLO 2:
Demonstrates awareness of cultural
differences and similarities.
2a. Identifies cultural characteristics
(beliefs, values, perspectives, or
practices)
2b. Interprets works of human
expression within cultural context
2c. Shows awareness of one’s own
culture in relation to others.
Evidence Used: British Literature exam
Spring 2011 Assessment 7
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Associate of Arts in Teaching
Degree/Certificate Award: AAT Degree
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Students recognized limited
evidence in identifying cultural
diversity in educational settings.
Almost 1/3 of the artifacts for this
subPSLO were scored with a 1, the
lowest ranking.
Related PSLO
PSLO 7a: Identifies
characteristics of diverse
populations within an educational
setting.
2
Key Assessment Findings
Students will improve
identifying diverse teaching styles.
Related PSLO
PSLO 7b: Identifies diverse teaching
styles.
3
Key Assessment Findings
Students will present
information about learning
communities/strategies in a
professional manner.
Related PSLO
PSLO 7c: Presents information
about learning
communities/strategies in
appropriate mode of expression.
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
Students cited only age or gender in
journal observation seating charts,
due to concerns of privacy policies
of local school districts. The rubric
indicates that two identifications
constitute highest ratings.
Recommended to include
appropriate cultural categories in
the instructions for the observation
journals.
Fall 2011 observation experience,
journal, and report have new
instructions on reporting broader
cultural observations. The accepted
ethnic terms are included as guide.
Evidence of Improvement
Support 1: fall 2011 observation
experience, journal, and report
instructions.
Support 2: classroom observation
notes
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
The spring artifacts showed
improvement, but 17.5% required a
3rd rater to decide discrepancies.
The Journal entries on teaching
styles do not reveal the students’
ability to distinguish between
diverse teaching styles if the
teacher uses only limited ones
based on subject matter or
population. Recommended
alternate means to assess this skill.
Test mapping of questions from the
current textbook of chapters which
focus on diversity in teaching styles.
Evidence of Improvement
Support 1: Test map for Exam 2 in
PSYC 1300
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
Because there were more artifacts
to examine, the score increased
dramatically, but the raters had very
little guidance in knowing what the
instructors were expecting. There
were no specific formatting
instructions for the raters to use as
a guide to measure student success
at presenting a professional
document. Recommend scoring
with a rubric and revision of
instructions.
1. fall 2011 new rubric for journals,
with expanded instructions
2. new assignment on education
issues events in paper format.
Evidence of Improvement
Support 1: grading rubric for
journals
Support 2: journal and report
instructions
Support 3: current education issues
assignment instructions
Spring 2011 Assessment 8
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Associate of Arts in Teaching
Degree/Certificate Award: AAT degree
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Students will improve ability to
identify characteristics of diverse
populations within an education
setting.
PSLO 6: Analyzes learning
communities.
6a. Identifies characteristics of
diverse populations within an
education setting.
PSLO 6: Analyzes learning
communities.
6b. Identifies diverse teaching
styles.
Results and Analysis
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Faculty are keeping copies of all students’
work which is a more representative sampling
of examples used in rating assessments.
Instructions for Observation Journal entries
clearly emphasize what characteristics of
diverse population within an education setting
were to be included in the analysis since only
40% of students met or exceeded
expectations.
New instruction sheets were given to
students in EDUC 1301 & EDUC 2301 to
clarify expectations of what
characteristics of diverse population
within an education setting were to be
included in the analysis.
Faculty are keeping copies of all students’
work which is a more representative sampling
of examples used in rating assessments.
Instructions for Observation Journal entries
clearly emphasize what characteristics of
diverse teaching styles were to be included in
the analysis since 60% of students met or
exceeded expectations.
New instruction sheets were given to
students in EDUC 1301 & EDUC 2301 to
clarify expectations of what
characteristics of diverse teaching styles
were to be included in the analysis.
Faculty are keeping copies of all students’
work which is a more representative sampling
PSLO 6: Analyzes learning
of examples used in rating assessments.
communities.
Instructions for Observation Journal entries
6c. Presents information about
clearly emphasize how the information should
learning communities in appropriate be presented to be in the appropriate mode of
expression since 70% of students met or
mode of expression.
exceeded expectations
Support 1. Instructions for Observation
Journals Spring 2011
Support 1. Instructions for Observation
Journals Spring 2011
New instruction sheets were given to
students in EDUC 1301 & EDUC 2301 to
clarify expectations of appropriate
presentation of Observation Journals.
Support 1. Instructions for Observation
Journals Spring 2011
Spring 2011 Assessment 9
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program:
Degree/Certificate Award:
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students will improve
ability to identify characteristics of
diverse populations within an
education setting.
Changes Implemented:
Recommended to include appropriate
cultural categories in the instructions
for the observation journals.
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor for
progress.
Related PSLO: PSLO 6: Analyzes
learning communities.
6a. Identifies characteristics of
diverse populations within an
education setting.
Evidence Used: fall 2011 observation
experience, journal, and report
instructions.
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Faculty were not
keeping adequate records of
student work.
Changes Implemented: faculty keep
adequate student work
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor for
progress.
Related PSLO: 6b
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Faculty were not
keeping adequate records of
student work.
Changes Implemented: Faculty keep
adequate student work
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor for
progress.
Related PSLO: 6c
Spring 2011 Assessment 10
PSLO 1: Communicates with appropriate modes of expression to individuals or groups
Communication skills are central to the education process, and some practice in communication skills
takes place in most classes across campus.
Scores from Fall 2009 are quite a bit higher than those from Fall 2010 and Spring 2011 for subPSLOs A, B,
and C.
Students have not scored well in demonstrating thesis clarity (1A) or organizing information (1B).
Understanding the main idea and organization are at the heart of these two subPSLOs, and these ideas
need to be reinforced.
Students demonstrate use of supporting details in their writing (1C), and they express themselves
appropriately when communicating (1D).
There is a disconnect between organizing information and using supporting details. The two should go
hand-in-hand, but they do not.
5.4
5.2
5
4.8
FALL 2009
FALL 2010
4.6
SPRING 2011
4.4
4.2
4
1A
1B
1C
1D
Figure 2: PSLO 1 Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 11
AA, AAT Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
PSLO 1: Communicates with appropriate modes of expression to individuals or groups.
PSLO
1A.
Demonstrates
thesis clarity.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.525
(75.4%)
Median
5
4.45
(74.1%)
5
4.85
(81%)
5
Mode
5
4
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.414
1.121
1.089
40
33
20
% of 6s
27.5%
24%
35%
% of 5s
30%
27%
30%
% of 4s
27.5%
30%
20%
% of 3s
2.5%
15%
15%
% of 2s
10%
3%
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
85% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 82%
Fall 2009: 85%
% of 1s
% of 0s
2.5%
# Disputed
0
2
0
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
4.5
Spring 2011
4.4
4.3
4.2
Mean
Figure 3: 1A Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 12
PSLO
1B.
Organizes
information.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.5
(75%)
Median
5
4.49
(74.8%)
5
4.95
(82.5%)
5
Mode
5
4
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.340
1.19
1.191
40
39
20
% of 6s
25%
23%
40%
% of 5s
35%
28%
35%
% of 4s
20%
30%
10%
% of 3s
5%
10%
10%
% of 2s
15%
7.7%
5%
0
1
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
80% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 82.3%
Fall 2009: 85%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
6
5
4
Fall 2009
3
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 4: 1B Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 13
PSLO
1C.
Uses support.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
5.125
(87.5%)
Median
5
4.70
(78.3%)
5
5.2
(86.67%)
5.5
Mode
5,6
5
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
0.939
1.10
0.951
40
33
20
% of 6s
40%
27%
50%
% of 5s
40%
33%
25%
% of 4s
15%
24%
20%
% of 3s
2.5%
12%
5%
% of 2s
2.5%
3%
0
3
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
95% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
Fall 2009: 95%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
4.8
Spring 2011
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
Mean
Figure 5: 1C Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 14
PSLO
Success Criterion
1D.
Presents ideas in
appropriate mode
of expression.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
5.225
(87.1%)
Median
6
5.12
(85.8%)
5
4.85
(80.8%)
5
Mode
6
6
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.097
0.946
1.137
40
34
20
% of 6s
57.5%
44%
40%
% of 5s
20%
29%
20%
% of 4s
12.5%
20.6%
25%
% of 3s
7.5%
5.9%
15%
% of 2s
2.5%
3
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 94.1%
Fall 2009: 85%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
4.9
Spring 2011
4.8
4.7
4.6
Mean
Figure 6: 1D Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 15
PSLO 2: Demonstrates awareness of cultural differences and similarities.
The three subPLSOs under PSLO 2 are inextricably linked, so the wide gap in scores between 2A and 2C is puzzling.
Being able to identify cultural characteristics (2A) and demonstrate an awareness between one’s own culture and
others (2C) are two faces of the same coin.
LSC-PA is a multi-cultural institution, so perhaps there is a lack of conscious recognition of differences in culture.
It is also possible that faculty avoid pointing out specific differences and similarities between cultures in hopes of
furthering intercultural harmony.
Better instruction to faculty about how to prepare usable artifacts is indicated, particularly for 2B.
5
4.8
4.6
FALL 2009
4.4
FALL 2010
SPRING 2011
4.2
4
3.8
2A
2B
2C
Figure 7: PSLO 2 Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 16
PSLO 2: Demonstrates awareness of cultural differences and similarities.
PSLO
Success Criterion
2A.
Identifies cultural
characteristics
(beliefs, values,
perspectives, or
practices)
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.15
(69.17%)
Median
4.5
4.37
(72.8%)
5
4.72
(72.9%)
5
Mode
5
5
5
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.252
1.262
1.450
40
35
39
% of 6s
12.5%
22.9%
38.5%
% of 5s
37.5%
28.6%
33.34%
% of 4s
12.5%
17%
5%
% of 3s
27.5%
25.7%
7.7%
% of 2s
10%
11%
15.4%
0
0
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
65% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 63.3%
Fall 2009: 76.9%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
Fall 2009
4.3
Fall 2010
4.2
Spring 2011
4.1
4
3.9
3.8
Mean
Figure 8: 2A Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 17
PSLO
Success Criterion
2B.
Interprets works
of human
expression within
cultural context.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.15
(69.17%)
Median
4
4.21
(70.17%)
4
4.77
(79.5%)
5
Mode
6
4
5
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.626
1.293
1.152
40
33
22
% of 6s
30%
18%
31.8%
% of 5s
15%
24%
36%
% of 4s
20%
33%
9%
% of 3s
15%
9%
22.7%
% of 2s
17.5%
15%
0
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
65% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 86%
Fall 2009: 77.3%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
Fall 2009
4.3
Fall 2010
4.2
Spring 2011
4.1
4
3.9
3.8
Mean
Figure 9: 2B Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 18
PSLO
2C.
Shows awareness
of one’s own
culture in relation
to others.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.718
(78.63%)
Median
5
4.375
(73.9%)
5
4.82
(80.3%)
5
Mode
6
5
5
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.099
1.211
1.290
39
32
34
% of 6s
33%
15.6%
35%
% of 5s
20.5%
37.5%
38%
% of 4s
20.5%
28%
12%
% of 3s
15.4%
6%
3%
% of 2s
10.3%
12.5%
12%
1
1
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
74% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 81.5%
Fall 2009: 85%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
Fall 2009
4.5
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
Mean
Figure 10: 2C Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 19
PSLO 3: Uses critical thinking skills.
Students were fairly consistent in demonstrating critical thinking skills, though the scores can certainly be higher.
Artifacts from subPSLOs A and B received mostly scores in the 4s, and only 60% of students met or exceeded
expectations. Artifacts from subPSLOs C and D received mostly scores in the 5s, and 80% and 85%, respectively,
met or exceeded expectations. A quarter of artifacts from subPSLO A received 2s, as did 30% from subPSLO B.
6
5
4
FALL 2009
3
FALL 2010
SPRING 2011
2
1
0
3A
3B
3C
3D
Figure 11: PSLO 3 Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 20
PSLO 3: Uses critical thinking skills.
PSLO
3A.
Identifies
problem,
argument, or issue
(to determine
extent of
information
needed).
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
3.8
(63.33%)
Median
4
5
(83.3%)
5
4.35
(72.5%)
4.5
Mode
4
5, 6
5
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.4
0.848
1.137
40
34
20
% of 6s
17.5%
35%
15%
% of 5s
10%
35%
35%
% of 4s
32.5%
23.5%
25%
% of 3s
15%
5.8%
20%
% of 2s
25%
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
60% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 94.2%
Fall 2009: 75%
5%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
0
6
5
4
Fall 2009
3
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 12: 3A Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 21
PSLO
3B.
Differentiates the
facts from
opinions as relates
to situation.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
3.75
(62.5%)
Median
4
4.44
(74%)
5
4.8
(80%)
5
Mode
4
5
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.481
1.22
1.322
40
27
20
% of 6s
22.5%
18.5%
45%
37%
15%
% of 5s
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
% of 4s
37.5%
25.9%
20%
% of 3s
10%
7%
15%
% of 2s
30%
11%
5%
0
4
0
Current Findings
60% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 82%
Fall 2009: 80%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
6
5
4
Fall 2009
3
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 13: 3B Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 22
PSLO
Success Criterion
3C.
Constructs
possible solutions
or prediction of
consequences.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.475
(74.6%)
Median
5
4.52
(75.5%)
5
5.35
(89.2%)
6
Mode
5
5
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.271
0.985
1.04
40
25
20
% of 6s
22.5%
16%
65%
% of 5s
35%
40%
15%
% of 4s
22.5%
24%
10%
% of 3s
7.5%
20%
10%
% of 2s
12.5%
1
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
80% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
Fall 2009: 90%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
5.6
5.4
5.2
5
Fall 2009
4.8
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
4.6
4.4
4.2
4
Mean
Figure 14: 3C Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 23
PSLO
3D.
Uses logical,
sound reasoning
to justify
conclusion.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.7
(78.3%)
Median
5
4.74
(79%)
5
4.45
(74.2%)
4.5
Mode
5
5, 6
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.043
1.287
1.356
40
23
20
% of 6s
22.5%
34.8%
30%
% of 5s
42.5%
34.8%
20%
% of 4s
20%
4%
25%
% of 3s
12.5%
21.7%
15%
% of 2s
5%
3.7%
10%
0
1
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
85% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 74.6%
Fall 2009: 75%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
4.8
4.75
4.7
4.65
4.6
Fall 2009
4.55
Fall 2010
4.5
Spring 2011
4.45
4.4
4.35
4.3
Mean
Figure 15: 3D Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 24
PSLO 4: Demonstrates technology literacy
Our students demonstrate that they are technologically literate, with 90-95% of students meeting or
exceeded expectations.
Over 70% of all artifacts were scored as 6s.
Figure 16: PSLO 4 Three-Year Comparison
7
6
5
4
FALL 2009
FALL 2010
3
SPRING 2011
2
1
0
4A
4B
4C
Figure 17: PSLO 4 Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 25
PSLO 4: Demonstrates technology literacy
PSLO
Success Criterion
4A.
Locates needed
information using
the appropriate
technological tool
or device.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.9
(81.67%)
Median
5
4.8
(80%)
5
5.59
(93.2%)
6
Mode
6
5
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.477
0.894
0.956
40
39
37
% of 6s
37.5%
17.9%
75.7%
% of 5s
35%
56%
19%
% of 4s
17.5%
12.8%
% of 3s
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 87.2%
Fall 2009: 95%
12.8%
% of 2s
10%
5%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
Fall 2009
Fall 2010
5
Spring 2011
4.8
4.6
4.4
Mean
Figure 18: 4A Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 26
PSLO
4B.
Displays
organizational
skills with the use
of technology.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
5.025
(83.75%)
Median
5
4.51
(75.2%)
5
5.51
(91.8%)
6
Mode
5
5
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
0.862
0.901
0.779
40
37
41
% of 6s
32.5%
10.8%
63%
% of 5s
42.5%
43%
29%
% of 4s
20%
35%
2%
% of 3s
5%
8%
4.8%
% of 2s
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
95% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 89.3%
Fall 2009: 95.2%
2.7%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
2
0
6
5
4
Fall 2009
3
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 19: 4B Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 27
PSLO
Success Criterion
4C.
Presents
information using
the appropriate
technological tool
or device.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
5.375
(89.6%)
Median
6
5.19
(86.5%)
5
5.87
(97.8%)
6
Mode
6
6
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
0.979
0.844
0.529
40
37
38
% of 6s
62.5%
43%
92%
% of 5s
20%
35%
5%
% of 4s
12.5%
18.9%
% of 3s
5%
12.7%
% of 2s
5%
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
95% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 87.3%
Fall 2009: 97.34%
2.6%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
6
5.8
5.6
Fall 2009
5.4
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
5.2
5
4.8
Mean
Figure 20: 4C Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 28
PSLO 5: Transfers to a baccalaureate program
PSLO
Program
5.
Completes degree
that is
transferable to a
baccalaureate
program.
AA
AAT
Commentary and
Use of Results for Improvement
Graduation Data
2010: 58
2009: 68
2008: 67
2007: 80
2006: 71
2010: 3
2009: 4
2008: 4
2007: 0
2006: 0
AA
100
80
60
40
20
0
AA
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Figure 21: Graduation Trends for AA
AAT
5
4
3
AAT
2
1
0
2006
2007
2008
2009
Figure 22: Graduation Trends for AAT
2010
Spring 2011 Assessment 29
PSLO 6: Applies mathematical and scientific principles
This PSLO was originally part of the Associate of Science degree, and the data from Fall 2009 and Fall
2010 were mined from the AS assessments. The college discontinued the AS degree in Fall 2010.
Students demonstrate strong proficiency using mathematical and scientific principles. At least 50% of
artifacts were scored with 5s and 6s.
6
5
4
FALL 2009
3
FALL 2010
SPRING 2011
2
1
0
6A
6B
6C
Figure 23: PSLO 6 Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 30
PSLO 6: Applies mathematical and scientific principles
PSLO
Success Criterion
6A.
Identifies
mathematical or
scientific
principles needed
to complete task.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
5.125
(85.42%)
Fall 2010
(from AS)
4.93
(82.1%)
Fall 2009
(from AS)
4.69
(78.2%)
Median
6
6
5
Mode
6
6
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.090
1.51
1.491
40
28
29
% of 6s
52.5%
57%
41.4%
% of 5s
20%
14%
27.6%
% of 4s
15%
7%
3.4%
% of 3s
12.5%
7%
13.8%
14%
13.8%
2
0
% of 2s
Current Findings
87.5% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 79%
Fall 2009: 72.4%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
Fall 2009
4.8
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
Mean
Figure 24: 6A Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 31
PSLO
6B.
Uses
mathematical or
scientific
principles needed
to complete task.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.6
(76.67%)
Median
5
4.56
(76%)
5
4.39
(73.2%)
4.5
Mode
5,6
6
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
1.411
1.605
1.449
40
32
28
% of 6s
30%
46.9%
32%
% of 5s
30%
9%
18%
% of 4s
25%
15.6%
21%
% of 3s
7.5%
9%
14%
% of 2s
2.5%
18.8%
14%
% of 1s
2.5%
% of 0s
2.5%
# Disputed
0
0
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
85% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 72.2%
Fall 2009: 72%
4.65
4.6
4.55
4.5
Fall 2009
4.45
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
4.4
4.35
4.3
4.25
Mean
Figure 25: 6B Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 32
PSLO
Success Criterion
6C.
Applies problemsolving skills in
mathematical or
scientific
principles needed
to complete task.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.3
(71.67%)
Median
5.5
4.70
(78%)
5
3.86
(64.3%)
4
Mode
6
6
5
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
2.090
1.589
1.246
40
27
29
% of 6s
50%
48%
6.9%
% of 5s
2.5%
18.5%
31%
% of 4s
22.5%
7%
20.7%
7%
24.1%
18.5%
17%
0
0
% of 3s
% of 2s
12.5%
% of 1s
2.5%
% of 0s
10
# Disputed
0
Fall 2010
Fall 2009
Current Findings
75% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 74.5%
Fall 2009: 58.9%
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
Fall 2009
2.5
Fall 2010
2
Spring 2011
1.5
1
0.5
0
Mean
Figure 26: 6C Mean Score Three-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 33
AAT ONLY, PSLO 7: Analyzes learning communities
Data for the AAT degree were not gathered in Fall 2009, since it was a new program.
subPSLO 7A shows some improvement over Fall 2010, but only 55.88% of students met or exceeded
expectations. Almost one-third of the artifacts for this subPSLO was scored with a 1, the lowest ranking
possible. While that is still within the limits of the success criteria, the number is too high.
