University Seminar Core Student Learning Outcome Assessment Report
Course Title:
LS101US – Ways of Knowing
Author of Report:
Teresa Greenwood and Bridget Kevane
Outcome Being Assessed:
Critical Thinking
Semester and Year
Fall 2016
Course Enrollment:
90
Number of Course Sections:
5
Number of Assignments Assessed:
12
Assessment Team:
Greenwood, Teresa; Townsend-Mehler, John; Waterton, Nigel
Method of Selecting Student Work:
Teresa Greenwood randomly chose 2 numbers, to represent two students on each section’s
alphabetical class roster. Instructor sent papers to director by email, leaving the last name and
first initial on each student piece, but removing all other identifying student information.
Method of Ensuring Inter-rater Reliability:
The assessment team gathered prior to assessing student work to review sample work and agree
upon levels of achievement. Teams then assessed their work individually. At least two assessors
evaluated each assignment. Bridget Kevane, Interim Director of Liberal Studies, reviewed the
papers along with Greenwood and Townsend-Mehler’s assessment. Nigel Waterton was the
second reader of the papers from Townsend-Mehler’s (JTM) classes.
Notes about Scoring:
In no case was there more than a category difference in the score of the two assessors and where
there was a difference the student was scored in the lower category. So if one assessor scored a
student benchmark and the second scored the same student at milestone (2), the student was
coded at benchmark. This allows for a more conservative measure of overall student
performance. A couple of papers (CP14B and LL14B) are outliers. CP14B represents an
alternative assignment given to the student (reflect on your favorite quotation from one of the
course texts). LL14B was submitted by the instructor because the student whose name had been
randomly selected withdrew from the course. Students in LS 101 are doing well and 75% of
papers met at least the criteria for “Milestone.”
Continued on the next page . . .
Assessments:
CP6A
CP14A
CP6B
CP14B
JTM14B
JTM6A
JTM14A
JTM6B
LL6A
LL14A
LL6B
LL14B
JT: 3, 2,2,2,3 TG: 3,2,2,2,2 Final: 3,2,2,2,2
Overall: 2
JT: 3,2,2,1,2 TG: 3,2,2,1,2 Final: 3,2,2,1,2
Overall: 2
JT: 2,2,2,3,2 TG: 3,2,2,2,2 Final: 3,2,2,2,2
Overall: 2
JT: 0,0,0,1,0 TG: 0,0,0,1,0 Final: 0,0,0,1,0
Overall: 0
NW: 4,4,4,3,3 TG: 3,4 ,4,3,3 Final: 3,4,4,3,3
Overall: 3
NW: 3,4,4,3,3 TG: 4,4,4,4,4 Final: 3,4,4,3,3
Overall: 3
NW: 2,2,2,2,2 TG: 2,3,2,2,2 Final: 2,2,2,2,2
Overall: 2
NW: 4,3,4,4,4 TG: 4,4,4,4,4 Final: 4,3,4,4,4
Overall: 4
JT: 1,1,1,1,1
TG: 1,1,1,1,1 Final: 1,1,1,1,1 Overall: 1
JT: 1,1,1,1,1
TG: 1,1,1,1,1 Final: 1,1,1,1,1 Overall: 1
JT: 1,1,1,1,1
TG: 1,1,1,1,1 Final: 1,1,1,1,1 Overall: 1
JT: 3,3,3,3,3
TG: 3,3,3,3,3 Final: 3,3,3,3,3 Overall: 3
[Outlier – Instructor selected paper because the student whose paper was
randomly selected withdrew from the class.]
Results:
Criteria
Explanation of Issues
Evidence
Influence of context and
assumptions
Student’s position
Implications and consequences
Overall
Capstone
4
8%
33%
Milestone
3
2
50%
8%
17%
33%
Benchmark
1
25%
25%
25%
8%
33%
25%
25%
8%
8%
25%
25%
25%
25%
33%
33%
25%
25%
25%
Recommendations for LS 101: All of the “Benchmark” papers are from courses taught by one
instructor whose final assignment is a reflection essay rather than a paper that calls for the
student to state a thesis and develop an argument. Bridget Kevane, Tami Eitle (former Director
of Liberal Studies) and the future director (Summer 2017) will discuss the direction the course
should take in the future and whether a common syllabus or common final assignment is
warranted.
