THE FIRST ANNUAL ECC STUDENT LEARNING
OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT SYMPOSIUM
featuring the SLO assessment experiences and
the course-specific findings of the Fall 2010
Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Team
(SLOAT)
facilitated by Dr. Susan Gaulden, Coordinator of Planning for
Institutional, Program, and Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment & Mathematics Professor
February 24, 2011
ASSESSMENT IS THE ONGOING PROCESS OF:
1.
Establishing clear, measurable expected SLOs, or student learning
outcomes, evidence of the knowledge, skills, attitudes, etc.
students have once they successfully complete a course
2.
Ensuring that students have sufficient opportunities to achieve
those outcomes
3.
Systematically gathering, analyzing, and interpreting evidence to
determine how well students learning matches our expectations –
SLOAT efforts
4.
Using the results to understand and improve student learning –
the First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium
>> http://sloat.mathography.org <<
1
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
SLOAT MEMBERS WERE REQUESTED TO
Systematically gather, analyze, and interpret evidence to
determine how well students learning matched our expectations

The 11 courses listed below were assessed for SLOs in Fall 2010
o AFE 083 – Troy Hamilton
o ENG 101 – Rich Bogart
o AFM 083 – Violeta De Pierola & Arturo Vera
o MTH 092 – Eman Aboelnaga & Barbara Satterwhite
o ART 100 – Barbara Pogue
o MTH 100 – Carlos Castillo & Soraida Romero
o BIO 121 – Jill Stein
o MTH 127 – Susan Gaulden
o BUS 101 – Nate Himelstein
o SOC 101 – Akil Khalfani
o ENG 096 – Eileen De Freece
Fall 2010 SLOAT members’ assessment experiences
and course-specific findings include…
2
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
AFE 083 – TROY HAMILTON, THE CENTER FOR ACADEMIC FOUNDATIONS

60% of the cohort before the midterm exam (both exams were designed by the
humanities division) was able to develop an appropriate introductory paragraph. The
first three questions on the checklist rubric were formulated to assess the
introductory paragraph.

63% of the cohort before the midterm exam was able to develop an appropriate
body paragraph utilizing MLA in-text citation. Questions 4 thru 7 on the checklist
rubric were formulated to assess the body paragraph.

61% of the cohort before the midterm exam was able to develop an appropriate
conclusion paragraph. Questions 8 thru 10 on the checklist rubric were designed to
assess the conclusion paragraph.
Midterm Assessment
100
80
60
60
63
61
Responses
40
20
0
Intro
Body
Conclusion
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
3
AFE 083 – TROY HAMILTON, THE CENTER FOR ACADEMIC FOUNDATIONS

By the final exam MPO’s 1.1 thru 1.9 were achieved, which certainly is a good thing but viewed
differently it is certainly by the narrowest of margin, especially factoring that AFE 083 is a
remedial course.

71% of students before the final exam were able to develop an appropriate introductory
paragraph, a small but considerable improvement from the midterm assessment.

75% of students before the final exam were able to develop an appropriate body paragraph
correctly utilizing MLA in-text citation.