More explicit instructions and help reporting data and preparing usable artifacts are needed.
6
5
4
FALL 2009
3
FALL 2010
SPRING 2011
2
1
0
7A
7B
7C
Figure 27: PSLO 7 Two-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 34
AAT ONLY. PSLO 7: Analyzes learning communities
PSLO
Success Criterion
7A.
Identifies
characteristics of
diverse
populations within
an educational
setting.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
3.647
(60.78%)
Median
4
3.2
(53.3%)
3
Mode
1
3
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
2.043
1.105
34
20
% of 6s
23.53%
% of 5s
23.53%
10%
% of 4s
8.82%
30%
% of 3s
14.71%
40%
% of 2s
Fall 2010
Change
+0.447
(+7.48%)
Current Findings
55.88% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 40%
10%
% of 1s
26.47%
% of 0s
2.94%
# Disputed
0
10%
0
3.7
3.6
3.5
3.4
Fall 2010
3.3
Spring 2011
3.2
3.1
3
2.9
Mean
Figure 28: 7A Mean Score Two-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 35
PSLO
7B.
Identifies diverse
teaching styles.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
5.4
(90%)
Median
6
3.8
(63.3%)
4
Mode
6
2
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
0.928
1.542
40
20
% of 6s
65.5%
15%
% of 5s
22.5%
25%
% of 4s
7.5%
20%
% of 3s
7.5%
5%
% of 2s
Fall 2010
Change
+1.6
(+26.7%)
Current Findings
95.5% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 60%
35%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 29: 7B Mean Score Two-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 36
PSLO
Success Criterion
7C.
Presents
information about
learning
communities
(strategies) in
appropriate mode
of expression.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
5.316
(88.6%)
Median
5
4.75
(79.2%)
5
Mode
5
6
Standard
Deviation
# artifacts
0.478
1.482
19
20
% of 6s
34.58%
45%
% of 5s
68.42%
25%
Fall 2010
Change
+0.566
(+9.4%)
Current Findings
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 70%
% of 4s
% of 3s
20%
% of 2s
10%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
Fall 2010
4.9
Spring 2011
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
Mean
Figure 30: 7C Mean Score Two-Year Comparison
Spring 2011 Assessment 37
LSC-PA Academic Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Name of Program: Associate of Arts & Associate of Arts in Teaching
Date:
Program Student Learning Outcome: 1. Communicates with appropriate modes of expression to individuals or
groups
subPSLO
1. a.
Demonstrates
thesis clarity
1. b. Organizes
information
1. c. Uses
support
1. d. Presents
ideas in
appropriate
mode of
expression
Accomplished
(3)
Thesis and
purpose are
clear to
audience;
matches
communication
task
Competent
(2)
Thesis and
purpose are
fairly clear to
audience;
matches
communication
task
Fully &
creatively
supports thesis
& purpose with
effective
transitions &
sequencing of
ideas
Substantial,
logical & specific
development of
ideas; details
are relevant,
original,
credible and
correctly
documented
when
appropriate
Style of
presentation is
appropriate for
specific
audience and
matches
communication
task
Organizational
elements
support thesis &
purpose but
could improve
transitions &
sequencing of
ideas
Solid but less
than original
reasoning with
some
appropriate
details or
examples and
limited
documentation
if relevant
Style of
presentation is
fairly
appropriate for
specific
audience and
matches
communication
task
Developing
(1)
Thesis and
purpose are
vague to
audience; only
loosely relates
to
communication
task
Signs of logical
organization but
may have
abrupt shifts &
less than
effective flow of
ideas
Obvious support
that may be too
general, not
interpreted,
irrelevant to
thesis, or
repetitive with
little or no
relevant
documentation
Style of
presentation is
underdeveloped
for specific
audience and
loosely matches
communication
task
Lack of
Evidence (0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 38
Program Student Learning Outcome: 2. Demonstrates awareness of cultural differences and similarities
subPSLO
2. a. Identifies
cultural
characteristics
(including
beliefs, values,
perspectives
and/or
practices)
2. b. Interprets
works of human
expression
within cultural
context
2. c. Shows
awareness of
one’s own
culture in
relation to
others
Accomplished
(3)
Identifies
multiple cultural
characteristics
Competent
(2)
Identifies at
least two
cultural
characteristics
Developing
(1)
Identifies one
cultural
characteristic
Interprets works
of human
expression
within cultural
context with
specific details
that reveals
insights to
understanding
the value of
cultural
differences
Illuminates with
multiple specific
details the
understanding
between self
and others
Interprets works
of human
expression
within cultural
context with
generalizations
that include
some details
showing an
awareness of
cultural
differences
Articulates with
some details the
understanding
between self
and others
Interprets works
of human
expression
within cultural
context with
description and
limited details in
a ethnocentric
way
Shows limited
understanding
between self
and others
Lack of Evidence
(0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 39
Program Student Learning Outcome: 3. Uses critical thinking skills
PSLO
3. a. identifies
problem,
argument, or
issue (to
determine
extent of
information
needed)
3.b.
Differentiates
the facts from
opinions as
relates to
situation
3. c. Constructs
possible
solutions or
prediction of
consequences
3. d. Uses
logical, sound
reasoning to
justify
conclusion
Accomplished
(3)
Key concepts
and terms are
identified and
extensive
information is
used
Competent
(2)
Identifies
concepts related
to the situation
to develop some
details of
information
Multiple and
diverse sources
of information
are used to
distinguish
between facts
and opinions
Generates new ,
creative,
interesting ideas
as solutions or
consequences;
makes
appropriate
connections
between ideas
Able to integrate
information
from a variety of
sources to draw
appropriate
conclusion;
articulates the
use of a
recognizable
reasoning
pattern for the
justification of
conclusion
Some facts and
opinion are
clearly
distinguished
but not
consistently
Provides some
connected ideas
and a
reasonable
solution or
consequence
Can integrate
information
from sources
and draws a
conclusion by
using a
reasoning
pattern
Developing
(1)
Unable to
formulate
clearly what is
needed to
examine the
situation and
uses limited
details
Separation
between fact
and opinion is
unclear and
minimally
related to
situation
Ideas are limited
and the
connection
between ideas is
vague and
solution is
obvious or not
conclusive
Shows limited
ability to
integrate
information
from sources
and draws a
weak conclusion
by using a
reasoning
pattern
incorrectly
Lack of Evidence
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 40
Program Student Learning Outcome: 4. Demonstrates technology literacy
subPSLO
4. a. Locates
needed
information
using the
appropriate
technological
tool or device
4. b. Displays
organizational
skills with the
use of
technology
4. c. Presents
information
using the
appropriate
technological
tool or device
Accomplished
(3)
Successfully
implements use
of technological
tool or device
for assigned task
Competent
(2)
Appropriate tool
or device is used
with some
errors or
multiple
attempts
Demonstrates
exemplary skills
in layout or
format of
information
Successfully
completes
project utilizing
a word
processing
program, and or
other necessary
software, with a
variety of
resources if
needed
Shows some skill
in layout or
format of
information
Displays some
skill in
presenting
information
effectively with
technological
tools or device
but may have
errors or
multiple
attempts
Developing
(1)
Displays
difficulty in
identifying or
using
appropriate
technology tool
or device
Shows limited
understanding in
layout or format
of information
Lack of Evidence
(0)
Rating
Limited use of
appropriate
technology tool
or device to
complete task
Program Student Learning Outcome: 5. Transfers to a baccalaureate program
subPSLO
a. Exhibits
student contact
hours completed
at LSC-PA
b. Number of AA
majors who
graduate
c. Number of AA
graduates who
request
transcripts sent
to other colleges
or universities
Accomplished
(3)
Competent
(2)
Developing
(1)
Lack of Evidence
(0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 41
Program Student Learning Outcome: 6. Applies mathematical and scientific principles.
subPSLO
6. a. Identifies
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
Accomplished
(3)
Shows ability to
identify the
appropriate
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
independently
6. b. Uses
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
Demonstrates
exceptional
understanding
of the functions
of the
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
6. c. Applies
problem solving
skills in
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
Applies
exceptional
problem solving
skills in
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
Competent
(2)
Shows ability to
identify the
appropriate
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
with requested
assistance or
errors
Demonstrates
understanding
of the functions
of the
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
with a few
errors
Applies problem
solving skills in
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
with some
errors
Developing
(1)
Shows limited
ability in
indentifying the
appropriate
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
Demonstrates
limited
understanding
of the functions
of the
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
Applies limited
problem solving
skills in
mathematical or
scientific
principles
needed to
complete task
Lack of Evidence
(0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 42
AAT ONLY: Program Student Learning Outcome: 7. Analyzes learning communities
PSLO
7a. Identifies
characteristic of
diverse
populations
within an
educational
setting
7b. Identifies
diverse teaching
styles
7c. Presents
information
about learning
communities
(strategies) in
appropriate
mode of
expression
Accomplished
(3)
Identifies
multiple
characteristics of
diverse
populations
within an
education
setting
Identifies
multiple
characteristics of
diverse teaching
styles
Style of
presentation is
appropriate for
the specific task
with ample
details
Competent
(2)
Identifies at
least two
characteristics of
divers
populations
within an
education
setting
Identifies at
least two
characteristics of
diverse teaching
styles
Style of
presentation is
appropriate for
the specific task
with some
details
Developing
(1)
Identifies at
least one
characteristic of
diverse
populations
within an
education
setting
Identifies at
least one
characteristic of
diverse teaching
styles
Style of
presentation is
appropriate for
the specific task
with few details.
Not Observed
(0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 43
CAD at GIST Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
Only scores for PSLO 2 increased from the last assessment round. The remaining PSLOs showed
significant drops in scoring.
Results are lower because of the high number of artifacts that were scored as 0 – Not Observed in the
scoring rubric criteria. The artifacts were considered, because they were submitted as evidence for the
PSLOs in question. The assumption is that the artifacts should have observable characteristics of the
criteria; if the observer finds the artifact lacking, the observer must rate the artifact with a 0 and the 0
score is averaged along with the other scores to determine the PSLO mean score.
7
6
5
PSLO 1
4
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 31: 3 of 4 PSLO Mean Scores Are Down Since Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 44
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: CAD AT GIST UNIT
Degree/Certificate Award: CERTIFICATE
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
59.9% of students met or
exceeded expectations
Related PSLO
Results and Analysis
Scores appear to be significantly
lower than fall. Fall artifacts were
deficient and did not give a good
picture of student capability.
Computers were purged in
December per prison policy, so we
really had no house plans to work
with as artifacts.
PSLO#1: Uses a computeraided drafting program to create
accurate architectural documents to
meet professional drafting
standards.
2
Key Assessment Findings
59.1% of students met or
exceeded expectations.
Related PSLO
PSLO#3: Uses problem-solving and
critical thinking skills to design and
document solutions.
3
Key Assessment Findings
50% of students met or
exceeded expectations.
Related PSLO
PSLO#4: Participates in class
activities and group projects in a
professional manner.
Changes Implemented
Teacher now saves copies of house
plans as semester progresses, giving
a much clearer picture of student
capability.
Evidence of Improvement
Sample plan
Results and Analysis
Again, artifacts in fall were
deficient. Also, zeros skew the
results. In the prison, each
computer is assigned to a student.
When a student drops or
withdraws, his computer is left
empty. A zero does not reflect a
student's inadequate work; it
reflects a computer that is
unused.
Results and Analysis
Teamwork checklist in fall
represented a summary judgment
based upon teacher's memory.
New, improved teamwork checklist
gives more complete picture of
exactly what each student did as
part of the team.
Changes Implemented
Teacher now saves copies of final
exam house plan, representing
culmination of knowledge for the
six-month program.
Evidence of Improvement
Sample house plan.
Changes Implemented
New, improved teamwork
checklist.
Evidence of Improvement
Sample checklist
Spring 2011 Assessment 45
CAD at GIST Blue Sheet Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: CAD at Gist
Degree/Certificate Award: Certificate Award
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Results and Analysis
The student will use a computerWe now save all tests.
aided drafting program to create
accurate architectural documents to
meet professional drafting
standards.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
For 2011 class, we have drawings
produced by students in Module One.
Supporting document CAD PSLO #1,
small building project, 2011.
PSLO #1 Uses a computer-aided
drafting program to create accurate
architectural documents to meet
professional drafting standards.
The student will use problemsolving and critical thinking skills to
design and document solutions.
We now keep copies of all final exams for
Module Two.
Supporting document CAD PSLO #3,
house plan 2011.
PSLO #3 Uses problem-solving and
critical thinking skills to design and
document solutions.
The student will participate in class
activities and group projects in a
professional manner.
PSLO #4 Participates in class
activities and group projects in a
professional manner.
For 2011 class, we have house plans
produced by students for Module Two.
We now have a checklist showing exactly
which projects the student contributed to
and/or produced.
For 2011 class, we have specific
checklist showing which drawings
students contributed to and/or
produced.
Supporting document CAD PSLO #4,
Group Projects Checklist 2011.
Spring 2011 Assessment 46
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: CAD AT GIST
Degree/Certificate Award: CERTIFICATE
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Architectural plans
were not available for assessment
from fall 2010 semester.
Changes Implemented: Teacher now
saves copies of plans throughout the
semester.
Resolved? Resolved
New PSLO Mean: 56%
Change in PSLO Mean:-41.9%
Related PSLO: Uses a computeraided drafting program to create
accurate architectural documents to
meet professional drafting
standards.
PSLO Mean: 97.9%
Evidence Used: Sample drawing
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Final exam house plans
were not available for assessment
from fall 2010 semester.
Changes Implemented: Teacher now
saves copies of final exam house plan,
drawn from general instructions, a test
of six months of development of
critical thinking skills.
Resolved? Resolved
Related PSLO: Uses problemsolving and critical thinking skills to
design and document
solutions.
New PSLO Mean: 57.5%
Change in PSLO Mean: -19.5%
Evidence Used: Sample final exam
house plan.
PSLO Mean: 77%
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: In fall 2010 students'
participation in group acticvities had
to be reconstructed by teacher from
memory with a very broad
checklist.
Changes Implemented: New, detailed
checklist gives more accurate picture
of student's participation in group
activities.
Resolved? Resolved
Related PSLO: Participates in class
activities and group projects in a
professional manner.
Evidence Used: New sample
checklist.
PSLO Mean: 82.3%
New PSLO Mean: 50%
Change in PSLO Mean: -32.3%
Spring 2011 Assessment 47
PSLO 1: Uses a computer-aided drafting program to create accurate architectural documents to meet
professional drafting standards.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Uses a computeraided drafting
program to create
accurate
architectural
documents to
meet professional
drafting
standards.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
3.36
(56%)
Median
5
5.875
(97.9%)
6
Mode
6
6
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
2.90
Change
-2.515
(-41.9%)
Current Findings
59.09% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
.5
22
16
% of 6s
10/45.45%
93.7%
% of 5s
2/9.1%
% of 4s
1/4.54%
6.25%
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
9/40.91%
# Disputed
0
0
7
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 32: PSLO Mean Score Down 41.9%
Spring 2011 Assessment 48
PSLO 2: Selects appropriate architectural components to develop buildable assemblies.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Selects
appropriate
architectural
components to
develop buildable
assemblies.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
3.59
(59.83%)
Median
5
2.875
(47.9%)
3
Mode
6
4
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
2.67
Fall 2010
Change
+0.715
(+11.93%)
Current Findings
59.1% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 50%
2.187
22
16
% of 6s
8/36.36%
18.7%
% of 5s
5/22.73%
31.25%
% of 3s
1/4.54%
% of 2s
1/4.54%
25%
% of 0s
7/31.82%
25%
# Disputed
0
0
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
4
3.5
3
2.5
Fall 2010
2
Spring 2011
1.5
1
0.5
0
Mean
Figure 33: PSLO Mean Scores Up 11.93%
Spring 2011 Assessment 49
PSLO 3: Uses problem-solving and critical thinking skills to design and document solutions.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Uses problemsolving and
critical thinking
skills to design
and document
solutions.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
3.45
(57.5%)
Median
5
4.62
(77%)
4
Mode
6
4, 6
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
2.81
Change
-1.17
(-19.5%)
Current Findings
59.1% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 87.5%
1.4083
22
16
% of 6s
9/40.91%
43.75%
% of 5s
4/18.18%
43.75%
% of 3s
% of 2s
1/4.54%
12.5%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
8/36.36%
# Disputed
0
0
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
Fall 2010
2.5
Spring 2011
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Mean
Figure 34: PSLO Mean Score Down 19.5%
Spring 2011 Assessment 50
PSLO 4: Participates in class activities and group projects in a professional manner.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Participates in
class activities
and group
projects in a
professional
manner.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
3.0
(50%)
Median
3.5
4.94
(82.3%)
5
Mode
0
6
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
46.75%
% of 3s
6.25%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
2.62
-1.94
(-32.3%)
Current Findings
50% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 93.75%
1.124
22
16
% of 6s
5/22.73%
50%
% of 5s
6/27.27%
% of 2s
Change
3/13.64%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
8/36.36%
# Disputed
0
0
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 35: PSLO Mean Score Down 32.3%
Spring 2011 Assessment 51
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Name of Program: CAD at Gist Program
Date:
PSLO
Developing (1)
Competent (2)
Accomplished (3)
1. Uses a
computer- aided
drafting program to
create accurate
architectural
documents to meet
professional
drafting standards.
2. Selects
appropriate
architectural
components to
develop buildable
assemblies.
Produces
architectural
documents which
are sometimes
accurate.
Produces
architectural
documents which
are usually
accurate.
Produces
architectural
documents which
are always
accurate.
Selects
architectural
components
which are
sometimes
appropriate to
building
requirements.
Exhibits difficulty
generating new
ideas. Lacks
ability to make
connections
between ideas.
Selects
architectural
components
which are usually
appropriate to
building
requirements.
Selects
architectural
components
which are always
appropriate to
building
requirements.
Displays inability
to select
appropriate
architectural
components.
Generates new
ideas but lacks
ability to connect
those ideas.
Generates new,
novel and
interesting ideas.
Spontaneously
makes
connections
between ideas.
Generates no
new ideas.
Participates in
group projects
only when
required.
Participates in
group projects
willingly.
Initiates group
projects which are
inclusive.
Refuses to
participate in
group projects.
3. Uses problemsolving and critical
thinking skills to
design and
document
solutions.
4. Participates in
class activities and
group projects in a
professional
manner.
Not Observed
(0)
Produces
architectural
documents
which are
lacking in
accuracy.
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 52
Commercial Music: Performance
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Commercial Music
Degree/Certificate Award:
AAS Commercial Music Performance
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Results and Analysis
Decrease of -6.12% in mean from fall
2010; decrease in # of student who met
or exceeded expectations (91.67% vs
100%) for microphone staging and set
list protocol.
The drop may be attributed to
 The incorporation of student selfassessments (indirect measures),
which were issued for the first time
spring 2011. Students were much
more critical of themselves than
peer and faculty assessments.
 The measurements were not
adequately implemented. Faculty
did not understand what evidence
we could have used to measure,
and a disgruntled former faculty
did not adopt suggested
improvements.
Related PSLO
3.b. Applies microphone, staging, and
set-list protocol for the venue and
audience.
Key Assessment Findings
Changes Implemented


Rubrics for self-evaluation will be
distributed along with selfassessment surveys (Appendix A)
All faculty have been versed on
measurement expectations.
(Appendix B).
Evidence of Improvement


Results and Analysis
Self-evaluation rubric (Appendix A)
Meeting minutes (Appendix B)
Changes Implemented
2
Decrease of -9.62 in mean from fall
2010; decrease in number of students
who met or exceeded expectations
(90% vs. 100%) for understanding of
legal issues.
Related PSLO
3.d. Demonstrates an understanding
of legal issues.
3
Key Assessment Findings
Decrease of -13.89% in mean from fall
2010; increase in the percentage of
students who met of exceeded
expectations (90% versus 83.35%).
Related PSLO
4.A. Demonstrate commitment to the
profession.