Liberal Studies Student Learning Outcome Assessment Report
Course Title:
LS401 – Senior Project
Author of Report:
Bridget Kevane and Teresa Greenwood
Outcome Being Assessed:
Undergraduate Research
Semester and Year
Spring 2017
Course Enrollment:
17
Number of Course Sections:
2
Number of Assignments Assessed:
10
Assessment Team:
Kevane, Bridget; Greenwood, Teresa; Jennifer Storment (third reader)
Method of Selecting Student Work:
Teresa Greenwood randomly chose 10 numbers, to represent five students on each section’s
alphabetical class roster. Instructors sent papers to Ms. Greenwood by email after removing all
identifying student information.
Method of Ensuring Inter-rater Reliability:
Student work was sent to Professor Kevane who, along with Ms. Greenwood, assessed the
students’ work individually. At least two assessors evaluated each assignment. Jennifer Storment
was available to read papers that required a third reader.
Notes about Scoring:
In no case was there more than a category difference in the score of the two assessors and where
there was a difference the student was scored in the lower category. So if one assessor scored a
student Good (3) and the second scored the same student at Acceptable (2), the student was
coded at Acceptable. This allows for a more conservative measure of overall student
performance. Students in LS 401 are doing well and 100% of papers met at least the criteria for
“Acceptable” while 30% met the criteria for “Good” to “Exemplary”.
Continued on the next page . . .
Assessments (Rubric attached):
Paper #
One
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Seven
Eight
Nine
Ten
TG: 4,4, 3, 3, 4///BK: 4,4,4,4,4///Result: 4,4, 3, 3, 4 – Good/Exemplary
TG: 2,2,3,3,2/// BK: 2,2,3,3,1/// Result: 2,2,3,3,1 - Acceptable
TG: 2,2,3,3,2/// BK:2,2,3,3,1/// Result: 2,2,3,3,1 - Acceptable
TG: 3,2, 3, 3, 2/// BK: 3,3,2,3,2//Result: 3,2, 2, 3, 2 – Acceptable/Good
TG: 3, 2, 3, 2, 2/// BK: 4,3,3,3,2//Result: 3, 2, 3, 2, 2 – Acceptable/Good
TG: 4, 3, 4, 4, 3/// BK: 3,3,4,4,3//Result: 3,3,4,4,3 – Good/Exemplary
TG: 4, 4, 3, 4, 4/// BK: 4,4,4,4,3// Result: 4,4,3,4,3 – Good/Exemplary
TG: 3, 2, 2, 3, 2/// BK: 4,2,3,4,2//Result: 3, 2, 2, 3, 2 - Acceptable
TG: 3, 3, 3, 3, 3/// BK: 3,2,3,3,2// Result: 3,2,3,3,2 – Good
TG: 3, 3, 3, ,4, 4/// BK: 3,3,3,4,3// Result: 3,3,3,4,3 - Good
Results:
Criteria
Well-defined research Question/purpose
Context
Exemplary
2
2
Good
6
2
Acceptable
2
6
Use of References
1
7
2
Quality of References
Consideration of alternative perspectives
3
1
6
3
1
4
Unacceptable
0
0
0
0
2
Recommendations for LS 401 and the Liberal Studies Program:
Students who take LS 401 have demonstrated their ability to define a research question and to
formulate a clear thesis. The students’ use of references is good overall; however, future
capstones should devote more time to source selection and evaluation, and instructors should
encourage students to use more peer-reviewed materials in their final papers. In addition,
instructors should help students move beyond description and reporting to analysis and
explication. Focusing on these skills should help more students demonstrate that they have
considered alternate perspectives.