71% of the students before final exam were able to develop an appropriate conclusion
paragraph.
Final Assessment
100
80
71
75
71
60
Responses
40
20
0
Intro
Body
Conclusion
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
4
AFM 083 – VIOLETA DE PIEROLA AND ARTURO VERA, THE CENTER FOR
ACADEMIC FOUNDATIONS
Academic Foundations Math (AFM 083) is a beginning
mathematics course designed to take students from concrete
arithmetic ideas to the more abstract algebraic forms of these
ideas. Some of the instructional components of AFM 083 are
two mandatory sessions (one hour each) of tutoring per week
and the required completion of ALEKS (computer software)
assignments. The AFM 083 course outline lists the following
goals:
1.
Demonstrate knowledge of the fundamental concepts and
theories from arithmetic, algebra and geometry.
2.
Utilize various problem-solving and critical-thinking techniques to
set up and solve real-world applications.
3.
Communicate accurate mathematical terminology and notation in
written and/or oral form in order to explain strategies to solve
problems as well as to interpret found solutions.
5
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
AFM 083 – VIOLETA DE PIEROLA AND ARTURO VERA, THE CENTER FOR
ACADEMIC FOUNDATIONS
The task assigned to the AFM 083 SLOAT members was to
determine if the students enrolled in the course are
learning the goals set forth in the course outline. SLOAT
participation was also meant to help instructors
understand how the students enrolled in the Center for
Academic Foundations learn and what different teaching
techniques should be used.
This assessment was conducted by Violeta De Pierola and
Arturo Vera and data was collected on 32 students.
6
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
AFM 083 – VIOLETA DE PIEROLA AND ARTURO VERA, THE CENTER FOR
ACADEMIC FOUNDATIONS
Section CW1
Section 03
100
100
80
80
60
60
Pre-test scores
Pre-Test scores
40
Post-Test
20
40
Post-Test
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0
8
1
Section 05
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Section 014
100
100
80
80
60
Pre-Test Scores
40
Post -Test
60
Pre-test Scores
40
20
20
0
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Post-Test
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
AFM 083 – VIOLETA DE PIEROLA AND ARTURO VERA, THE CENTER FOR
ACADEMIC FOUNDATIONS
After reviewing the data collected from the assessment, we
realize that the instructors need to spend more time reviewing
fractions (adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing), relating
word problems into real life, and simplifying basic algebraic
operations. Some suggestions to help students learning more
effectively are as follows:
•
Instructors can have SIs work with students struggling
with these math concepts.
•
The students should work on ALEKS at least one day
per week during tutoring time.
•
The students should work together while working on
these math topics.
8
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
ART 100 – BARBARA POGUE, HUMANITIES DIVISION

Focus on the Principles of Design booklet—relates to course
goal #4: “Prepare and present information using the computer
by doing the Principles of Design booklet.”

MPOs related to CG #4: “Use magazines to gather examples of
each principle; use computers to type up explanations of why
each illustration fits the criteria for the principles of design;
assemble images, titles and explanations, along with a cover
sheet, into a booklet.”

I prepared a handout of instructions and another to evaluate
the booklets. I devoted one class period to work on the
booklets and then left the students on their own for two
months to finish the project.
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
9
ART 100 – BARBARA POGUE, HUMANITIES DIVISION

I discovered that all the students did the assignment, but that the
grades ran the gamut from A to D.

I discovered that my assessment sheet was inadequate, as it didn’t
take into consideration the almost intangible differences between
fair, good and excellent design choices for the booklets.

I decided that this semester, I needed to spend more than just one
class period on doing the booklets. The students need more handson, direct instruction and comments from me, so this semester I
will spend three class periods on working on the booklet.
10
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
BIO 121 – JILL STEIN, BIOLOGY & CHEMISTRY DIVISION

Data was collected on the level of student mastery of 15 MPOs

Partial achievement was attained for all MPOs

Student Survey Results: Self-reported barriers of biology success
33% of students indicated that they have test anxiety
41% of students do not study enough because of overcommitted
schedules
18% felt that their biology background was insufficient
11
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
BUS 101 – NATE HIMELSTEIN, BUSINESS DIVISION
PURPOSE OF STUDY – DETERMINE QUESTIONS ON THE
DEPARTMENTAL FINAL EXAM THAT MOST STUDENTS GOT
WRONG.
METHODOLGY – ITEM ANALYSIS FROM SCANTRON
SCORING SHEETS WAS CONDUCTED FROM 6 DAYTIME
SECTIONS. 113 SCORES WERE ANALYZED.
INSTRUMENTATION – QUESTIONS ON THE DEPARTMENTAL
EXAM WERE BASED ON BLOOM’S TAXONOMY AND AACSB
PARAMETERS.
12
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
BUS 101 – NATE HIMELSTEIN, BUSINESS DIVISION
Data Collection – All students were given a 100 question
exam and answers were marked on ScanTron scoring
sheets.
Section 001 Mean 78.3
 Section 002 Mean 78.7
 Section 003 Mean 80.1
 Section 006 Mean 69.6
 Section 007 Mean 77.0
 Section 009 Mean 77.6

# OF QUESTIONS
.10/100 WRONG
%
2
1
1
16
13
20
2
1
1
16
13
20
13
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
BUS 101 – NATE HIMELSTEIN, BUSINESS DIVISION
Conclusions

With the exception of one section, the mean was
between 3 points, i.e., ranged from 77.0 to 80.1.

The specific questions in which more than 10 students
rendered the wrong answer were noted.

All instructors teaching this course will be given these
results and we will suggest that these areas be given
more time to review with the students during the review
for the final exam.
14
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
ENG 096 – EILEEN DE FREECE, HUMANITIES DIVISION

My experience conducting the assessment of ENG 096 during Fall
2010 was interesting and enlightening.