This decrease may be because we
measured this outcome in more classes
than just Survey of Music Business.
Regardless of the results, we recognize
that legal issues are a big part of the
industry and will continue to embed
this topic into all courses across the
curriculum. We also need to make legal
issues a ‘real life’ issue rather than just
a topic in classes.
Results and Analysis
We had adopted a more rigorous,
department wide attendance policy and
a higher expectation of professionalism
and accountability, which may have
negatively impacted our overall mean.
Still, the increase in % who met or
exceeded expectations rose, so we
believe we are on the right track and
plan to continue.
We also implemented a plan to ‘weed
out’ students who are marginally
interested in the program, at their
audition. We found this to be effective
because students who don’t
understand the rigors of Commercial
Music are less likely to persist.

Invite guest artists to talk to classes
about music business and law
(Appendix C)
Evidence of Improvement









Calendar of events that includes
guest speakers (Appendix C)
Changes Implemented
Adopted a department-wide
attendance policy and common applied
syllabus (Appendix D)
Adopted more rigorous audition
criteria (Appendix E)
Enforce mentor relationships
(Appendix F)
Increased visibility of faculty as
engaged performers, to better inspire
students (Appendix G)
Evidence of Improvement
Common applied syllabus with
common attendance policy (Appix D)
Audition rubric (Appendix E)
List of students/mentors (Appendix F)
Photo of bulletin board devoted to
faculty (and student) off-campus
performances. (Appendix G)
Spring 2011 Assessment 53
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
2009- 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Commercial Music: Performance
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program SLOS’s
1.i. Stage Presence.
Students will improve their stage
presence by using appropriate body
and facial expression during
performance.
sub-PSLO 1.i. Exhibit appropriate facial
expression and body movement during
performance.
Results and Analysis
Modified performance course content
so stage presence is addressed in
applied music courses, ensemble,
songwriting, Survey Music Business,
and American Pop. Music.
Assessment indicates a slight,
insignificant increase in student
outcomes (+0.03), as measured by
faculty evaluations, a self-evaluation,
and an electronic audience survey.
We keep copies of all students’ work,
which is a more representative
sampling, and do more frequent and
more targeted assessment.
Evidence of faculty evaluations is in
supporting document 1.
Implemented a self-evaluation and
electronic audience survey, in addition
to faculty performance evaluations.
3.d. Permissions and Waivers.
Students will demonstrate an increase
in understanding of legal issues.
sub-PSLO 3.d. Demonstrate an
understanding of legal issues.
3.a. Performance Rights.
Students will demonstrate an increase
in understanding of basic performance
rights.
sub-PSLO 3.a. Demonstrate an
understanding of basic performance
rights.
Implementation and Evidence of
Improvement
This topic is now addressed in several
classes: songwriting, ensemble,
applied music, MIDI, Finale, arranging
and composition, and Survey of Music
Business.
We keep copies of all students’ work,
which is a more representative
sampling, and do more frequent and
more targeted assessment.
Evidence of self-evaluation is in
supporting document 2.
Evidence of the electronic audience
survey is supporting document 3.
Assessment indicates a slight,
insignificant drop in student outcomes (0.39), as evidenced by tests and quizzes
administered early this semester. This
may be attributed to a more diverse
pool of assessments taken from several
classes, as well as the introduction of
direct measurement (test questions)
versus the indirect measure of signing
waivers previously measured.
Assessment now includes direct
questions in tests and quizzes in all
these classes, in addition to the signing
of waivers, etc., before performances.
Evidence of assessment is in supporting
document 4.
Basic performance rights are more
directly addressed in Survey of Music
Business, and the presentation has
been embedded into several other
courses for reinforcement.
Assessment indicates a +.48 increase in
student learning outcomes, as
evidenced by a quiz administered to
Survey of Music Business students as
well as performance students who had
been exposed to performance rights in
other classes. This may be attributed to
1) utilizing direct instruction, and 2) a
complete re-write of the quiz questions.
We keep copies of all students’ work,
which is a more representative
sampling, and do more frequent and
more targeted assessment.
The assessment questions that address
performance rights have been rewritten to be clearer, and cover
multiple levels of understanding.
Evidence of direct instruction and quiz
are in supporting documents 5 and 6.
Spring 2011 Assessment 54
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Commercial Music: Performance
Degree/Certificate Award: A.A.S.
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Student demonstration
of stage presence, using
appropriate body and facial
expression during performance, was
lacking. Stage presence is a large
predictor of success for
performance majors.
Changes Implemented: Modified
course content so stage presence is
addressed across the applied
curriculum.
Resolved? yes
Continuing? yes
Related PSLO: 1.i. Exhibit
appropriate facial expression and
body movement during
performance.
New PSLO Mean: 100%
Change in PSLO Mean: +21.14%
Evidence Used: Common applied
syllabus.
PSLO Mean: 93.34%
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students were not
demonstrating adequate
understanding of legal issues in the
music industry.
Changes Implemented: Incorporation
of legal discussion and assessment in
more classes than just Survey of Music
Business.
Resolved? No
Continuing? yes
Related PSLO: 3.d. Students will
demonstrate an understanding of
legal issues.
Evidence Used: Tests results from
several difference courses.
.
Incorporation of guest lecturers,
who specialize in legal aspects of
the industry.
New PSLO Mean: 88.55%
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.62%
PSLO Mean: 98.17%
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Students lacked
comprehensive understanding of
basic performance rights.
Changes Implemented: Direct
instruction of basic performance rights
in Survey of Music Business;
assessment questions that cover
multiple levels of understanding.
Resolved? no
Continuing? yes
Related PSLO: 3.a. Demonstrate an
understanding of basic performance
rights.
Evidence Used: Lecture notes;
assessment questions.
No new intervention needed.
New PSLO Mean: 70.63%
Change in PSLO Mean: +5.33%
PSLO Mean: 65.3%
Spring 2011 Assessment 55
Commercial Music: Performance Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
PSLO 1: Applies commercial music performance techniques to professional practice.
PSLO
Assessment
Methods
Success
Criterion
1A.
Demonstrates
a professional
tone quality.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not
Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum
of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current
Findings
5.667
(94.45%)
4.933
(82.2%)
+ 0.734
(+12.25%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
0.779
1.0328
12
15
83.34%
46.67%
16.67%
53.3%
0
0
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.82
(97%)
4.933
(82.2%)
+0.887
(+14.8%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 86.67%
0.603
1.48645
11
15
90.91%
60%
9.10%
26.67%
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
1B.
Demonstrates
a secure and
accurate
rhythm for the
style of music
being
performed.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 3s
% of 2s
13.3%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 56
PSLO
Assessment
Methods
Success
Criterion
1C.
Demonstrates
pitch accuracy.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not
Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum
of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current
Findings
5.8
(96.67%)
4.53
(75.4%)
+1.27
(+21.27%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
6
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 79%
0.632
1.576
10
19
90%
42%
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.0
(83.34%)
4.8
(80%)
+ 0.2
(+3.34%)
Median
6
4.8
Mode
6
4,6
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 93%
1.414
1.265
10
15
60%
46.67%
30%
46.67%
10%
6.67%
0
0
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
1D.
Demonstrates
dynamic levels
that are
appropriate for
the style of
music being
performed.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
10%
% of 3s
% of 2s
21%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
10.5%
0
Results of Current
Assessment
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
Spring 2011 Assessment 57
PSLO
Assessment
Methods
Success
Criterion
1E.
Demonstrates
phrasing that is
appropriate for
the style of
music being
performed.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not
Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum
of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current
Findings
5.8
(96.67%)
5.067
(84.3%)
+0.733
(+12.37%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 93%
0.422
1.280
10
15
80%
60%
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
6.0
(100%)
4.267
(71%)
+1.733
(+29%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4,6
0
4.554
10
15
100%
33%
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
1F.
Demonstrates
a creative
nuance in
response to
the
arrangement.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
33%
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
3.37%
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
20%
0
Results of Current
Assessment
0
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
6.67%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
33%
% of 3s
6.67%
% of 2s
20%
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 69%
Spring 2011 Assessment 58
PSLO
1G.
Performs
correct notes
as required.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.231
(87.18%)
5.29
(88%)
-0.059
(-0.82%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
1.013
0.994
13
14
61.54%
64%
38.46%
36%
0
0
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.5
(91.67%)
4.93
(82%)
+0.57
(+9.67%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
0.905
1.667
12
15
75%
66.7%
25%
13.3%
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
1H.
Performs
music from
memory.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 3s
% of 2s
20%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 59
PSLO
Assessment
Methods
Success
Criterion
1I.
Exhibits
appropriate
facial
expression and
body
movement
during
performance.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not
Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum
of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current
Findings
5.6
(93.34%)
4.33
(72.2%)
+1.27
(+21.14%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 93%
0.699
1.112
10
15
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
70%
20%
% of 5s
20%
13.3%
% of 4s
10%
53.3%
% of 3s
6.67%
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 2: Applies commercial music sound engineering technology to support performance practices.
PSLO
2A.
Applies
appropriate
microphone
technique to
performance.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
4.917
(81.95%)
4.62
(77%)
+0.297
(+4.95%)
5.5
4
6
4
91.7% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
1.311
0.961
12
13
50%
30.7%
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
8.3%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
33.34%
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
69.2%
% of 3s
% of 2s
8.3%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 60
PSLO
2B.
Conducts
sound check
for the venue,
systems, and
performance.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.0
(83.34%)
5.72
(95.5%)
-0.72
(12.16%)
5
6
4, 6
6
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
0.943
0.647
10
11
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
4.778
(70.63%)
3.92
(65.3%)
+0.858
(+5.33%)
5.5
4
6
3, 5, 6
98.33% of
students met or
exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 50%
1.517
1.782
18
12
50%
25%
25%
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
40%
81.8%
% of 5s
20%
9%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
40%
9%
0
0
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO 3: Applies basic music industry principles to professional practice.
PSLO
3A.
Demonstrates
an
understanding
of basic
performance
rights.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
11.11%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 4s
22.22%
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
% of 3s
% of 2s
16.67%
1.67%
% of 1s
16.67%
8.3%
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 61
PSLO
3B.
Applies
appropriate
microphone,
staging, and
set-list
protocol for
the venue and
audience.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
4.583
(76.38%)
4.94
(82.5%)
-0.36
(-6.12%)
Median
4
5
Mode
4
4
91.67% of
students met or
exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
1.240
1.026
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.389
(89.82%)
5.45
(90.8%)
-0.061
(-0.98%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
5
88.89% of
students met or
exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
1.335
0.5104
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
12
19
33.34%
31.6%
% of 5s
8.33%
% of 4s
50.0%
52.6%
% of 3s
% of 2s
8.33%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
3C.
Promotes
performances.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
0
Results of Current
Assessment
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
0
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
18
20
77.78%
45%
% of 5s
5.56%
55%
% of 4s
5.56%
% of 3s
% of 2s
11.11%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 62
PSLO
3D.
Demonstrates
an
understanding
of legal issues.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.313
(88.55%)
5.89
(98.17%)
-0.577
(-9.62%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
94.44% of
students met or
exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
1.078
0.3153
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
16
19
56.25%
89.47%
% of 5s
27.78%
10.5%
% of 4s
5.56%
% of 3s
% of 2s
5.56%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 4: Demonstrates professional behavior as characterized by a commitment to the profession.
PSLO
4A.
Demonstrates
a commitment
to the
profession with
attendance,
persistence in
the program,
and timeliness
to classes,
rehearsals, and
performances.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Current
Findings
4.667
(77.78%)
5.5
(91.67%)
-0.833
(-13.89%)
Median
5
5.5
Mode
6
5,6
83.34% of
students met or
exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
1.557
0.513
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
% of 6s
12
20
41.67%
50%
% of 5s
16.67%
50%
% of 4s
25%
% of 3s
8.33%
% of 2s
% of 1s
8.33%
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 63
LSC-PA Academic Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Name of Program: Comm. Music: Performance
Date:
PSLO: 1. Apply commercial music performance techniques to their professional practice.
subPSLO
Accomplished
Competent
Developing
(3)
(2)
(1)
1.a. Demonstrate a
Tone is consistently
Tone is consistently Tone is consistently
professional tone
focused, clear, and
focused, clear, and
focused, clear, and
quality.
centered through the centered
centered but
entire range of the
throughout the
sometimes the tone
instrument. Tone
normal playing
is uncontrolled in the
has professional
range of the
normal playing
quality.
instrument.
range. Extremes in
Extremes in range
range are usually
sometimes cause
uncontrolled.
tone to be less
Occasionally the tone
controlled. Tone
quality detracts from
quality typically
overall performance.
does not detract
from the
performance.
1.b. Demonstrate a
The beat is secure
The beat is secure
The beat is
secure and accurate
and the rhythms are
and the rhythms are somewhat erratic.
rhythm for the style of accurate for the style mostly accurate.
Some rhythms are
music being
of music being
There are a few
accurate. Frequent
performed.
played.
duration errors, but or repeated duration
these do not detract errors. Rhythm
from the overall
problems
performance.
occasionally detract
from the overall
performance.
1.c. Demonstrate
pitch accuracy.
Virtually no errors.
Pitch is very accurate
An occasional
isolated error, but
most of the time
pitch is accurate and
secure
Some accurate
pitches, but there are
frequent and/or
repeated error.
Not Observed
(0)
Spring 2011 Assessment 64
subPSLO
Accomplished
(3)
1.d. Demonstrate
Dynamic levels are
dynamic levels that
obvious, consistent,
are appropriate for the and an accurate
style of music being
interpretation of the
performed.
style of music being
performed.
Competent
(2)
Dynamic levels are
typically accurate
and consistent.
Developing
(1)
Dynamic levels
fluctuate but can be
discerned.
1.e. Demonstrate
phrasing that is
appropriate for the
style of music being
performed.
Phrasing is always
consistent and
sensitive to the style
of music being
performed.
Phrasing is usually
consistent and
sensitive to the style
of music being
performed.
Phrasing is usually
consistent and
occasionally sensitive
to the style of music
being performed.
1.f. Demonstrate a
creative nuance in
response to the
arrangement.
Always performs
with a creative
nuance and style in
response to the
arrangement.
Often performs with
nuance and style
that is indicated in
the arrangement.
Sometimes performs
with nuance and
style that is indicated
in arrangement.
1.g. Perform correct
notes as required.
Notes are
consistently
accurate.
An occasional
inaccurate note is
played, but does not
detract from overall
performance.
A few inaccurate
notes are played,
detracting somewhat
from the overall
performance.
Not Observed
(0)
Spring 2011 Assessment 65
subPSLO
1.h. Perform music
from memory.
Accomplished
(3)
All of the piece was
memorized.
Competent
(2)
Most of the piece
was memorized.
Developing
(1)
The piece was not
memorized.
1.i. Exhibit
appropriate facial
expression and body
movement during
performance.
Student has excellent
stage presence with
outstanding facial
expressions and body
movement.
Student has
acceptable stage
presence with a
pleasant face and
body movement.
Student has minimal
stage presence with
lack of facial
expression and body
movement.
Not Observed
(0)
PSLO 2. Apply commercial music sound engineering technology to support performance practices.
subPLSO
Accomplished
Competent
Developing
Not Observed
(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)
2.a. Apply
Handles microphone Handles microphone Handles microphone
appropriate
appropriately for the appropriately for
appropriately for
microphone
performance;
most of the
some of the
technique to
appears comfortable performance;
performance; does
performance.
with the microphone. appears somewhat
not appear
comfortable with
comfortable with
the microphone.
the microphone.
2.b. Conduct sound
check for the venue,
systems, and
performance.
Performs a sound
check that is
appropriate for the
venue, systems, and
performance.
Performs a sound
check that is
somewhat
appropriate for the
venue, systems, and
performance.
Performs a sound
check but it is
inappropriate for the
venue, systems, and
performance.
Spring 2011 Assessment 66
PSLO 3. Apply basic music industry principles to their professional practice.
Criteria
Accomplished (3)
Competent (2)
Developing (1)
3.a. Demonstrate an Student has
Student has
Student did not
understanding of
demonstrated
demonstrated
demonstrate
basic performance
understanding of
understanding of
understanding of
rights.
performance rights
performance rights
performance rights
by correctly
by correctly
by correctly
identifying
identifying
identifying
characteristics,
characteristics,
characteristics,
definitions, etc., on a definitions, etc., on a definitions, etc., on a
test most of the
test some of the
test.
time.
time.
3.b. Apply
appropriate
microphone, staging,
and set-list protocol
for the venue and
audience.
Utilizes excellent
microphone, staging,
and set-list protocol
for the venue and
audience.
Utilizes acceptable
microphone, staging,
and set-list protocol
for the venue and
audience.
Utilizes minimal
microphone, staging,
and set-list protocol
for the venue and
audience.
3.c. Promote
performances.
Effectively and
appropriately
promotes
performance.
Promotes
performance
acceptably.
Minimal
performance
promotion.
3.d. Demonstrate an
understanding of
legal issues by
signing necessary
waivers for
performances and
collaborative work.
Student has signed
necessary
visual/audio waiver
for each
performance and
collaborative work.
Student has signed
necessary
visual/audio waiver
for most
performances and
collaborative work.
Student has signed
necessary
visual/audio waiver
for some
performances and
collaborative work.
Not Observed (0)
Spring 2011 Assessment 67
PSLO 4. Demonstrate professional behavior as characterized by a commitment to the profession.
subPSLO
Accomplished
Competent
Developing
Not Observed
(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)
4.a.
Demonstrates
Demonstrates
Demonstrates
Demonstrate a
excellent attitude,
acceptable attitude, minimal attitude,
commitment to the
persistence,
persistence,
persistence,
profession with
attendance, and
attendance, and
attendance, and
attendance,
timeliness.
timeliness.
timeliness.
persistence in the
program, and
timeliness to classes,
rehearsals and
performances.
Spring 2011 Assessment 68
Commercial Music: Sound Engineer
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Commercial Music Sound Engineer
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Commercial Music Sound Engineer
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Results and Analysis
Decrease of -39.97% in mean
from fall 2010; decrease in # of student
who met or exceeded expectations
(40% versus 93.34%) for microphone
staging and set list protocol.
The drop may be attributed to

The adoption of an online,
standardized test (Logic certification
test) to assess student outcomes,
which included this PSLO. Our
students were not prepared for the
test. We need to make sure our
students are familiar with the terms
used (in some cases, we don’t think
they understand the question.) Also,
our students are very ‘hands-on’
oriented and tend to perform poorly on
standardized written tests.

Lack of critical listening exercises in
upper level audio classes.

Poor textbook – did not line up with
curriculum/online testing well.
 Lack of incorporation of Live Sound
class material into rehearsals and
performances.
Related SLO
1.F. Applies sound technology
techniques to projects, reflecting
specific markets.
2
Key Assessment Findings
Decrease of -8.33% in mean from
fall 2010; decrease in the number of
students who met or exceeded
expectations (90% versus 100%) for
demonstration of understanding of
legal issues.
Related SLO
3.C. Demonstrates an understanding
of legal issues.
3
Key Assessment Findings
Decrease of -29.17% in mean from fall
2010; decrease in the number of
students who met or exceeded
expectations (60% versus 100%) for
demonstration of managing session
time.
Related SLO
1.H. Manages session time.
Changes Implemented




Evidence of Improvement



Results and Analysis
This decrease may be because we
measured this outcome in more classes
than just Survey of Music Business.
Regardless of the results, we recognize
that legal issues are a big part of the
industry and will continue to embed
this topic into all courses across the
curriculum. We also need to make legal
issues a ‘real life’ issue rather than just
a topic in classes.
Appendix A: Copy of CD – example
of critical listening exercise
Appendix B: Cover of new
textbook
Appendix C: Live Sound schedule
Changes Implemented
Invite guest artists to talk to classes
about music business and law
(Appendix D)
Evidence of Improvement
Appendix D: Calendar of Events
Results and Analysis
Some of this decrease may be
attributed to a lack of session
management accountability by a former
faculty. We were also using an
inadequate process for session signups, and students weren’t versed in
appropriate session management
techniques.
Go through the standardized test
ahead of time and incorporate the
terms used, and phrasing of
questions, into class lecture.
Incorporate critical listening into
curriculum (Appendix A)
Adopt new textbook. (Appendix B)
Scheduled Live Sound labs at the
same time as band rehearsals.
(Appendix C)
Changes Implemented



Assigned different faculty to
oversee session management.
Creation of additional student
recording sessions. (Appendix E)
Revised studio session sheets
(Appendix F)
Evidence of Improvement


Appendix E: Session Schedule
Appendix F: Studio Session Sheets
Spring 2011 Assessment 69
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Commercial Music: Sound Engineer
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Results and Analysis
1.e. Budgeting
1.
Budgeting is now included in the
course objectives, as well as
embedded in Survey Music Business
for reinforcement.
We keep copies of all students’ work,
which is a more representative
sampling, and do more frequent and
more targeted assessment.
The assessment is based on direct
assessment of answers to test
questions and response to a scenario
analysis paper.
Preliminary evidence indicates that 50%
of students are able to develop an
acceptable budget for a recording
project, as measured by a budget quiz.
This was not previously measured.
Microphone placement is now taught in
Audio Engineering II.
We keep copies of all students’ work,
which is a more representative sampling,
and do more frequent and more targeted
assessment.
The assessment questions have been rewritten to be more clear.
Assessment indicates no increase in
student learning outcomes, as evidence
by no increase in student test scores.
This may be attributed to a less diverse
pool of assessments taken from one
class (Audio II) versus assessment from
instruction in Audio III.
Students will develop a production
budget for recording projects.
2.
Develop a production budget for
recording projects
3.
1.b. Recording Techniques
Students will improve their
placement and selection of
microphones in a recording session.
1.
2.
3.
Demonstrate proper microphone
placement and use of room
acoustics in a recording session.
1.g. Signal Flow
Evidence of topic embedding in Survey
Music Business is in supporting
document 1.
Evidence of direct assessment of budget
is in supporting document 2.
Evidence of curricular inclusion is
supporting document 3.
Evidence of test response is supporting
document 4.
1.
Students will improve their
understanding of signal flow, as
demonstrated on quizzes, tests, and
2.
practical assignments.
Develop a signal flow for
instrument, microphone, preamp,
and input.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
3.
Signal flow is addressed multiple times in
audio engineering classes, beginning in
Audio I, and embedded into multiple
units.
We keep copies of all students’ work,
which is a more representative sampling,
and do more frequent and more targeted
assessment.
Signal flow is directly assessed through
more frequent quizzes. Evidence of this is
in supporting document 10.
Assessment indicates a slight drop in
student outcomes, as evidenced by a
slight decrease in test scores. This may
be attributed to the assessment of
younger, first semester students from
multiple classes versus assessment to of
upper level students.
Evidence of curriculum inclusion in
Audio 1 is supporting document 5.
Evidence of test response is supporting
document 6.
Spring 2011 Assessment 70
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Commercial Music: Sound Engineer
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: We had no
assessments for this outcome.
Changes Implemented:
Budget is now included in the course
objectives, as well as embedded in
Survey Music Business.
Resolved? yes
Continuing? yes
Related PSLO: 1.E. Develops a
production budget for recording
projects.
Also, we directly assessed budget using
test questions and scenario papers.
PSLO Mean: none
New PSLO Mean: 78.33%
Change in PSLO Mean: n/a
Evidence Used: Copy of page of text
that includes budgeting and planning.
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students were not
adequately demonstrating
microphone placement and use of
room acoustics in recording
sessions.
Changes Implemented: Microphone
placement is now introduced earlier in
the curriculum.
Resolved? yes
Continuing? yes
Related PSLO: 1.b. Demonstrate
proper microphone placement and
use of room acoustics in a recording
session.
Assessment questions were rewritten
to be more clear.
New PSLO Mean: 90%
Change in PSLO Mean: +12.5%
Evidence Used: Audio II syllabus
PSLO Mean: 77.5%
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Students were not
adequately developing a signal flow
for instrument, microphone,
preamp, and input.
Changes Implemented:
Signal flow was addressed in all audio
classes, beginning Audio I, and
embedded into multiple units.
Resolved? yes
Continuing? yes
Signal flow was also directly assessed
through more frequent quizzes.
Related PSLO: 1.g. Develop a signal
flow for instrument, microphone,
preamp, and input.
PSLO Mean: 74%
New PSLO Mean: 93.33%
Change in PSLO Mean: +19.53%
Evidence Used: Quizzes from different
audio levels; copy of syllabi.
Spring 2011 Assessment 71
Commercial Music: Sound Engineer Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
PSLO 1: Applies commercial music sound technology to professional practice.
PSLO
Assessment
Methods
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
1A.
Demonstrates
an
understanding
of the role,
duties, and
responsibilities
of the
producer.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not
Observed
Mean
5.6
(93.33%)
4.43
(73.8%)
+ 1.17
(+19.53%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
6
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 86%
1.265
2.138
10
14
90%
43%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum
of 6.
% of 4s
Fall
2010
Change
Current Findings
5.4
(90%)
4.65
(77.5%)
+ 0.7
(+12.5%)
Median
6
4.5
Mode
6
4,6
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
1.265
1.226
10
20
70%
30%
20%
15%
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 5s
29%
% of 3s
% of 2s
Current
Findings
14%
10%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
1B.
Demonstrates
proper
microphone
placement and
use of room
acoustics in a
recording
session.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
14%
0
0
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
35%
% of 3s
10%
% of 2s
10%
5%
0
0
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
Spring 2011 Assessment 72
PSLO
Assessment
Methods
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
1C.
Utilizes editing
techniques
that are
effective and
appropriate.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not
Observed
Mean
5.0
(83.33%)
4.4
(73.3%)
+ 0.6
(+10.03%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4,6
1.348
1.5492
12
15
58.33%
40%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum
of 6.
% of 4s
33.33%
40%
8.33%
20%
0
0
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
Findings
91.67% of
students met or
exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
% of 5s
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
1D.
Utilizes mixing
techniques
that are
effective and
appropriate.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
4.4
(73.33%)
4.25
(71%)
+ 0.15
(+ 2.3%)
Median
5
4
Mode
6
6
1.838
1.552
10
20
50%
35%
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 5s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 4s
5%
20%
% of 3s
% of 2s
30%
10%
30%
20%
0
0
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
Findings
70% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 70%
Spring 2011 Assessment 73
PSLO
Assessment
Methods
1E.
Develops a
production
budget for
recording
projects.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
None
Median
4.7
(78.33%)
5.5
Mode
6
None
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
1.829
50%
None
% of 5s
20%
None
% of 4s
10%
None
1F.
Applies sound
technology
techniques to
projects,
reflecting
specific
markets.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
+ 4.7
None
Findings
80% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: None
None
None
% of 3s
None
% of 2s
10%
None
% of 1s
10%
None
# Disputed
Change
10
% of 0s
PSLO
Fall
2010
None
0
None
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Findings
2.0
(33.33%)
4.4
(73.3%)
- 2.4
(-39.97%)
Median
0
4
Mode
0
4
40% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 93.34%
2.828
1.1212
5
15
20%
26.67%
20%
66.67%
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
% of 3s
% of 2s
6.67%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
60%
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 74
PSLO
1.G.
Develops a
signal flow for
instrument,
microphone,
preamp, and
input.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
4.5
(75%)
4.44
(74%)
+ 0.06
(+1%)
Median
4
4
Mode
4
4
1.732
1.149
12
18
41.66%
22%
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 5s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 4s
Findings
91.67% of
students met or
exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 82.8%
22%
50%
38.8%
% of 3s
11%
% of 2s
5.56%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
1H.
Manages
session time.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
8.33%
0
Results of Current
Assessment
0
Fall
2010
Change
Findings
3.8
(63.33%)
5.55
(92.5%)
- 1.75
(-29.17%)
Median
4
6
Mode
2
6
60% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
1.751
0.6048
10
20
30%
60%
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
35%
30%
5%
% of 3s
% of 2s
40%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
Spring 2011 Assessment 75
PSLO 2: Applies commercial music performance skill to support sound engineering practice.
PSLO
2A.
Utilizes theory
skills in the
recording,
editing, and
mixing process.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
5.4
(90%)
3.867
(64.4%)
+ 1.533
(+25.6%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
1.265
1.598
10
15
70%
26.6%
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 5s
Findings
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 66.6%
20%
% of 4s
40%
% of 3s
% of 2s
10%
33.34%
0
0
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
2B.
Utilizes
keyboard skills
in the
recording, in
relation to the
quality of the
recording
process.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
5.6
(93.33%)
3.467
(57.8%)
+ 2.133
(+35.53%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
1.265
1.767
10
15
90%
20%
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
40%
% of 3s
% of 2s
10%
33.34%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
6.67%
0
0
Findings
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 60%
Spring 2011 Assessment 76
PSLO 3: Applies basic music industry principles to professional practice.
PSLO
3A.
Demonstrates
an
understanding
of basic
performance
rights.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3–
Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Findings
4.909
(81.87%)
4
(66.67%)
+ 0.909
(+15.2%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
90.9% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 74.7%
1.868
1.279
11
12
63.64%
16.7%
Fall
2010
Change
Findings
5.4
(90%)
4.176
(69.6%)
+ 1.224
(+20.4%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
3
0.843
1.334
10
17
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 5s
% of 4s
8%
27.27%
50%
% of 3s
8%
% of 2s
16.7%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO
3B.
Applies
microphone,
staging, and
set-list
protocol for
the venue and
audience.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
9.1%
0
Results of Current
Assessment
0
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
60%
23.5%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 5s
20%
17.6%
% of 4s
20%
17.6%
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 3s
17.6%
% of 2s
5.8%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
100% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 58.7%
Spring 2011 Assessment 77
PSLO
3C.
Demonstrates
an
understanding
of legal issues.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
5.2
(86.67%)
5.7
(95%)
- 0.5
(-8.33%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
1.932
0.6570
10
20
80%
80%
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 5s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 4s
Findings
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
10%
10%
10%
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
10%
0
0
PSLO 4: Demonstrates professional behavior as characterized by a commitment to the profession.
PSLO
4A.
Demonstrates
a commitment
to the
profession with
attendance,
persistence in
the program,
timeliness to
classes and
recording
sessions.
Assessment
Methods
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Success
Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall
2010
Change
Findings
5.2
(86.67%)
5.11
(85.2%)
+ 0.09
(+1.47%)
Median
6
5.5
Mode
6
6
90% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 83.36%
1.398
1.132
10
18
70%
50%
50% will score a
total mean score
of 4 or higher
from two raters,
each of whom
rates using the
following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of
6.
% of 5s
Standard
Deviation
# of
artifacts
(not
disputes)
% of 6s
% of 4s
27.8%
20%
% of 3s
% of 2s
5.56%
16.67%
10%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
2
Spring 2011 Assessment 78
LSC-PA Academic Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: Commercial Music: Sound Engineer
Date:
PSLO 1. Apply commercial music sound technology to their professional practice.
subPSLO
Accomplished
Competent
Developing
(3)
(2)
(1)
1.a. Demonstrate Student outlines the Student outlines the Student outlines the
an understanding
role, duties, and
role, duties, and
role, duties, and
of the role, duties, responsibilities of
responsibilities of
responsibilities of
and
the producer in a
the producer in an
the producer in a
responsibilities of comprehensive and acceptably
minimally
the producer.
clear essay.
comprehensive and comprehensive and
clear essay.
clear essay.
1.b. Demonstrate In a recording
In a recording
In a recording
proper
session, excellent
session,
session,
microphone
demonstration of
demonstration of
demonstration of
placement and
proper mic
adequate mic.
incorrect mic.
use of room
placement; proper
placement;
placement;
acoustics in a
use of room
acceptable use of
unacceptable use of
recording session. acoustics
room acoustics
room acoustics
1. c. Utilize
Creates clear and
Creates edits that
Creates edits that
editing techniques clean edits that are
are acceptable, but
are unacceptable
that are effective
undetectable, so
may not always
and do not make
and appropriate.
edits make musical
make musical sense. sense.
sense.
1. d. Utilize
Creates a blend of
Creates a blend of
Creates a blend of
mixing techniques instruments that is
instruments that is
instruments that are
that are effective
well balanced and
balanced, but may
not balanced, and
and appropriate.
appropriate for the
not be appropriate
may not be
genre.
for the genre.
appropriate for the
genre.
1.e. Develop a
Develops an
Develops a budget
Develops a budget
production budget accurate and
for a project that is
that is acceptable
for recording
manageable budget acceptable but may but not
projects.
for project.
not be accurate or
manageable.
manageable.
Not Observed
(0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 79
subPSLO
Accomplished (3)
1.f. Apply sound
technology
techniques to
projects, reflecting
specific markets.
Demonstrates an
understanding of
the music market by
applying
appropriate sound
technology
techniques to
project.
Develops excellent
signal flow for
instrument,
microphone,
preamp, and input.
1.g. Develop a
signal flow for
instrument,
microphone,
preamp, and
input.
1.h. Manage
session time.
Demonstrates
appropriate session
management.
Competent
(2)
Demonstrates an
understanding of
the music market by
applying acceptable
sound technology
techniques to
project.
Develops acceptable
signal flow for
instrument,
microphone,
preamp, and input.
Developing
(1)
Demonstrates an
understanding of
the music market by
applying minimally
acceptable sound
technology
techniques to
project.
Develops minimally
acceptable signal
flow for instrument,
microphone,
preamp, and input.
Demonstrates
minimally
appropriate session
management.
Demonstrates
inappropriate
session
management.
Not Observed
(0)
PSLO 2. Apply commercial music performance skill to support sound engineering practice.
subPSLO
Accomplished
Competent
Developing
Not Observed
(3)
(2)
(1)
(0)
2.a. Utilize theory Utilizes excellent
Utilizes acceptable
Utilizes minimal
skills in the
theory skills in the
theory skills in the
theory skills in the
recording, editing recording, editing,
recording, editing,
recording, editing,
and mixing
and mixing process. and mixing process. and mixing process.
process.
2.b. Utilize
Demonstrates an
Minimally
Does not
keyboard skills in
understanding of,
understands and
demonstrate an
the recording, in
and utilizes
utilizes keyboard
understanding of,
relation to the
appropriate
skills in relations to
and does not utilize
quality of the
keyboard skills, in
the quality of the
appropriate
recording process. relation to the
recording process.
keyboard skills in
quality of the
relation to the
recording process.
quality of the
recording process.
Rating
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 80
PSLO 3. Apply basic music industry principles to their professional practice.
subPSLO
Accomplished
Competent
Developing
(3)
(2)
(1)
3.a. Demonstrate Student has
Student has
Student could not
an understanding
demonstrated
demonstrated
demonstrate
of basic
understanding of
understanding of
understanding of
performance
performance rights
performance rights
performance rights
rights.
by correctly
by correctly
by correctly
identifying
identifying
identifying
characteristics,
characteristics,
characteristics,
definitions, etc., on
definitions, etc., on
definitions, etc., on
a test most of the
a test some of the
a test.
time.
time.
3.b. Apply
Utilizes excellent
Utilizes acceptable
Utilizes minimal
microphone,
microphone,
microphone,
microphone,
staging, and setstaging, and set-list
staging, and set-list
staging, and set-list
list protocol for
protocol for the
protocol for the
protocol for the
the venue and
venue and
venue and
venue and
audience.
audience.
audience.
audience.
3.c. Demonstrate Session agreements Session agreements Session agreements
an understanding
have been signed by have been signed by we not signed.
of legal issues by
all performers.
some performers.
securing necessary
session
agreements prior
to recording.
Not Observed
(0)
PSLO 4. Demonstrate professional behavior as characterized by a commitment to the profession.
subPLSO
Accomplished (3)
Competent
Developing
Not Observed
(2)
(1)
(0)
4.a. Demonstrate Demonstrates
Demonstrates
Demonstrates
a commitment to
excellent attitude,
acceptable attitude, minimal attitude,
the profession
persistence,
persistence,
persistence,
with attendance,
attendance, and
attendance, and
attendance, and
persistence in the timeliness.
timeliness.
timeliness.
program,
timeliness to
classes and
recording
sessions.
Rating
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 81
Cosmetology Findings Table, Spring 2011 Assessment
Overall, mean scores for all PSLOs went up. The PSLO 1 score jumped by nearly a full point, the PSLO 2
score went up by 1.25 points, and the score for PSLO 5 went up 1.5 points. Scores for PSLOs 3 and 4
rose by about half a point each.
7
6
5
PSLO 1
4
PSLO 2
PSLO 3
3
PSLO 4
PSLO 5
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 36: All PSLO Mean Scores Up From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 82
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Cosmetology
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Cosmetology Operator
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Students need to improve on
professionalism while working with
customers and school policies
concerning professional behavior.
Results and Analysis
Students should be professional at
all times. The salon software has
helped, but additional ways to
improve are needed.
Related PSLO
Key Assessment Findings
Scores need to improve on State
Board exam.
Related PSLO
2: Practice all sanitary and safety
measures that protect individual
and public health.
3
Key Assessment Findings
Students lack in workforce
behavior.
Related PSLO
4: Demonstrate appropriate
workforce behavior.
In addition to continued use of the
salon software, we reinforced the
need for professional behavior.
Evidence of Improvement
1: Show professional and ethical
behavior.
2
Changes Implemented
Customer surveys with more
detailed questions about
professionalism.
Results and Analysis
Students’ skills improved by
watching the pre-taped video of
State Board procedures.
Improvement was shown in the
practical passing rate.
Findings showed that the video
helped, but we need additional help
for the written portion of the State
Board
Results and Analysis
Booking appointments and keeping
track of customer services improve
by using Shortcuts Salon Software.
Changes Implemented
Continue to have students view
video of practical State Board Exam;
purchase of online practice written
exam.
Evidence of Improvement
Milady’s online Licensing
Preparation document
Changes Implemented
Install new front desk software.
Evidence of Improvement
PO for Shortcuts Salon Software.
Added clients to advisory
committee.
Spring 2011 Assessment 83
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Cosmetology
Degree/Certificate Award: Certificate
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment PSLO
Data indicated a deficiency in
professional and ethical behavior
suitable for salon standards
Results and Analysis
Purchased specialized salon software to
train students in the areas of telephone
skills, interpersonal communication with
clients, and appointment scheduling.
PSLO #1 Show professional and ethical
behavior
Data indicated a deficiency in sanitary
and safety measures that protect
individual and public health
PSLO #4 Demonstrate appropriate
workforce behaviors
Implementation: Students went
through extensive training for the
software. Students rotated working
reception desk for one week each.
Documentation: Letter from Shortcuts
Salon and Spa Software
Contracted a professional video crew to
tape instructors performing the correct
safety and sanitation procedures that
are required by law.
PSLO #2 Practice all sanitary and safety
measures that protect individual and
public health
Data indicated a deficiency in
workforce behaviors
Implementation & Evidence of
Improvement
Implementation: Students are given
access to view the video at their
convenience as many times as needed.
Documentation: DVD Label. IEC
Simulations taped and provided video
free of charge.
Purchased specialized salon software to
train students in the areas of
interpersonal communications with
clients and appointment scheduling.
Implementation: Students receive
extensive training on salon software.
Students assigned to work at the
reception desk for one week rotations.
Documentation: Letter from Shortcuts
Salon and Spa Software
Spring 2011 Assessment 84
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Cosmetology
Degree/Certificate Award: Certificate
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Data indicated a
deficiency in professional and
ethical behavior suitable for salon
standards
Changes Implemented: The software
used to resolve the original problem
turned out to be problematic in itself.
Continuing? yes
Changed software to SalonBiz.
Related PSLO: PSLO #1 Show
professional and ethical behavior
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Data indicated a
deficiency in sanitary and safety
measures that protect individual
and public health
Changes Implemented: Videos were
made available.
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor for
progress.
Related PSLO: PSLO #2 Practice all
sanitary and safety measures that
protect individual and public health
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Data indicated a
deficiency in workforce behaviors
Changes Implemented: The software
used to resolve the original problem
turned out to be problematic in itself.
Continuing? yes
Changed software to SalonBiz.