Only 63% of ENG 096 students demonstrated an acceptable level of
mechanics and language use coming into the course.

A December 2010 survey – in which only a few sections participated
and so is not statistically relevant – indicated that only 50% of ENG
096 students demonstrated an acceptable level of mechanics and
language use by semester’s end.

Remediation support in the form of an Editing/Grammar course
might help improve these percentages.

In Spring 2011, the end-of-the-semester data will be collected sooner
(earlier in April) and more faculty participation will be encouraged.
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
15
ENG 101 – RICHARD BOGART, HUMANITIES DIVISION
Two measures (assessment instruments) were used
during Fall 2011.
Course Goal #1: Write a composition.
A rubric was distributed twice during the semester to
the ENG 101 faculty, requesting them to evaluate the
compositions of the first five papers, alphabetically,
based upon the outcomes listed in the course outline.
16
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
ENG 101 – RICHARD BOGART, HUMANITIES DIVISION
Writing Rubric

The paper includes an appropriate subject based upon the given
writing assignment.

A specific topic was developed within the assigned subject for the
paper.

An introduction provides background regarding the paper’s thesis.

A relevant thesis statement is incorporated into the introduction.

Body paragraphs were well-structured.

Body paragraphs were related to each other in a logical structure
that supported the thesis.

The paper contained an appropriate concluding paragraph.

The paper demonstrates an acceptable level of mechanics and
language usage.
17
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
ENG 101 – RICHARD BOGART, HUMANITIES DIVISION
The results were not surprising.

Response regarding the requirements for appropriate
subject, topic, introduction, thesis, body paragraphs, and
conclusion were strong, with responses of “Yes” or
“Somewhat” consistently in excess of 90%.

But, the solid “Yes” scores for a clear introduction, good
thesis, and good structure were close to only 50%.

The clearest area of need was in mechanics, however. In
response to the statement ‘The paper demonstrates an
acceptable level of mechanics and language usage.’ only
41% of the responses were “Yes,” with 49% “Somewhat.”
18
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
ENG 101 – RICHARD BOGART, HUMANITIES DIVISION
When the rubric was repeated later in the semester, there was
considerable improvement in these areas.

The percentage of solid “Yes” answers for a clear thesis statement
rose to 80% from 56% in the first evaluation.

The percentage of solid “Yes” responses for body paragraphs
being related in a logical structure rose from 53% to 69%.

There was, however, only slight improvement in the area of
mechanics and language usage with a solid “Yes” response of 41%
in the first study improving to only 45% in the second.
It may be appropriate to consider prescriptive means of improving the
mechanics and language usage of our students, recognizing that these are
affected by a large variety of factors in a diverse student body.
19
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
ENG 101 – RICHARD BOGART, HUMANITIES DIVISION
The second measure that was used to assess ENG 101 was a
student survey following the mid-term exam. The survey
studied self-perceived student readiness for the exam.
The questions for the survey were:

Are you pleased with your grade on the exam?

Did you prepare adequately for the exam?

If not, why not? (Circle all that apply)




Did not have time to study
Did not know the exam was scheduled
Have an overcommitted schedule
Did not study enough during the semester

Did the exam relate to what you have been learning in
class?

Did your instructor accurately tell you what to expect on the
exam prior to the exam date?
20
ENG 101 – RICHARD BOGART, HUMANITIES DIVISION

The strongest survey responses were for the categories
regarding classroom preparation. A strong 83% of the
respondents provided a solid “Yes” regarding teacher
preparation for the exam. An additional 13% affirmed
this with a “Somewhat.”

Only 59% responded with a solid “Yes,” regarding
preparing adequately for the exam. An additional, 36%
responded that they had “Somewhat” done so.