Related PSLO: PSLO #4
Demonstrate appropriate workforce
behaviors
Spring 2011 Assessment 85
PSLO 1: Shows professional and ethical behavior
PSLO
PSLO 1: Shows
professional and
ethical behavior
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
5.025
(83.75%)
4.1
(68.3%)
Median
5
4
Mode
6
4
Standard
Deviation
1.143
1.373
# of artifacts
40
20
% of 6s
13/32.5%
20%
% of 5s
14/35%
15%
% of 4s
4/10%
40%
% of 3s
3/7.5%
5%
% of 2s
2/5%
20%
0
0
Change
+0.925
(+15.45%)
Current Findings
87.5% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 75%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO 1
6
5
4
3
PSLO 1
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 37: PSLO 1 Mean Score Up by 15.45%
Spring 2011 Assessment 86
PSLO 2: Practices all sanitary and safety measures that protect individual and public health
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Practices all
sanitary and
safety measures
that protect
individual and
public health
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
5.9
(98.34%)
4.65
(77.5%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
6
Standard
Deviation
.0304
1.424
# of artifacts
40
20
% of 6s
36/90%
40%
% of 5s
4/10%
20%
% of 4s
15%
% of 3s
15%
% of 2s
10%
Change
+1.25
(+15.84%)
Current Findings
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 75%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 2
7
6
5
4
PSLO 2
3
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 38: PLSO 2 Mean Score Up by 15.84%
Spring 2011 Assessment 87
PSLO 3: Demonstrates proficiency in all cosmetology skills
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Demonstrates
proficiency in all
cosmetology
skills
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
5.85
(97.5%)
5.3
(88.3%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
Standard
Deviation
0.483
0.979
# of artifacts
40
20
% of 6s
36/90%
60%
% of 5s
2/5%
15%
% of 4s
2/5%
20%
% of 3s
Change
+0.55
(+9.2%)
Current Findings
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 95%
5%
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 3
5.9
5.8
5.7
5.6
5.5
PSLO 3
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 39: PSLO 3 Mean Score Up By 9.2%
Spring 2011 Assessment 88
PSLO 4: Demonstrates appropriate workforce behaviors
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Demonstrates
appropriate
workforce
behaviors
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
+0.625
(+10.35%)
Mean
5.075
(84.56%)
4.45
(74.2%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
5
Standard
Deviation
1.384
1.317
# of artifacts
40
20
% of 6s
21/52.5%
15%
% of 5s
13/32.5%
55%
% of 4s
5%
% of 3s
10%
% of 2s
3/15%
15%
0
0
Current Findings
85% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 75%
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
PSLO 4
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
PSLO 4
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 40: PSLO 4 Mean Score Up By 10.35%
Spring 2011 Assessment 89
PSLO 5: Prepares to pass the State Board requirements
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 5:
Prepares to pass
the State Board
requirements
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
+1.525
(+25.38%)
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
Mean
5.975
(99.58%)
4.45
(74.2%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
6
Standard
Deviation
0.158
1.356
# of artifacts
40
20
% of 6s
39/97.5%
35%
% of 5s
2.5%
10%
% of 4s
25%
% of 3s
25%
% of 2s
5%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 5
7
6
5
4
PSLO 5
3
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 41: PSLO 5 Mean Score Up By 25.38%
Recommendation: Provide numbers of students who take State Boards, numbers who don’t pass, numbers who
pass on second or subsequent try.
Spring 2011 Assessment 90
LSC-PA Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: Cosmetology
PSLO
Accomplished
(3)
1. Show
Always shows
professional and
professional and
ethical behavior
ethical behavior
2. Practice all
Always practices
sanitary and safety sanitary and
measures that
safety measures
protect individual to protect
and public health
individual and
public health
3. Demonstrate
Proficient in all
proficiency in all
cosmetology skills
cosmetology skills
4. Demonstrate
appropriate
workforce
behaviors
5. Prepare to pass
the State Board
requirements
Prepared for
successful
employment
Prepared to
successfully pass
the State Board
Date:
Competent
(2)
Usually shows
professional and
ethical behavior
Usually follows
all the sanitary
and safety
measures to
insure individual
and public health
Ability to
perform most of
the cosmetology
skills
Almost ready for
employment
Developing
(1)
Sometimes shows
professional and
ethical behavior
Sometimes follows
all the sanitary and
safety measures to
insure individual
and public health
Almost prepared
to pass the State
Board
Somewhat
prepared to pass
the State Board
Ability to perform
some of the
cosmetology skills
Somewhat
prepared for
employment
Not Observed
(0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 91
Esthetics Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
Esthetics mean scores are higher than from the previous assessment round in Fall 2010, in one case by
almost 30%.
Most artifacts in all PSLOs were ranked as 5s or 6s, indicating a high level of comprehension of the SLOs
at both the course and program level.
PSLOs 2, 3, and 5 show improvement rates of almost 10%, while PSLO 4 shows an improvement rate of
29.1%.
PSLOs 3, 4, and 5 were targeted for improvement in the last assessment round; the improvements were
made and student scores reflect the intervention.
7
6
5
PSLO 1
4
PSLO 2
PSLO 3
3
PSLO 4
PSLO 5
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 42: All PSLO Mean Scores Up From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 92
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Esthetician
Degree/Certificate Award: Certificate
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Students need more practice in
esthetic skills
Results and Analysis
Students are still lacking in certain
skills.
Related PSLO
Key Assessment Findings
Students lacked in workforce
behaviors
Students have the opportunity to
view over 25 various videos on
esthetic skills.
Evidence of Improvement
# 3 Demonstrates proficiency in all
esthetic skills
2
Changes Implemented
Copy of some of the video covers.
Results and Analysis
Booking appointments and keeping
track of customer’s services
improved by using Shortcuts Salon
Software.
Related PSLO
Changes Implemented
I recommend continued use of the
software and purchase the yearly
maintenance.
I also recommend including some of
our school’s customers on our
Advisory Committee for their input
in our students’ salon behavior.
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of the yearly software
agreement.
# 4 Demonstrate appropriate
workforce behaviors
Names of clients added to Advisory
Committee
3
Key Assessment Findings
Practical scores improved but we
are still lacking in the written
portion.
Related PSLO
#5 Prepares to pass the State Board
Results and Analysis
We are weak in the written area of
the State Board Exam. The student
may only take the practical portion
of the state exam after the written
is taken and passed. So we need to
strengthen the passing rate of the
written exam.
Changes Implemented
Continue to view the pre-taped
video of the practical skills.
Evidence of Improvement
Purchase Milady’s online Licensing
Preparation with written test
questions similar to the ones on the
State Board exam
Spring 2011 Assessment 93
Esthetics
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Esthetics
Degree/Certificate Award: Certificate
Key Assessment PSLO
Data indicated a deficiency in esthetics
skills
Assessment Summary
Results and Analysis
Contracted a professional video crew to
tape instructors performing the correct
facial procedures.
Implementation: Students are given
access to view the video as many times
as needed.
Purchased specialized salon software to
train students in the areas of
interpersonal communications with
clients and appointment scheduling.
Documentation: DVD label. IEC
Simulations taped and provided video
free of charge.
Implementation: Students receive
extensive training on salon software.
Students assigned to work at the
reception desk for one week rotations.
PSLO #3 Demonstrate proficiency in all
esthetic skills
Data indicated a deficiency in
appropriate workforce behaviors.
PSLO #4 Demonstrate appropriate
workforce behaviors
Data indicated a deficiency in state
board passing requirements.
PSLO # 5 Prepare to pass the State
Board requirements.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Contracted a professional video crew to
tape instructors performing the correct
facial procedures as required by the
state licensing board.
Documentation: Letter from Shortcuts
Salon and Spa Software
Implementation: Students are given
access to view the video as many times
as needed.
Documentation: DVD label. IEC
Simulations taped and provided video
free of charge.
Spring 2011 Assessment 94
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Esthetics
Degree/Certificate Award: Certificate
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Data indicated a
deficiency in professional and
ethical behavior suitable for salon
standards
Changes Implemented: The software
used to resolve the original problem
turned out to be problematic in itself.
Continuing? yes
Changed software to SalonBiz.
Related PSLO: PSLO #1 Show
professional and ethical behavior
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Data indicated a
deficiency in sanitary and safety
measures that protect individual
and public health
Changes Implemented: Videos were
made available.
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor for
progress.
Related PSLO: PSLO #2 Practice all
sanitary and safety measures that
protect individual and public health
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Data indicated a
deficiency in workforce behaviors
Changes Implemented: The software
used to resolve the original problem
turned out to be problematic in itself.
Continuing? yes
Changed software to SalonBiz.
Related PSLO: PSLO #4
Demonstrate appropriate workforce
behaviors
Spring 2011 Assessment 95
PSLO 1: Shows professional and ethical behavior.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Shows
professional and
ethical behavior.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
5.6
(93.33%)
5.35
(89.2%)
+0.25
(+4.13%)
Median
6
5.5
Mode
6
6
0.821
0.745
20
20
16/80%
50%
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
Current Findings
100 % of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
35%
% of 4s
4/20%
15%
0
0
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
5.65
5.6
5.55
5.5
5.45
Fall 20110
5.4
Spring 2011
5.35
5.3
5.25
5.2
Mean
Figure 43: PSLO Mean Score Up 4.13%
Spring 2011 Assessment 96
PSLO 2: Practices all sanitary and safety measures that protect individual and public health.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Practices all
sanitary and
safety measures
that protect
individual and
public health.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
5.75
(95.83%)
5.2
(86.67%)
+0.55
(+9.16%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
0.550
1.152
20
20
% of 6s
17/85%
60%
15%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
3/15%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
1/5%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 3s
15%
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
0
0
5.8
5.7
5.6
5.5
5.4
Fall 2010
5.3
Spring 2011
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
Mean
Figure 44: PSLO Mean Score Up 9.16%
Spring 2011 Assessment 97
PSLO 3: Demonstrates proficiency in all esthetics skills.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Demonstrates
proficiency in all
esthetics skills.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
5.474
(91.23%)
4.85
(80.8%)
+0.624
(+10.43%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
5,6
1.073
1.137
19
20
% of 6s
13/68.4%
35%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
2/10.5%
35%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
2/10.5%
10%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 3s
Current Findings
94.74% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
20%
% of 2s
1/5.26%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.6
5.5
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
Fall 2010
5
Spring 2011
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
Mean
Figure 45: PSLO Mean Score Up 10.43%
Spring 2011 Assessment 98
PSLO 4: Demonstrates appropriate workforce behavior.
PSLO
PSLO 4:
Demonstrates
appropriate
workforce
behavior.
Success Criterion
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
5.3
(88.3%)
3.55
(59.2%)
+1.75
(+29.1%)
Median
6
3.5
Mode
6
2
90% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 50%
1.174
1.432
Mean
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
20
20
% of 6s
13/65%
10%
% of 5s
3/15%
20%
% of 4s
2/10%
20%
% of 3s
1/5%
15%
% of 2s
1/5%
35%
0
0
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 46: PSLO Mean Score Up 29.1%
Spring 2011 Assessment 99
PSLO 5: Prepares to pass the State Board requirements.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 5: Prepares
to pass the State
Board
requirements.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
5.3
(88.33%)
4.8
(80%)
+0.5
(+8.33%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
6
90% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 75%
0.988
1.436
20
20
% of 6s
13/65%
45%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
3/15%
25%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
2/10%
5%
% of 3s
1/5%
15%
% of 2s
1/5%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
10%
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.4
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
Fall 2010
4.9
Spring 2011
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
Mean
Figure 47: PSLO Mean Score Up 8.33%
Spring 2011 Assessment 100
LSC-PA Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: Esthetics
PSLO
Date:
Accomplished (3)
Competent (2)
Developing(1)
Sometimes
shows
professional and
ethical behavior
Sometimes
follows the
safety and
sanitation
measures to
protect
individual and
public health
Able to perform
some of the
esthetic skills
Somewhat
prepared for
employment
1. Show
professional and
ethical behavior
Always shows
professional and
ethical behavior
Usually shows
professional and
ethical behavior
2. Practice all safety
and sanitary
measures that
protect individual
and public health
Always practices
safety and
sanitation
measures to
protect individual
and public health
Usually follows
the safety and
sanitation
measures to
protect individual
and public health
3. Demonstrate
proficiency in all
esthetic skills
4. Demonstrate
appropriate
workforce
behaviors
5. Prepare to pass
the State Board
requirements
Proficient in all
skills of esthetics
Able to perform
most of the
esthetic skills
Almost ready for
employment
Prepared for
successful
employment
Prepared to pass
the State Board
Almost ready to
pass the State
Board
Somewhat
prepared to
pass the State
Board
Not Observed
(0)
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 101
HVAC at Stiles Finding, Spring 2011 Assessment
Scores of all PSLOs have gone up since the last assessment.
Artifacts for PSLOs 1, 3, and 4 do not show a range of achievement; they show primarily the highest level
of success for the PSLO criteria.
7
6
5
PSLO 1
4
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 48: All PSLO Mean Scores Up From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 102
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: HVAC AT STILES
Degree/Certificate Award: CERTIFICATE
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
100% of students scored 100
on environmental safety
test.
Results and Analysis
Excellent performance on test
indicates students are well
prepared.
Related PSLO
PSLO#1: Demonstrates
environmental safety
practices.
Key Assessment Findings
Slight drop in percentage of
students who met or exceeded
expectations.
2
Related PSLO
PSLO#2: Troubleshoots,
services, and repairs air
conditioning, heating, and
refrigeration systems.
3
Key Assessment Findings
Almost all students
functioned effectively in a
team.
Related PSLO
PSLO#4: Works effectively as
a team member.
Changes Implemented
Students were given instruction
on how to alleviate test
anxiety.
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of suggestions for
alleviating test anxiety.
Results and Analysis
More precise checklist showed
individual areas of weakness.
Students need practice on a
variety of air conditioning
systems.
Changes Implemented
Commercial grade compressor
delivered to unit so students can
practice on commercial as well
as residential compressors.
Evidence of Improvement
Delivery of commercial
compressor.
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
More detailed teamwork
Better documentation of team
checklist gave effective picture of participation.
teamwork function.
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of detailed teamwork
checklist.
Spring 2011 Assessment 103
HVAC at STILES Blue Sheet Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: HVAC at Stiles
Degree/Certificate Award: Certificate Award
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Students will learn environmental
safety practices.
Results and Analysis
We now save all environmental safety tests.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
We have distributed to students some
guidelines for coping with test anxiety.
PSLO #1 Demonstrates
environmental safety practices
Supporting document HVAC PSLO#1
2011
Students will troubleshoot, service, We now save all final exams for Module Two.
and repair air conditioning, heating,
and refrigeration systems.
We have implemented checklist
showing exactly which
procedures/instruments the individual
student has mastered.
PSLO #2 Troubleshoots, services,
and repairs air conditioning,
heating, and refrigeration systems.
Students will perform technician
duties safely.
Supporting document HVAC Individual
Tasks Checklist. PSLO #2 2011
We now save all shop safety tests.
Supporting document HVAC PSLO #3
2011
PSLO #3 Performs technician duties
safely.
Students will work effectively as a
team member.
PSLO #4 Works effectively as a
team member.
Instructor has installed videos on shop
safety which each student will view and
master.
Supporting document HVAC PSLO #4 2010
We have implemented checklist
showing exactly which procedures the
student mastered as part of a team.
Supporting document HVAC Group
Projects Checklist PSLO #4 2011
Spring 2011 Assessment 104
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: HVAC AT STILES
Degree/Certificate Award: CERTIFICATE
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Knowledge of
environmental safety is imperative
in HVAC.
Changes Implemented: Teacher
obtained DVD's on environmental
safety for use in classroom.
Resolved? Resolved.
Related PSLO: Demonstrates
environmental safety practices.
Evidence Used: Environmental Safety
Test.
New PSLO Mean: 100%
Change in PSLO Mean:
33.33%
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Inadequate
documentation of individual
projects accomplished.
Changes Implemented: Detailed
checklist of individual projects
accomplished.
Resolved? Resolved
Related PSLO: Troubleshoots,
services, and repairs air
conditioning, heating, and
refrigeration systems.
Evidence Used: Detailed checklist of
individual projects accomplished.
New PSLO Mean: 83.48%
Change in PSLO Mean:
2.98%
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Shop safety is of
paramount importance in
HVAC.
Changes Implemented: Rigorous shop
safety test.
Resolved? Resolved
Related PSLO: Performs technician
duties safely
Evidence Used: Shop safety test
PSLO Mean: 66.67%
PSLO Mean: 80.5%
New PSLO Mean: 100%
Change in PSLO Mean:
33.33%
PSLO Mean: 66.67%
Spring 2011 Assessment 105
PSLO 1: Demonstrates environmental safety practices.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Demonstrates
environmental
safety practices.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
6
(100%)
4
(66.67%)
+2.0
(+33.33%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 83.4%
0
1.715
12
18
12/100%
22%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
5.56%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
55.56%
% of 3s
5.56%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 2s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 1s
% of 0s
11%
# Disputed
0
0
7
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 49: PSLO Mean Score Up 33.33%
Spring 2011 Assessment 106
PSLO 2: Troubleshoots, services, and repairs air conditioning, heating, and refrigeration systems.
PSLO
PSLO 2:
Troubleshoots,
services, and
repairs air
conditioning,
heating, and
refrigeration
systems.
Success Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
5.09
(83.48%)
4.83
(80.5%)
+0.26
(+2.98%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
1.38
1.030
11
12
% of 6s
6/54.55%
41.67%
% of 5s
3/27.27%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
Current Findings
81.82% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
58.3%
% of 3s
1/9.09%
% of 2s
1/9.09%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
1
0
5.15
5.1
5.05
5
4.95
Fall 2010
4.9
Spring 2011
4.85
4.8
4.75
4.7
Mean
Figure 50: PSLO Mean Score Up 2.98%
Spring 2011 Assessment 107
PSLO 3: Performs technician duties safely.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Performs
technician duties
safely.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
6
(100%)
4
(66.67%)
+2.0
(+33.33%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 84.6%
0
1.1547
12
13
12/100%
15.4%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
69%
% of 3s
% of 2s
15.4%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
7
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 51: PSLO Mean Score Up 33.33%
Spring 2011 Assessment 108
PSLO 4: Works effectively as a team member.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
Fall 2010
Change
PSLO 4:
Works effectively
as a team
member.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
5.5
(91.67%)
4.31
(71.8%)
+3.19
(+19.87%)
Median
6
4
Mode
6
4
1.73
1.377
12
13
11/91.67%
31%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
91.67% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 84.6%
% of 5s
54%
% of 3s
% of 2s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Current Findings
15.4%
% of 1s
% of 0s
1/8.33%
# Disputed
0
0
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 52: PSLO Mean Score Up 19.87%
Spring 2011 Assessment 109
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: HVAC at Stiles
PSLO
Date:
Developing
(1)
Demonstrates
difficulty
understanding safe
levels of handling
refrigerants.
Competent
(2)
Performs at an
acceptable level
in safe handling of
refrigerants.
Accomplished
(3)
Performs at a
superior level in
safe handling of
refrigerants.
Not Observed
(0)
Lacks
understanding of
safe handling of
refrigerants.
2. Troubleshoots,
services, and
repairs air
conditioning,
heating, and
refrigeration
systems.
3. Performs
technician duties
safely.
Repairs HVAC
systems that have
been previously
diagnosed.
Identifies,
diagnoses, and
repairs HVAC
systems at an
acceptable level.
Identifies,
diagnoses, and
repairs HVAC
systems at a
superior level.
Displays inability to
repair HVAC
systems.
Follows some
safety rules in
HVAC lab when
reminded.
Follows most
safety rules in
HVAC lab.
Consistently
follows all safety
rules in HVAC lab.
Ignores safety rules
in HVAC lab.
4. Works effectively
as a team member.
Participates in
team efforts only
when required.
Participates in
team efforts
willingly.
Initiates team
efforts which are
inclusive.
Refuses to
participate in team
efforts.
1. Demonstrates
environmental
safety practices.
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 110
Instrumentation Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
Only the score for PSLO 3 showed improvement over the last assessment round. PSLO 1 dropped by
almost 6%. PSLO 2 dropped by 24.1%, and PSLO 4 dropped by 19.17%.
70% of artifacts for PSLO 2 were rated at 4 or lower, as compared to Fall 2010 in which 75% of artifacts
were scored with 5 or 6.
Similarly, 70% of artifacts for PSLO 4 were rated at 4 or lower; in Fall 2010 75% of artifacts were rated 5
or 6.
6
5
4
PSLO 1
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 53: All But PSLO 3 Scored Lower Than Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 111
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program:
Degree/Certificate Award:
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Drop of 24.1%
Results and Analysis
Shows an increase in lack of
knowledge on analyzing flow &
Temperature results
Related PSLO
PSLO 2
2
Key Assessment Findings
Drop of about 24%
Evidence of Improvement
Informal observation of
improvement
Results and Analysis
Shows a lack of knowledge in
analyzing level and gas
measurements
Related PSLO
Key Assessment Findings
Drop of 6%
Related PSLO
PSLO 1
Changes Implemented
Focused on using new analyzer
trainer with hands-on activity
Evidence of Improvement
Improvement on homework and
lab activities
PSLO 4
3
Changes Implemented
Revised lecture and labs
Results and Analysis
Shows difficulty identifying
control panel indicators and
calibration tools
Changes Implemented
Showed videos of control room
and indicators, set up
workbenches for using
calibration tools
Evidence of Improvement
Showed improvement at
workbenches using calibration
tools.
Spring 2011 Assessment 112
Instrumentation
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Instrumentation
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program SLO’s
Results and Analysis
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
The students need to improve
the analyzing of gas
measurements to determine
proper operating parameters.
The students needed more training in
Chromatography
We authorized the creation of a
training video
PSLO #3 Analyze level and gas
measurements to determine
proper operating parameters of
specific process and electrical
equipment
The students need to improve
their training of the panel board
instruments and how they
work.
PSLO #1 Identify control panel
indicators, calibration tools,
electrical parts, and how they
work.
The students need to improve
on their knowledge of safety
procedures.
PSLO #4 Implement standard
safety procedures as required in
industry
Evidence: Purchase Order of training
video
The students need more hands on
exposure to panel board instruments.
We purchased an analyzer trainer
with panel board instruments.
Evidence: Purchase Order of
analyzer equipment
The students require more training on
safety procedures.
We added additional an video lab
with a focus on safety training using
the lockout /tag out of electrical and
process equipment.
Evidence: Video lab exam with
student grades.
Spring 2011 Assessment 113
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Instrumentation
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Instrumentation
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: students need to
improve the analyzing of gas
measurements to determine proper
operating parameters.
Changes Implemented: Used training
video on chromatography
Continuing? yes
Successful, but continuing to
monitor results
Related PSLO: PSLO 3
New PSLO Mean: 4.99
Change in PSLO Mean: +.35
PSLO Mean: 4.55
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: The students need to
improve their training of the panel
board instruments and how they
work.
Changes Implemented: hands-on labs;
purchased $1900 worth of panel board
switches
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor results
Related PSLO: PSLO 1
Evidence Used: lab using panel board
switches
New PSLO Mean: 4.55
Change in PSLO Mean: -.35
PSLO Mean: 4.9
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: The students need to
improve on their knowledge of
safety procedures.
Changes Implemented: Our focus was
on safety video and hands on line
opening of pressurized pipes.
Continuing? yes
Continuing to monitor for results
Related PSLO: PSLO 4
Evidence Used: used pipe demo trainer
New PSLO Mean: 4.1
Change in PSLO Mean: -1.15
PSLO Mean: 5.25
Spring 2011 Assessment 114
PSLO 1: Identifies control panel indicators, calibration tools, electrical parts, and how they work.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Identifies control
panel indicators,
calibration tools,
electrical parts,
and how they
work.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
4.55
(75.8%)
4.9
(81.67%)
Median
5
5.5
Mode
6
6
1.504
1.483
20
20
% of 6s
7/35%
50%
% of 5s
5/25%
25%
% of 4s
4/20%
5%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 3s
Change
-0.35
(-5.87%)
Current Findings
80% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
5%
% of 2s
4/20%
15%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
Fall 2010
4.6
Spring 2011
4.5
4.4
4.3
Mean
Figure 54: PSLO Mean Score Down 5.87%
Spring 2011 Assessment 115
PSLO 2: Analyzes temperature and flow results to determine proper operating parameters of specific
process computerized and electronic equipment.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Analyzes
temperature and
flow results to
determine proper
operating
parameters of
specific process
computerized and
electronic
equipment.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
3.75
(62.5%)
5.2
(86.67%)
Median
4
5.5
Mode
2
6
1.650
0.951
2
20
% of 6s
5/25%
50%
% of 5s
1/5%
25%
% of 4s
6/35%
20%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 3s
Change
-1.45
(-24.17%)
Current Findings
60% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 95%
5%
% of 2s
8/40%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 55: PSLO Mean Score Down 24.17%
Spring 2011 Assessment 116
PSLO 3: Analyzes level and gas measurements to determine proper operating parameters of specific
process and electrical equipment.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Analyzes level and
gas
measurements to
determine proper
operating
parameters of
specific process
and electrical
equipment.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
4.9
(81.67%)
4.55
(75.8%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
6
1.483
1.468
20
20
% of 6s
12/60%
35%
% of 5s
2/10%
30%
% of 4s
4/20%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 3s
Change
+0.35
(+5.87%)
Current Findings
90% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 65%
25%
% of 2s
2/10%
10%
0
0
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
Fall 2010
4.6
Spring 2011
4.5
4.4
4.3
Mean
Figure 56: PSLO Mean Score Up 5.87%
Spring 2011 Assessment 117
PSLO 4: Demonstrates standard safety procedures as required in industry.
PSLO
PSLO 4:
Demonstrates
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry.
Success Criterion
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
4.1
(68.33%)
5.25
(87.5%)
Median
4
6
Mode
3
6
1.291
1.164
20
20
% of 6s
5/25%
65%
% of 5s
1/5%
10%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
6/30%
10%
% of 3s
7/35%
15%
% of 2s
1/5%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
Change
-1.15
(-19.17%)
Current Findings
60% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 57: PSLO Mean Score Down 19.17%
Spring 2011 Assessment 118
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: Instrumentation
PSLO
Date:
Accomplished
(3)
1. Identify control Able to identify
panel indicators,
all control panel
calibration tools,
indicators,
electrical parts
calibration tools,
and how they
electrical parts
work.
and how they
work.
2. Analyze
Able to correctly
temperature and analyze
flow results to
temperature and
determine proper flow results to
operating
determine proper
parameters of
operating
specific process
parameters of
computerized and specific process
electronic
computerized
equipment
equipment
Competent
(2)
Able to identify
most control
panel indicators,
calibration tools,
electrical parts
and how they
work.
Usually able to
correctly analyze
temperature and
flow results to
determine proper
operating
parameters of
specific process
computerized
equipment
3. Analyze level
and gas
measurements
to determine
proper operating
parameters of
specific process
and electrical
equipment
Able to level and
gas
measurements
to determine
proper operating
parameters of
specific process
and electrical
equipment
4. Demonstrate
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry
Understands and
implements all
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry
Usually able to
analyze level and
gas
measurements
to determine
proper operating
parameters of
specific process
and electrical
equipment
Usually
understands and
implements most
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry
Developing
(1)
Able to identify
some control
panel indicators,
calibration tools,
electrical parts
and how they
work.
Sometimes able
to correctly
analyze
temperature and
flow results to
determine proper
operating
parameters of
specific process
computerized
equipment
Sometimes able
to analyze level
and gas
measurements
to determine
proper operating
parameters of
specific process
and electrical
equipment
Sometimes
understands and
implements some
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry
Not Observed
(0)
Not enough
information to
assess
Not enough
information to
assess
Not enough
information to
assess
Not enough
information to
assess
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 119
Medical Office Administration Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
PSLO 1 scores increased by 11.63%, but scores for artifacts in all of the remaining PSLOs decreased.
Further intervention in PSLOs 2, 3, and 4 is indicated.
6
5
4
Series 1
Series 2
3
Series 3
Series 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 58: 3 of 4 PSLO Mean Scores Down From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 120
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Medical Office Administration
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Students will illustrate better
medical ethics an office procedure
skills.
Results and Analysis
Students need more skill in office
procedures and appropriate office
ethics.
Changes Implemented
Modified the curriculum to include
a practice set and textbook that
emphasize medical office
procedures and ethics.
Related PSLO
Evidence of Improvement
2: Demonstrates appropriate
etiquette, ethics, office procedures,
and professionalism in the
healthcare setting.
Copy of textbook cover and 1st page
of table of contents.
2
Key Assessment Findings
Students will improve their skill
in using medical practice
management program software.
Copy of practice set cover and 1st
page of table of contents.
Results and Analysis
Students need more skill in using
medical practice management
program software.
Related PSLO
Key Assessment Findings
Students will increase their
understanding of the current
changes in medical insurance and
medical coding.
Related PSLO
4: Applies current trends in
medical insurance, HIPAA
guidelines, and coding systems.
Modified the curriculum to include
more practice in using medical
practice management program
software.
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of textbook and 1st page of
table of contents.
3: Uses specialized medical
computer applications.
3
Changes Implemented
Results and Analysis
Students need more practice in
using current medical coding
textbooks and understanding
current changes in medical
insurance.
Changes Implemented
Modified the curriculum by
implementing updated medical
coding and medical insurance
textbooks.
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of current coding textbooks
(ICD-9-CM and CPT).
Copy of medical insurance textbook
& 1st page of table of contents.
Spring 2011 Assessment 121
Medical Office Administration Blue Sheet Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Medical Office Administration
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Students will acquire an
understanding of electronic health
records and improve their skills in
using medical software.
Results and Analysis
Students need more capability in
understanding and using electronic health
records in a healthcare setting.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Modified the curriculum to include a
course in electronic health records.
Evidence: Copy of textbook cover &
assignments
PSLO 3: Use specialized medical
computer applications.
Students will improve their resume
and interviewing skills.
Students need more skill in creating
resumes and in interviewing for a position
in the healthcare industry.
PSLO 2: Demonstrate appropriate
etiquette, ethics, office
procedures, and professionalism in
the healthcare setting.
Students will increase their
understanding of the Health
Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act (HIPAA).
PSLO 4: Apply current trends in
medical insurance, HIPAA
guidelines, and coding systems.
Added a resume generator software
program to the internship course.
Evidence: Copy of website
Students need more in-depth coverage on
the rules and regulations of HIPAA.
Added a HIPAA textbook to the capstone
course.
Evidence: Copy of textbook cover and
assignments
Spring 2011 Assessment 122
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Medical Office Administration
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students will acquire an
understanding of electronic health
records and improve their skills in
using medical software.
Changes Implemented: Modified the
curriculum to include a course in
electronic health records.
Resolved? X
This problem was resolved.
Another portion of the PSLO is
now being addressed.
Related PSLO: 3
Evidence Used: Copy of textbook cover
& assignments
New PSLO Mean: 4.15
Change in PSLO Mean: -07
PSLO Mean: 4.85
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students will improve
their resume and interviewing skills.
Changes Implemented: Added a
resume generator software program to
the internship course.
Resolved? X
Another portion of the PSLO is
now being addressed.
Related PSLO: 2
Evidence Used: Copy of website
New PSLO Mean: 4.25
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.95
PSLO Mean: 5.2
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Students need more indepth coverage on the rules and
regulations of HIPAA.
Changes Implemented: Added a HIPAA
textbook to the capstone course.
Resolved? X
Another portion of the PSLO is
now being addressed.
Related PSLO: 4
PSLO Mean: 4.25
Evidence Used: Copy of textbook cover
and assignments.
New PSLO Mean: 3.95
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.3
Spring 2011 Assessment 123
PSLO 1: Uses medical terminology, jargon, and abbreviations correctly.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Uses medical
terminology,
jargon, and
abbreviations
correctly.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
4.7
(78.3%)
4.0
(66.67%)
Median
5
4
Mode
6
2
1.471
1.686
40
20
20/50%
30%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
Change
+0.7
(+11.63)
Current Findings
85% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 65%
10%
14/35%
25%
6/15%
35%
0
0
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
4.8
4.6
4.4
Fall 2010
4.2
Spring 2011
4
3.8
3.6
Mean
Figure 59: PSLO Mean Score Up 11.63%
Spring 2011 Assessment 124
PSLO 2: Demonstrates appropriate etiquette, ethics, office procedures, and professionalism in the healthcare
setting.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Demonstrates
appropriate
etiquette, ethics,
office procedures,
and
professionalism in
the healthcare
setting.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
4.25
(70.83%)
5.2
(86.67%)
Median
4
6
Mode
6
6
1.81
1.361
40
20
19/47.5%
65%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
Change
-0.95
(-18.84%)
Current Findings
62.5% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
15%
% of 4s
6/15%
5%
% of 3s
2/5%
5%
% of 2s
13/32.5%
10%
0
0
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 60: PSLO Mean Score Down 18.84%
Spring 2011 Assessment 125
PSLO 3: Uses specialized medical computer applications.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Uses specialized
medical computer
applications.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Mean
4.15
(69.17%)
4.85
(80.8%)
Median
4
5
Mode
6
6
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
Change
-0.7
(-11.63%)
Current Findings
79.13% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 90%
1.72
40
20
16/40%
40%
% of 5s
25%
% of 4s
11/27.5%
25%
13/32.5%
10%
% of 3s
% of 2s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Fall 2010
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
5
4.8
4.6
Fall 2010
4.4
Spring 2011
4.2
4
3.8
Mean
Figure 61: PSLO Mean Score Down 11.63%
Spring 2011 Assessment 126
PSLO 4: Applies current trends in medical insurance, HIPAA guidelines, and coding systems.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Applies current
trends in medical
insurance, HIPAA
guidelines, and
coding systems.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Mean
3.95
(65.83%)
4.25
(70.8%)
Median
4
4.5
Mode
2
6
1.78
1.585
40
20
15/37.5%
30%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
Change
-0.3
(-4.97%)
Current Findings
60% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 70%
20%
% of 4s
9/22.5%
% of 3s
20%
5%
% of 2s
16/40%
25%
0
0
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
4.3
4.25
4.2
4.15
4.1
Fall 2010
4.05
Spring 2011
4
3.95
3.9
3.85
3.8
Mean
Figure 62: PSLO Mean Score Down 4.97%
Spring 2011 Assessment 127
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: Medical Office Administration
PSLO
1. Use medical
terminology,
jargon, and
abbreviations
correctly.
2. Demonstrate
appropriate
etiquette, ethics,
and
professionalism
in the healthcare
setting.
3. Use knowledge
of specialized
medical
computer
applications.
4. Apply current
trends in medical
insurance, HIPAA
guidelines, and
coding systems.
Accomplished
(3)
Always define
terms correctly
with all prefixes,
word roots, and
suffixes used as
part of the
definition.
Always
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical
lapse in a
healthcare
environment.
Always uses
medical office
software features
successfully.
Exceptional
insight and
analysis of
insurance trends
and mastery of
the technique for
locating a medical
code.
Date:
Competent
(2)
Usually define
terms correctly
with most
prefixes, word
roots, and
suffixes used as
part of the
definition.
Usually
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical
lapse in a
healthcare
environment.
Sometimes uses
medical office
software features
successfully.
Developing
(1)
Occasionally
define terms
correctly with
some prefixes,
word roots, and
suffixes used as
part of the
definition.
Occasionally
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical
lapse in a
healthcare
environment.
Occasionally uses
medical office
software features
successfully.
Not Observed
(0)
Not enough
information to
assess.
Moderate insight
and analysis of
insurance trends
and usually able
to locate a code.
Occasional insight
of insurance
trends and
understands
current coding
systems.
Not enough
information to
assess.
Not enough
information to
assess.
Not enough
information to
assess.
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 128
Network Specialist
While modest increases in scores for PSLO 2 and 4 indicate strength, scoring for PSLO 1 is down by
nearly 11% and scoring for PSLO 3 is down by over 20%.
Continued and perhaps more focused intervention in PSLOs 1 and 3 is strongly indicated.
7
6
5
PSLO 1
4
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 63: Two PSLOs Up, Two PSLOs Down From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 129
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: PC Hardware
Degree/Certificate Award: Network Specialist
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Results and Analysis
Students not getting enough
Change to a book that contains
concepts for troubleshooting and both concepts and hands-on
maintain computer systems.
troubleshooting and computer
maintenance
Changes Implemented
Changed ITSC 1325, PC Hardware
book to a book that provides
both concepts and hands-on
exercises to troubleshoot and
maintain computer systems.
Related PSLO
PSLO #1: Maintain computer
and network systems
PSLO #2: Troubleshoot
computer and network systems
Evidence of Improvement
Evidence: Copy of cover of book.
Key Assessment Findings
Students not getting enough
practice on describing new
trends in computer and network
systems.
2
Related PSLO
PSLO #3 – Describes current
trends in computer and network
systems
3
Key Assessment Findings
Students need to improve
internet research skills and
technical writing skills.
Related PSLO
PSLO #3: Describe current
trends in computer and network
systems.
Results and Analysis
Change to an updated book that
better describes new trends in
computer and network systems.
Changes Implemented
Changed ITSC 1325, PC Hardware
book to one that provides more
current trends in computer and
network systems.
Evidence of Improvement
Evidence: Copy of cover of book.
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
Increase the number of research Changed ITSC 1325, PC Hardware
projects that stress current
class to include more research
trends and require students to
and technical writing.
write essays to improve technical
writing skills.
Evidence of Improvement
Sample of research and writing
project.
Spring 2011 Assessment 130
Network Specialist Blue Sheet, Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Network Specialist
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Students need to improve internet
research skills and technical writing
skills..
Results and Analysis
Modified class to include more internet
research and technical writing.
PSLO #3: Describe current trends
in computer and network systems.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Targeted internet research topics for
which students will write a technical
essay. For targeted topics, students
researched the topic on the internet and
write a short essay on what they found.
Evidence: Assignments for research and
writing.
Students were not getting enough
hands-on troubleshooting and
maintain computer systems.
PSLO #1: Maintain computer and
network systems
PSLO #2: Troubleshoot computer
and network systems
Change to a workbook that contains
hands-on troubleshooting and computer
maintenance.
Not enough classroom observation
of students working on projects.
Developed rubrics to demonstrate ethics,
professionalism, participation, and
teamwork.
PSLO #4: Demonstrate ethics and
professionalism within the
computer field
Changed ITSC 1325, PC Hardware book
to a workbook that provides hands-on
exercises to troubleshoot and maintain
computer systems.
Evidence: Copy of cover of workbook
and an example of assignment.
More rubrics for classroom observations
displaying ethics, professionalism,
participation, and teamwork.
Evidence: Weekly chart of observation
rubrics.
Spring 2011 Assessment 131
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Introduction to PC Hardware
Degree/Certificate Award: Network Specialist
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students need to
improve internet research skills and
technical stills
Changes Implemented: Modified class
to include more internet research and
technical writing.
Resolved? no
Continuing? yes
Related PSLO: #3: Describe current
trends in computer and network
systems
Evidence Used: Assignments for
research and writing.
Changed ITSC 1325, PC Hardware
class to include more research
and technical writing.
4.75
Change in PSLO Mean: -1.25
PSLO Mean: 4.75
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students were not
getting enough hands-on
troubleshooting and maintaining
computer systems.
Changes Implemented: Changed to a
workbook that contains hands-on
troubleshooting and compute
maintenance.
Resolved? yes
Continuing? yes
Related PSLO:
Related PSLO #2 Troubleshoot
computer and network systems
Evidence Used: Copy of cover of new
book.
New PSLO Mean: 5.679
Change in PSLO Mean: +.079
PSLO Mean: 5.6
CFall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Not enough classroom
observation of students working on
projects.
Changes Implemented: Developed
rubrics to demonstrate ethics,
professionalism, participation, and
teamwork.
Resolved? yes
Continuing? no
Evidence Used: Week chart of
observation rubrics
New PSLO Mean: 5.2
Change in PSLO Mean: + .45
Related PSLO: #4 Demonstrate
ethics and professionalism within
the compute field.
PSLO Mean: 4.75
Spring 2011 Assessment 132
PSLO 1: Maintains computer and network systems.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Maintains
computer and
network systems.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
4.94
(82.33%)
5.6
(93.3%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
1.88
0.821
36
20
25/69.4%
80%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
6/16.6%
20%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
Fall 2010
Change
-0.66
(-10.97%)
Current Findings
89.44% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
% of 5s
% of 3s
% of 2s
2/5.56%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
3
# Disputed
0
0
5.8
5.6
5.4
Fall 2010
5.2
Spring 2011
5
4.8
4.6
Mean
Figure 64: PSLO Mean Score Down 10.97%
Spring 2011 Assessment 133
PSLO 2: Troubleshoots computer and network systems.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Troubleshoots
computer and
network systems.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
5.679
(94.6%)
5.6
(93.3%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
1.21
0.821
36
20
32/88.89%
80%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
3/8.33%
20%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
Fall 2010
Change
+0.79
(+1.3%)
Current Findings
97.22% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
% of 5s
% of 3s
% of 2s
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
1/2.78%
# Disputed
0
0
5.7
5.68
5.66
5.64
Fall 2010
5.62
Spring 2011
5.6
5.58
5.56
Mean
Figure 65: PSLO Mean Score Up 1.3%
Spring 2011 Assessment 134
PSLO 3: Describes current trends in computer and network systems.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Describes current
trends in
computer and
network systems.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
4.75
(79.1%)
6
(100%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
1.81
0
32
20
19/59.4%
100%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
Fall 2010
Change
-1.25
(-20.9%)
Current Findings
84.38% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
% of 5s
8/25%
% of 3s
% of 2s
3/9.38%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
2/6.24%
# Disputed
0
7
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Spring 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 66: PSLO Mean Score Down 20.9%
Spring 2011 Assessment 135
PSLO 4: Demonstrates ethics and professionalism within the computer field.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Demonstrates
ethics and
professionalism
within the
computer field.
Results of Current
Assessment
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
5.2
(86.67%)
4.75
(79.1%)
Median
6
5.5
Mode
6
6
1.39
1.445
35
20
24/68.57%
50%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
Change
+0.45
(+7.57%)
Current Findings
94.28% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
5%
9/24.71%
30%
% of 3s
% of 2s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Fall 2010
15%
% of 1s
1/2.86%
% of 0s
1/2.86%
# Disputed
0
0
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
Fall 2010
4.9
Spring 2011
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
Mean
Figure 67: PSLO Mean Score Up 7.57%
Spring 2011 Assessment 136
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Name of Program: Networking Specialist
PSLO
3. Describe
current trends in
computer and
network systems
Exceptional
insight to current
trends in
computer and
network systems.
Apply most new
technologies
Competent
(2)
Usually apply
proper
maintenance
processes for
computer and
network systems
Sometimes
applies processes
for
troubleshooting
computer and
network systems
successfully.
Repair some
computer and
network systems.
Moderate insight
to current trends
in computer and
networking
systems. Apply
some new
technologies.
4. Demonstrate
ethics and
professionalism
within the
computer field
Always
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical
lapse within the
computer field.
Usually
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical
lapse within the
computer field.
1. Maintain
computer and
network systems
2. Troubleshoot
computer and
network systems
Accomplished
(3)
Always apply
proper
maintenance
processes for
computer and
network systems
Always applies
processes for
troubleshooting
computer and
network systems
successfully.
Repair most
computer and
network systems.
Date:
Developing
(1)
Occasionally
apply proper
maintenance
processes for
computer and
network systems
Occasionally
applies processes
for
troubleshooting
computer and
network systems
successfully.
Repair few
computer and
network systems
Occasionally
insight to current
trends in
computer and
networking
systems. Apply
few new
technologies.
Occasionally
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical
lapse within the
computer field
Not Observed
(0)
Not enough
information to
assess
Not enough
information to
assess
Not enough
information to
assess
Not enough
information to
assess.
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 137
Office Administration Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
All PSLO mean scores are down from the last assessment round. Interventions in PSLOs 2, 3, and 4 are
strongly indicated.
6
5
4
PSLO 1
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
PSLO 5
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 68: All PSLO Mean Scores Down From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 138
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Office Administration
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Students will improve their
team building/teamwork skills.
Results and Analysis
Students will be given more
practice in team work exercises.
Related PSLO
2: Illustrates the ability to
work in a team environment.
Key Assessment Findings
Students will practice and
exhibit their office procedure
skills.
2
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of a sampling of teamwork
assignments.
Results and Analysis
Students need more practice in
producing and demonstrating
office procedure skills.
Related PSLO
3: Uses office procedure skills.
3
Key Assessment Findings
Students will interpret and
manipulate raw data into
appropriate business documents
using a variety of software
programs.
Related PSLO
4: Uses word processing,
spreadsheet, database, and
presentation software.
Changes Implemented
Added more team building
exercises to the curriculum.
Changes Implemented
Modified the curriculum to
include more exercises in office
procedure work.
Evidence of Improvement
Rubrics
Results and Analysis
Students need more familiarity
with using a variety of business
software programs.
Changes Implemented
Began using an integrated
software application course to
the curriculum.
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of textbook and pages of
table of contents.
Spring 2011 Assessment 139
Office Administration Blue Sheet Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Office Administration
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Students will improve their skills in
integrating information among
software applications.
Results and Analysis
Students need more experience in
software integration.
Students need more familiarity with
proofreading and editing business
correspondence.
Modified the curriculum to include a
proofreading and editing course.
Evidence: Copy of textbook cover &
assignments
PSLO 5: Proofread, edit, and apply
basic rules of grammar to general
business correspondence.
Students will demonstrate an
increase in the understanding of
office etiquette, ethical issues, and
professionalism.
Modified the curriculum to include a
course on software integration.
Evidence: Copy of textbook cover &
assignments
PSLO 4: Use word processing,
spreadsheet, database, and
presentation software.
Students will increase their
proofreading and grammar
capabilities.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Not enough observation of specific
assessments (e.g., etiquette, ethics,
professionalism) in the internship course.
Modified student internship evaluations
to reflect a more targeted assessment of
etiquette, ethics, and professionalism.
Evidence: Internship evaluations
PSLO 1: Demonstrate appropriate
etiquette, ethics, and
professionalism in the business
office setting.
Spring 2011 Assessment 140
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Office Administration
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students will improve
their skills in integrating information
among software applications.
Changes Implemented: Modified the
curriculum to include a course on
software integration.
Continuing? X
The integration course was just
implemented in the fall 2011
semester.
Related PSLO: 4
Evidence Used: Copy of textbook cover
& assignments
New PSLO Mean: 3.575
Change in PSLO Mean: -1.125
PSLO Mean: 4.7
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students will increase
their proofreading and grammar
capabilities.
Changes Implemented: Modified the
curriculum to include a proofreading
and editing course.
Resolved? X
Felt that raters did not
comprehend artifacts presented.
Determined new way to present
artifacts.
Related PSLO: 5
Evidence Used: Copy of textbook cover
and assignments
New PSLO Mean: 3.75
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.4
PSLO Mean: 4.15
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Students will
demonstrate an increase in the
understanding of office etiquette,
ethical issues, and professionalism.
Changes Implemented: Modified
student internship evaluations to
reflect a more targeted assessment of
etiquette, ethics, and professionalism.
Resolved? X
Another portion of the PSLO is
now being addressed.
Evidence Used: Internship evaluations
New PSLO Mean: 4.47
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.43
Related PSLO: 1
PSLO Mean: 4.9
Spring 2011 Assessment 141
PSLO 1: Demonstrates appropriate etiquette, ethics, and professionalism in the business office setting.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
Fall 2010
Change
PSLO 1:
Demonstrates
appropriate
etiquette, ethics,
and
professionalism in
the business
office setting.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
4.47
(74.5%)
4.9
(81.67%)
-0.43
(-10.17%)
4.5
5.5
6
6
1.289
1.373
38
20
% of 6s
11/28.95%
50%
% of 5s
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
8/21.05%
15%
% of 4s
10/26.32%
20%
% of 3s
6/15.79%
5%
% of 2s
3/7.89%
10%
0
0
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
Current Findings
76.41% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
Fall 2010
4.6
Spring 2011
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
Mean
Figure 69: PSLO Mean Score Down 10.17%
Spring 2011 Assessment 142
PSLO 2: Illustrates the ability to work in a team environment.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Illustrates the
ability to work in
a team
environment.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
4.275
(71.25%)
5.1
(85%)
-0.825
(-13.75%)
Median
4
6
Mode
6
6
75% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 90%
1.55
1.373
40
20
% of 6s
13/32.5%
65%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
5/12.5%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
12/30%
% of 3s
2/5%
% of 2s
8/20%
10%
0
0
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
25%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
5.2
5
4.8
4.6
Fall 2010
4.4
Spring 2011
4.2
4
3.8
Mean
Figure 70: PSLO Mean Score Down 13.75%
Spring 2011 Assessment 143
PSLO 3: Uses office procedure skills.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Uses office
procedure skills.
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
4.57
(71.67%)
5.3
(88.3%)
-0.73
(-16.63%)
5.5
6
6
6
1.696
1.342
30
20
% of 6s
18/60%
75%
% of 5s
3/7.5%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
Current Findings
77.5% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 90%
15%
% of 3s
2/5%
% of 2s
7/17.5%
10%
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
5.4
5.2
5
Fall 2010
4.8
Spring 2011
4.6
4.4
4.2
Mean
Figure 71: PSLO Mean Score Down 16.63%
Spring 2011 Assessment 144
PSLO 4: Uses word processing, spreadsheet, database, and presentation software.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Uses word
processing,
spreadsheet,
database, and
presentation
software.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
3.575
(59.58%)
4.7
(78.3%)
-1.125
(-18.72%)
Median
4
4
Mode
2
6
55% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
1.615
1.302
40
20
% of 6s
9/22.5%
45%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
1/2.5%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
12/30%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 3s
40%
10%
% of 2s
18/45%
5%
0
0
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
5
4.5
4
3.5
3
Fall 2010
2.5
Spring 2011
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Mean
Figure 72: PSLO Mean Score Down 18.72%
Spring 2011 Assessment 145
PSLO 5: Proofreads, edits, and applies basic rules of grammar to general business correspondence.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 5:
Proofreads, edits,
and applies basic
rules of grammar
to general
business
correspondence.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
Fall 2010
Change
3.75
(62.5%)
4.15
(69.2%)
-0.4
(-6.7%)
4
4
2, 4
4, 6
1.58
1.599
40
20
10/25%
35%
15/37.5%
35%
Current Findings
62.5% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 70%
% of 5s
% of 3s
5%
% of 2s
15/37.5%
25%
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
0
4.2
4.1
4
3.9
Fall 2010
3.8
Spring 2011
3.7
3.6
3.5
Mean
Figure 73: PSLO Mean Scores Down 6.7%
Spring 2011 Assessment 146
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: Office Administration
PSLO
Accomplished
(3)
1. Demonstrate
Students can
appropriate
always
etiquette, ethics,
differentiate
and
between good
professionalism in ethical practices
the business office and an ethical
setting.
lapse in a business
environment.
2. Illustrate the
Participates in the
ability to work in a majority of team
team environment. building exercises
and oral/visual
presentations
3. Use office
Routinely uses
procedure skills.
correct office
procedures to
accomplish tasks.
4. Use word
Independently
processing,
locates and uses
spreadsheet,
all necessary
database, and
features of word
presentation
processing,
software.
spreadsheet,
database, and
presentation
software.
5. Proofread, edit, Expresses and
and apply basic
organizes ideas,
rules of grammar
grammar, and
to general business spelling with a
correspondence.
high degree of
effectiveness.
Date:
Competent
(2)
Students can
sometimes
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical lapse
in a business
environment.
Participates in
some of the team
building exercises
and oral/visual
presentations
Generally uses
correct office
procedures to
accomplish tasks.
Can locate and use
some features of
word processing,
spreadsheet,
database, and
presentation
software.
Developing
(1)
Students can
occasionally
differentiate
between good
ethical practices
and an ethical lapse
in a business
environment.
Participates in a
few of the team
building exercises
and oral/visual
presentations
Seldom uses
correct office
procedures to
accomplish tasks.
Needs assistance to
use features of
word processing,
spreadsheet,
database, and
presentation
software.
Not Observed
(0)
Not enough
information to
assess.
Expresses and
organizes ideas,
grammar, and
spelling with some
degree of
effectiveness.
Expresses and
organizes ideas,
grammar, and
spelling with
limited
effectiveness.
Not enough
information to
assess.
Not enough
information to
assess.
Not enough
information to
assess.
Not enough
information to
assess.
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 147
Paralegal Assessment Findings Table, Spring 2011
Mean scores for PSLOs 2, 3, 4, and 5 are higher than those for the fall 2010 assessment. Only PSLO 1
mean scores are lower.
Intervention is indicated for PLSO 1.
6
5
4
PSLO 1
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
PSLO 5
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 74: Three of Four PSLO Mean Scores Up From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 148
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: PARALEGAL
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Paralegal students will be
required to take a new course
taught only by legal
professionals, to expand their
knowledge of legal terms.
Results and Analysis
Results of Spring ’11 student
artifacts meeting or exceeding
expectations were 30% lower
than preceding semester
indicating that students needed
more exposure to legal
terminology from legal
professionals.
Related PSLO
#1: Identifies legal terms,
structure of a law firm and the
paralegal’s role.
2
Key Assessment Findings
Evidence of Improvement
Copy of new Business Law course
outline required by our program
approval body, the American Bar
Association.
Results and Analysis
Related PSLO
3
Key Assessment Findings
Related PSLO
Changes Implemented
Introduced a new, required
Business Law course to the
paralegal degree, to be taught
only by qualified legal
professionals, to increase the
student’s exposure to legal
terms.
Changes Implemented
Evidence of Improvement
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
Evidence of Improvement
Spring 2011 Assessment 149
Paralegal Blue Sheet Changes Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Paralegal
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Results and Analysis
Students will acquire an
understanding of the Westlaw
online research program to
broaden their online legal research
computer ability.
PSLO 5: Illustrate the ability to use
computer, accounting, and
organizational skills.
Determined that students needed to
learn the Westlaw program for most law
offices.
Students will improve their
understanding of legal ethics.
Students need greater exposure to ethical
reading.
PSLO 3: Demonstrate appropriate
etiquette, ethics, and
professionalism in the legal
environment.
Students will improve their
document-drafting ability.
PSLO 2: Apply correct drafting
procedures to transactional and
court documents.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Purchased membership in the Westlaw
online legal research program for our
students.
Evidence: Copy of American Bar
Association-required (our Paralegal
Program approval body) course outline
for LGLA 1401 Legal Research and Writing
course.
Changed to a Real Property course (LGLA
2309) textbook with ethics material in
every chapter.
Evidence: Copy of textbook cover
Students need additional documentdrafting ability early in their paralegal
education.
Added a form-drafting exercise to their
introductory paralegal course, LGLA 1307.
Evidence: Copy of assignment.
Spring 2011 Assessment 150
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: PARALEGAL
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students needed to,
also, learn the Westlaw legal
research program for most law
offices.
Changes Implemented:
Resolved? YES
Continuing?
Related PSLO: #5 – Illustrate the
ability to use computer, accounting
and organizational skills.
Copy of American Bar Associationrequired course outline for Legal
Research and Writing course
indicating hands-on Westlaw
instruction.
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students needed
greater exposure to legal ethics
reading..
Changes Implemented:
Resolved? YES
School purchased the Westlaw online
research program.
Switched to a new Real Property
textbook with ethics material in every
chapter.
Related PSLO: #3 – Demonstrate
appropriate etiquette, ethics, and
professionalism in the legal
environment.
Copy of textbook cover.
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Students needed more
document-drafting ability early in
their paralegal education.
Changes Implemented:
Resolved? YES
Added a form-drafting exercise to their
introductory paralegal course, LGLA
1307.
Related PSLO: #2 – Apply correct
drafting procedures to transactional
and court documents.
Evidence Used:
Copy of the new assignment.
Spring 2011 Assessment 151
PSLO 1: Identifies legal terms, structure of a law firm, and the paralegal’s role.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Identifies legal
terms, structure
of a law firm, and
the paralegal’s
role.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
-1.05
(-17.5%)
20% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 50%
Mean
2.7
(45%)
3.75
(62.5%)
Median
3
3.5
Mode
1,3
3
Standard
Deviation
1.72
1.410
# of artifacts
20
20
% of 6s
2/10%
20%
% of 5s
2/10%
5%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
25%
% of 3s
8/40%
% of 2s
20%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
30%
8/40%
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 1
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
PSLO 1
1.5
1
0.5
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 75: PSLO 1 Mean Score Down by 17.5%
Spring 2011 Assessment 152
PSLO 2: Applies correct drafting procedures to transactional and court documents.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Applies correct
drafting
procedures to
transactional and
court documents.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Results of Current
Assessment
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Change
Current Findings
+0.5
(+8.37%)
65% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 50%
Mean
4.3
(71.67%)
3.8
(63.3%)
Median
5
3.5
Mode
6
3
Standard
Deviation
1.98
1.472
# of artifacts
20
20
% of 6s
8/40%
25%
% of 5s
5/25%
% of 4s
25%
% of 3s
3/15%
% of 2s
30%
20%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Fall 2010
4/20%
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 2
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
4
PSLO 2
3.9
3.8
3.7
3.6
3.5
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 76: PSLO 2 Mean Score Up by 8.37%
Spring 2011 Assessment 153
PSLO 3: Demonstrates appropriate etiquette, ethics, and professionalism in the legal environment.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 3:
Demonstrates
appropriate
etiquette, ethics,
and
professionalism in
the legal
environment.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
+0.65
(+10.83%)
Mean
4.95
(82.5%)
4.3
(71.67%)
Median
5.5
4
Mode
6
4
Standard
Deviation
1.36
0.979
# of artifacts
20
20
% of 6s
10/50%
15%
% of 5s
4/20%
20%
% of 4s
3/15%
50%
% of 3s
1/5%
15%
% of 2s
2/10%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Current Findings
85% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 3
5
4.8
4.6
4.4
PSLO 3
4.2
4
3.8
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 77: PSLO 3 Mean Score Up by 10.83%
Spring 2011 Assessment 154
PSLO 4: Conducts proper client and witness interviews.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Conducts proper
client and witness
interviews.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Results of Current
Assessment
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Change
+1.0
(+16.63%)
Mean
5.45
(90.83%)
4.45
(74.2%)
Median
66
4
Mode
6
4
Standard
Deviation
0.76
1.103
# of artifacts
20
20
% of 6s
11/55%
20%
% of 5s
8/40%
25%
% of 4s
Current Findings
95% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
30%
% of 3s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
Fall 2010
1/5%
20%
0
0
% of 2s
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
PSLO 4
6
5
4
3
PSLO 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 78: PSLO 4 Mean Score Up by 16.63%
Spring 2011 Assessment 155
PSLO 5: Illustrates the ability to use computer, accounting, and organizational skills.
PSLO
Results of Current
Assessment
Success Criterion
PSLO 5:
Illustrates the
ability to use
computer,
accounting, and
organizational
skills.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
Fall 2010
Change
+0.94
(+15.63%)
Mean
5.54
(92.3%)
4.6
(76.67%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
6
Standard
Deviation
0.91
1.570
# of artifacts
22
20
% of 6s
16/72.72%
50%
% of 5s
4/18.18%
% of 4s
Current Findings
90.91% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 75%
25%
% of 3s
2/9.09%
% of 2s
10%
15%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
PSLO 5
6
5
4
3
PSLO 5
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 79: PSLO 5 Mean Score Up by 15.63%
Spring 2011 Assessment 156
Program: Paralegal
PSLO
1. Identify legal
terms, structure of
a law firm, a
corporation,
government entity
and the paralegal’s
role in each of
these areas.
2. Apply correct
drafting
procedures to
transactional and
court documents
3. Demonstrate
appropriate
etiquette, ethics,
and
professionalism in
the legal
environment.
4. Conduct proper
client and witness
interviews.
5. Illustrate the
ability to use
computer,
accounting, and
organizational
skills.
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Date:
Accomplished
Competent
Developing
(3)
(2)
(1)
Independently uses
Frequently uses
Seldom uses correct
correct legal
correct legal
legal terminology
terminology and
terminology and
and rarely
consistently
often understands
understands the
understands the
the structure of a law structure of a law
structure of a legal
firm, a corporation,
firm, a corporation,
firm, corporation,
government entity
government entity
government entity
and the role of the
and the role of the
and the role of a
paralegal in each of
paralegal in each of
paralegal in each of
these.
these.
these.
Consistently applies
Usually applies
Seldom applies
correct procedures
correct procedures
correct procedures
when drafting both
when drafting both
when drafting both
transactional and
transactional and
transactional and
court documents.
court documents.
court documents.
Always differentiates Usually differentiates Occasionally
between appropriate between appropriate differentiates
ethical practices and
ethical practices and
between appropriate
a lapse in ethics in a
a lapse in ethics in a
ethical practices and
given legal scenario.
given legal scenario.
a lapse in ethics in a
Polite and respectful Usually polite and
given legal scenario.
to others and uses
respectful to others
Sporadically polite
appropriate language and as a rule uses
and respectful to
and manners in legal appropriate language others and rarely
situations.
and manners in legal
uses appropriate
situations.
language and
manners in legal
situations.
Always applies
Usually applies
Occasionally applies
correct interviewing
correct interviewing
correct interviewing
principles and
principles and
principles and
methods when
methods when
methods when
interviewing clients
interviewing clients
interviewing clients
and witnesses.
and witnesses.
and witnesses.
Always applies
Often applies basic
Occasionally
correct commands
commands to
completes basic
and file/disk
software. Can
commands on
techniques using
sometimes apply
software. Rarely
computer software
appropriate file/disk
applies appropriate
Consistently
management
file and disk
completes
techniques. Usually
management
assignments and
completes
techniques.
meets deadlines.
assignments on time
Seldom completes
and meets deadlines. assignments or
meets deadlines.
Not Observed Rating
(0)
Not enough
information to
be assessed.
Not enough
information to
be assessed.
Not enough
information to
be assessed.
Not enough
information to
be assessed.
Not enough
information to
be assessed.
Spring 2011 Assessment 157
Process Technology Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
Scores for artifacts for PSLO 2 are down slightly from previous numbers, despite this PSLO being
targeted for improvement.
Despite slight improvements in other PSLOs, interventions are recommended to increase mean scores.
7
6
5
PSLO 1
4
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Spring 2011
Figure 80: 3 of 4 PSLO Mean Scores Up From Previous Assessment
Spring 2011 Assessment 158
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Process Technology
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Findings
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
1 Students
need to improve ability to
Students needed more repetitive
New Distillation Tower training model
identify specific equipment and
training on identifying equipment.
for hands on operation was purchased.
operating parameters.
Better classroom utilization of internet
available video training program.
Related PSLO
PSLO 1- Use technology to access
Evidence of Improvement
operator-specific documentation and
Purchase Order for Distillation Trainer.
training.
Purchase Order for an ELMO Projection
PSLO 2- Identify specific equipment and
system for installation in second
operating parameters to meet industry
classroom.
standards.
PSLO 3- Identify and adjust controls to
meet product requirements for safe
and effective operation.
Key Assessment Findings
Students needed better technology
to access to operator specific
documentation and training.
2
Results and Analysis
Students needed more instructor lead
training on online specific
documentation and training.
Changes Implemented
New Distillation Tower training model
for hands on operation was purchased.
Better classroom utilization of internet
available video training program.
Evidence of Improvement
Purchase Order for Distillation Trainer.
Purchase Order for an ELMO Projection
system for installation in second
classroom.
Results and Analysis
Students needed more specific training
to identify process equipment and
control schemes.
Changes Implemented
Purchase Order for Distillation Trainer.
Purchase Order for an ELMO Projection
system for installation in second
classroom.
New classroom tests developed for
online videos.
Evidence of Improvement
Purchase Order for Distillation Trainer.
Purchase Order for an ELMO Projection
system for installation in second
classroom.
Test with student grades.
Related PSLO
PSLO 1- Use technology to access
operator-specific documentation and
training.
PSLO 2- Identify specific equipment and
operating parameters to meet industry
standards.
PSLO 3- Identify and adjust controls to
meet product requirements for safe
and effective operation.
Key Assessment Findings
Students need to improve ability to
identify specific equipment and
operating parameters.
3
Related PSLO
PSLO 1- Use technology to access
operator-specific documentation and
training.
PSLO 2- Identify specific equipment and
operating parameters to meet industry
standards.
PSLO 3- Identify and adjust controls to
meet product requirements for safe
and effective operation.
Spring 2011 Assessment 159
Process Technology Blue Sheet Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Process Technology
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Students need to improve their
knowledge of process operating
requirements and methods.
PSLO #1: Use technology to access
operator-specific documentation
and training.
Students need to improve analysis
skills of common process industry
operating parameters.
Results and Analysis
Students needed more specific training of
process industry operating procedures.
A new online training video displaying
common process industry operating
processes was created.
Evidence: Purchase Order for online
training video.
Students needed more hands on training
in common operating parameters, (pH,
conductivity, turbidity).
PSLO #2: Identify specific
equipment and operating
parameters to meet industry
standards.
Students need to improve
capability to identify process
control schemes to meet industry
requirements.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
A new process analyzer trainer with
graphic analytical results displays was
purchased.
Evidence: Purchase Order of analyzer
training equipment.
Students needed more specific training to
identify process industry control schemes.
An overhead projector with an ELMO was
installed in the classroom.
Evidence: Test with student grades.
PSLO #3: Identify and adjust
controls to meet product
requirements for safe and effective
operation.
Spring 2011 Assessment 160
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Process Technology
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS Degree
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students need to
improve their knowledge of process
operating requirements and
methods.
Changes Implemented: A new online
training video displaying common
process industry operating processes
was created.
Resolved? Yes
Continuing? Yes
Evidence Used: Purchase Order for
online training video.
New PSLO Mean: 5.05
Change in PSLO Mean: +.03
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students need to
improve analysis skills of common
process industry operating
parameters.
Changes Implemented: A new process
analyzer trainer with graphic analytical
results displays was purchased.
Resolved? No
Continuing? Yes
Related PSLO: PSLO 2- Identify
Evidence Used: Purchase Order of
analyzer training equipment.
Related PSLO: PSLO 1- Use
technology to access operatorspecific documentation and
training.
PSLO Mean: 4.75
specific equipment and
operating parameters to meet
industry standards.
New PSLO Mean: 5.0
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.2
PSLO Mean: 5.2
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Students need to
improve capability to identify
process control schemes to meet
industry requirements.
Changes Implemented: An overhead
projector with an ELMO was installed
in the classroom.
Resolved? Yes
Continuing? Yes
Related PSLO: PSLO #3: Identify and
adjust controls to meet product
requirements for safe and effective
operation.
PSLO Mean: 5.3
Evidence Used: Test with student
grades.
New PSLO Mean: 5.75
Change in PSLO Mean: +0.45
Spring 2011 Assessment 161
PSLO 1: Uses technology to access operator—specific documentation and training.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Uses technology
to access
operator—
specific
documentation
and training.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
5.05
(83.33%)
4.75
(79.2%)
+0.3
(+4.13%)
Median
5
5
Mode
6
6
85% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
1.28
1.372
20
20
% of 6s
9/45%
45%
% of 5s
8/40%
10%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
35%
% of 3s
1/5%
5%
% of 2s
2/10%
10%
0
0
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
5.1
5.05
5
4.95
4.9
Fall 2010
4.85
Spring 2011
4.8
4.75
4.7
4.65
4.6
Mean
Figure 81: PSLO Mean Score Up 4.13%
Spring 2011 Assessment 162
PSLO 2: Identify specific equipment and operating parameters to meet industry standards.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 2:
Identify specific
equipment and
operating
parameters to
meet industry
standards.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
5
(83.33%)
5.2
(86.67%)
-0.2
(-3.34%)
5.5
6
6
6
80% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 85%
1.21
1.399
20
20
% of 6s
10/50%
55%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
4/20%
5%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
2/10%
10%
% of 3s
4/20%
5%
Median
Mode
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 2s
10%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.25
5.2
5.15
5.1
Fall 2010
5.05
Spring 2011
5
4.95
4.9
Mean
Figure 82: PSLO Mean Score Down 3.34%
Spring 2011 Assessment 163
PSLO 3: Identify and adjust controls to meet requirements for safe and effective operation.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
PSLO 3:
Identify and
adjust controls to
meet
requirements for
safe and effective
operation.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
5.75
(95.83%)
5.3
(93.3%)
+0.45
(+2.53%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 95%
0.443
1.081
20
20
% of 6s
15/75%
60%
% of 5s
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
5/25%
20%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
15%
% of 3s
% of 2s
5%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.8
5.7
5.6
5.5
Fall 2010
5.4
Spring 2011
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
Mean
Figure 83: PSLO Mean Score Up 2.53%
Spring 2011 Assessment 164
PSLO 4: Implements standard safety procedures as required in industry.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Implements
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
5.55
(92.5%)
5
(83.3%)
+0.55
(+9.2%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
6
100% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 90%
0.605
1.170
20
20
% of 6s
12/60%
50%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
7/35%
25%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
1/5%
20%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 3s
5%
% of 2s
5%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.6
5.5
5.4
5.3
5.2
Fall 2010
5.1
Spring 2011
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
Mean
Figure 84: PSLO Mean Score Up 9.2%
Spring 2011 Assessment 165
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Program: Process Technology
PSLO
1. Use
technology to
access operator
specific
documentation
and training
Accomplished
(3)
Ability to access
operator specific
documentation and
training through
the use of
technology
Date:
Competent
(2)
Ability to access
most operator
specific
documentation
and training
through the use of
technology
Usually able to
identify specific
equipment and
operating
parameters to
meet industry
standards.
Developing
(1)
Ability to access
some operator
specific
documentation and
training through
the use of
technology
Sometimes able to
identify specific
equipment and
operating
parameters to meet
industry standards.
Not Observed
(0)
Not enough
information to
assess.
2. Identify
specific
equipment and
operating
parameters to
meet industry
standards.
Ability to identify
specific equipment
and operating
parameters to
meet industry
standards.
Not enough
information to
assess.
3. Identify and
adjust controls
to meet
requirements
for safe and
effective
operation
Able to identify and
adjust controls to
meet requirements
for safe and
effective operation
Usually able to
identify and adjust
controls to meet
requirements for
safe and effective
operation
Sometimes able to
identify and adjust
controls to meet
requirements for
safe and effective
operation
Not enough
information to
assess.
4. Implement
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry
Understands and
implements all
standard safety
procedures as
required in industry
Usually
understands and
implements most
standard safety
procedures as
required in
industry
Sometimes
understands and
implements some
standard safety
procedures as
required in industry
Not enough
information to
assess.
Rating
Spring 2011 Assessment 166
Software Developer Findings, Spring 2011 Assessment
Ratings for artifacts of PSLO 1 showed a significant increase. Ratings for PSLO 4 showed a significant
decrease.
Continued intervention for PSLOs 3 and 4 is indicated.
6
5
4
PSLO 1
PSLO 2
3
PSLO 3
PSLO 4
2
1
0
Fall 2010
Sprint 2011
Figure 85: Two PSLO Mean Scores Up, Two PSLO Mean Scores Down
Spring 2011 Assessment 167
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Software Developer
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
1
Key Assessment Findings
Students need additional
hands-on programming
assignments.
Results and Analysis
Students need additional handson programming assignments
requiring them to develop and
troubleshoot software.
Related PSLO
PSLO #2 – Apply a software
development process to develop
and troubleshoot a software
product.
Key Assessment Findings
Students need a better
understanding of what types of
original graphics are appropriate
for inclusion in a software
product.
2
Related PSLO
PSLO #3 – Create computer
graphics for inclusion into a
software program.
3
Key Assessment Findings
Students need a more
comprehensive understanding of
ethics and professionalism.
Related PSLO
PSLO #4 – Demonstrate ethics
and professional within the
computer field.
Changes Implemented
Implemented additional handson assignments that require
students to develop and
troubleshoot software.
Evidence of Improvement
Hands-On Assignments
Results and Analysis
Students need assignments
requiring them to evaluate their
original graphics to ensure they
are appropriate for inclusion in a
software product.
Changes Implemented
Implemented assignments that
require the student to evaluate
their original graphics to ensure
they are appropriate for
inclusion in a software product.
Evidence of Improvement
Assignments
Results and Analysis
Changes Implemented
Our program was redesigned last Implemented group projects that
semester to include a capstone
require peer evaluations.
course and professional
development course which will
not be offered for the first time
until Spring 2012. Due to this our
Evidence of Improvement
assessment findings were based Peer Evaluations
on student evaluations by the
instructor. From this it was
determined that requiring
students to evaluate one another
working together in a team
environment would be a more
accurate assessment.
Spring 2011 Assessment 168
Software Developer Blue Sheet Fall 2010
Lamar State College-Port Arthur
2009-2011 Educational Programs Assessment Summary
Educational Program: Software Developer
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Assessment Summary
Key Assessment Program
SLO’s
Students need to understand basic
computer concepts and apply them
to programs.
Results and Analysis
Determined that students needed
additional assignments and chapter pretests to evaluate incoming knowledge of
the material.
PSLO #1: Apply program design
processes to create computer
programs.
Students needed additional
assignments requiring original
graphics.
PSLO #4: Demonstrate ethics and
professionalism within the
computer field
Implemented a pre-test/post-test
process to evaluate student knowledge
of computer program design upon
entering their advanced programming
class.
Evidence: sample pre-test/post-test
results for chapter 8.
Included additional assignments requiring
students to use their own creativity and
originality in applying their knowledge of
graphic software.
PSLO #3: Troubleshoot computer
and network systems
Using an Internship course did not
provide accurate measurement of
ethics and professionalism.
Implementation & Evidence
of Improvement
Implemented additional assignments
asking students to produce original
graphics.
Evidence: Assignment/Rubric
It was determined that the program
needed to be redesigned to allow a valid
measurement of professionalism and
ethics.
The program was redesigned to include a
capstone course and a course in
professional development.
Evidence: Old program and new program
Spring 2011 Assessment 169
Lamar State College – Port Arthur
Spring 2011 Educational Programs Improvement Summary
Educational Program: Software Developer
Degree/Certificate Award: AAS
Improvement Tracking Summary
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 1: Students need to
understand basic computer
concepts and apply them to
programs.
Changes Implemented: Implemented a
pre-test/post-test process to evaluate
student knowledge of computer
program design upon entering their
advanced programming class.
Resolved? Yes
Related PSLO: #1 – Apply program
design processes to create
computer programs.
Evidence Used: Sample pre-test/posttest results for chapter 8.
New PSLO Mean: 4.85
Change in PSLO Mean: +0.9
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 2: Students needed
additional assignments requiring
original graphics.
Changes Implemented: Implemented
additional assignments asking students
to produce original graphics.
Continuing? Yes
Related PSLO: #3 – Create computer
graphics for inclusion into a
software product.
Evidence Used: Assignment/Rubric
New intervention needed?
Implemented assignments that
require the student to evaluate
their original graphics to ensure
they are appropriate for inclusion
in a software product.
PSLO Mean: 4.85
New PSLO Mean: 5.0
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.3
PSLO Mean: 5.0
Fall 2010
Discussion of Problem Resolution
Change
Problem 3: Using an Internship
course did not provide accurate
measurement of ethics and
professionalism.
Changes Implemented: The program
was redesigned to include a capstone
course and a course in professional
development.
Continuing? Yes
Related PSLO: #4 – Demonstrate
ethics and professionalism within
the computer field.
Evidence Used: Old program and new
program
New intervention needed?
Implemented group projects that
require peer evaluations.
PSLO Mean: 5.0
New PSLO Mean: 5.0
Change in PSLO Mean: -0.65
Spring 2011 Assessment 170
PSLO 1: Applies program design processes to create computer programs.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 1:
Applies program
design processes
to create
computer
programs.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
4.85
(80.83%)
3.95
(65.8%)
+0.9
(+15.03%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
5
1.599
1.572
20
20
% of 6s
12/60%
10%
50%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
% of 5s
1/5%
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
2/10%
% of 3s
2/10%
5%
% of 2s
3/15%
35%
0
0
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
Current Findings
75% of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 60%
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
6
5
4
Fall 2010
3
Sprint 2011
2
1
0
Mean
Figure 86: PSLO Mean Score Up 15.03%
Spring 2011 Assessment 171
PSLO 2: Applies a software-development process to develop and troubleshoot a software product.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
Fall 2010
Change
Current Findings
PSLO 2:
Applies a
softwaredevelopment
process to
develop and
troubleshoot a
software product.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
4.95
(82.5%)
4.55
(75.8%)
+0.4
(+6.7%)
Median
6
5
Mode
6
5
75 % of students met
or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 80%
1.605
1.234
20
20
% of 6s
13/65%
10%
% of 5s
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
1/5%
70%
% of 4s
1/5%
% of 3s
2/10%
5%
% of 2s
3/15%
15%
0
0
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 1s
% of 0s
# Disputed
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
Fall 2010
4.6
Spring 2011
4.5
4.4
4.3
Mean
Figure 87: PSLO Mean Score up 4.97%
Spring 2011 Assessment 172
PSLO 3: Creates computer graphics for inclusion into a software product.
Results of Current
Assessment
PSLO
Success Criterion
Fall 2010
Change
PSLO 3:
Creates computer
graphics for
inclusion into a
software product.
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
5.0
(83.33%)
5.3
(88.3%)
-0.3
(-4.97%)
Median
6
5.5
Mode
6
6
1.30
0.801
40
20
% of 6s
22/55%
50%
% of 5s
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
4/10%
30%
% of 4s
9/22.5%
20%
% of 3s
2/5%
% of 2s
3/7.5%
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
Current Findings
87.5% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
% of 1s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
% of 0s
# Disputed
0
0
5.35
5.3
5.25
5.2
5.15
Fall 2010
5.1
Spring 2011
5.05
5
4.95
4.9
4.85
Mean
Figure 88: PSLO Mean Score Down 4.97%
Spring 2011 Assessment 173
PSLO 4: Demonstrates ethics and professionalism within the computer field.
PSLO
Success Criterion
PSLO 4:
Demonstrates
ethics and
professionalism
within the
computer field.
Results of Current
Assessment
Fall 2010
Change
5.0
(83.33%)
5.65
(94.2%)
-0.65
(-10.87%)
Median
6
6
Mode
6
6
1.462
0.489
30
20
19/63.33%
65%
50% will score a
total mean score of
4 or higher from two
raters, each of
whom rates using
the following scale:
3 – Accomplished
2 – Competent
1 – Developing
0 – Not Observed
Mean
Rater scores are
added, for a
maximum sum of 6.
% of 4s
Standard
Deviation
# of artifacts
% of 6s
% of 5s
Current Findings
86.67% of students
met or exceeded
expectations.
Fall 2010: 100%
35%
7/23.33%
% of 3s
% of 2s
4/13.33%
% of 1s
% of 0s
Artifact list with
ratings follows.
# Disputed
0
0
5.8
5.6
5.4
Fall 2010
5.2
Spring 2011
5
4.8
4.6
Mean
Figure 89: PSLO Mean Score Down 10.87%
Spring 2011 Assessment 174
LSC-PA Technical Program Student Learning Outcomes Rubric
Name of Program: Software Developer
PSLO
Date:
Accomplished
(3)
Always develop
complete
processes of
planning,
implementing,
testing, and
documenting
computer
programs
Competent
(2)
Usually develop
processes of
planning,
implementing,
testing, and
documenting
computer
programs.
Developing
(1)
Occasionally
develop
processes of
planning,
implementing,
testing, and
documenting
computer
programs
Not Observed
(0)
Not enough
information to
assess
2. Apply a
software
development
process to
develop and
troubleshoot a
software product
Always design,
write, and
implement
computer
programs
successfully
Creates graphics
to be included in
a software
product.
Occasionally
design, write,
and implement
computer
programs
successfully.
Often programs
have errors that
prevent running
Occasionally
creates graphics
to be included in
a software
product.
Not enough
information to
assess
3. Create
computer
graphics for
inclusion into a
software product
Usually design,
write, and
implement
computer
programs
successfully,
however may
have some
errors.
Usually creates
graphics to be
included in a
software
product.
4. Demonstrate
ethics and
professionalism
within the
computer field
Always
demonstrate
good, ethical
practices.
1. Apply program
design processes
to create
computer
programs.
Usually
demonstrate
good, ethical
practices.
Occasionally
demonstrate
good, ethical
practices.
Not enough
information to
assess
Not enough
information to
assess.
Rating