Of the sub categories, the clear majority of the
responses fell into the categories of not studying
enough or having an over-committed schedule.
21
MTH 092 – EMAN ABOELNAGA AND BARBARA SATTERWHITE,
MATHEMATICS & PHYSICS DIVISION
3 Forms of Assessment :

Attitudinal Survey

Attendance/Online Homework

Blueprinted Final Exam
Population/Sample Size:

10 MTH 092 sections

Mainly full-time and day-time sections; included 2 from
West Caldwell and one evening
22
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
MTH 092 – EMAN ABOELNAGA AND BARBARA SATTERWHITE,
MATHEMATICS & PHYSICS DIVISION
SLO #1: Course Goal 1: Demonstrate knowledge of the
fundamental concepts and theories from algebra and geometry.
MPOs related to CG 1:
1.1 simplify and evaluate variable expressions;
1.2 translate verbal expressions into variable expressions;
1.3 perform basic operations on polynomial, rational, and
exponential expressions;
1.4 factor polynomial expressions;
1.5 solve linear, literal, and factorable quadratic equations;
1.6 graph a line in the Rectangular Coordinate System;
1.7 identify and find the slope and intercepts of a line; and
1.8 find the equation of a line based on given geometric properties
23
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
MTH 092 – EMAN ABOELNAGA AND BARBARA SATTERWHITE,
MATHEMATICS & PHYSICS DIVISION
RESULTS

Only 29% of students registered for a math class based on the
choice of professor.

46% of students dislike math and have little confidence in
their ability to do math.

Students with passing grades were found to have excellent
attendance.

There was little statistical significance between use of online
homework and final course grade.
24
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
MTH 092 – EMAN ABOELNAGA AND BARBARA SATTERWHITE,
MATHEMATICS & PHYSICS DIVISION
RESULTS – FINAL EXAM

Mastered
100
Not Mastered
89% of students mastered MPO
1.4:
Factor
polynomial
expressions.
90
80
70


63% of students mastered MPO
1.8: Find the equation of a line
based on given geometric
properties.
51% of students mastered MPO
1.6:
Graph a line in the
Rectangular Coordinate System.
60
50
40
30
20
10

58% of students mastered MPO
1.5: Solve linear, literal, and
quadratic equations that are
factorable.
0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
MPO
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
25
MTH 100 – CARLOS CASTILLO AND SORAIDA ROMERO, MATHEMATICS &
PHYSICS DIVISION
 Sample:
10 sections (Day/Evening, Main/WEC, Full-Time/Half Time)
 n= 314 students
PURPOSE:
• Test for acquisition of all 21 MPOs under
the 4 course goals for MTH 100
•Ascertain which factors/variables affect
student success rates
 Methodology & Results:
 4 Departmental exams blue-printed with all 21 course MPOs
 15/21 (71%) of the MPOs were met by the students
26
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
MTH 100 – CARLOS CASTILLO AND SORAIDA ROMERO, MATHEMATICS &
PHYSICS DIVISION
 Methodology & Results (continued):
 Student Questionnaire
Only 42% use tutoring facilities; 25% because “too busy”
 67% do all or more than half of homework
 40% use on-line homework packages; all use WebAssign
 60% say they suffer from some math test anxiety
 44% say they need more time to take math tests

 Data on student background/learning environment gathered
from IT or Banner. Higher success rates were found for those
students who:
Take MTH 100 with full-time versus adjunct faculty
 Take MTH 086 instead of AFM 083 to review arithmetic at the
College

The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
27
MTH 100 – CARLOS CASTILLO AND SORAIDA ROMERO, MAP DIVISION
 Methodology & Results (cont.):
Higher success rates were found for those students who:
Meet course pre-requisites, particularly those that earned B or
higher in MTH 092
 Leave no gaps between math courses
 Use on-line homework software, particularly those that score 60%
or higher in it
 Have either no absences at all or less than 3

Success Rate and Absences
Success Rate
120%
100%
97%
73%
80%
63%
60%
40%
25%
20%
0%
None
1 to 3
4 to 6
7 or more
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
28
MTH 127 – SUSAN GAULDEN, MATHEMATICS & PHYSICS DIVISION
Basic Calculus – primarily for Business majors
Student Survey Results: Self-reported barriers of math success
53% of students indicated that they have test anxiety &
36% of students do not study enough because of overcommitted schedules
61% of students reported that they need to work harder on their own
Missing classes definitely affects performance negatively
The Effect of Missing Classes on
Final Course Grade
66.7%
% of Classes Missed
27.8%
20.2%
13.1%
7.6%
1.2%
A
B+
4.8%
B
C+
D
F
W
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
29
MTH 127 – SUSAN GAULDEN, MATHEMATICS & PHYSICS DIVISION
Data was collected on the level of student mastery of 14 MPOs – 5 were
achieved, 7 were partially achieved, and 2 were not achieved
Students achieved the following 5 MPOs:
MPO 1.2 solve linear, quadratic, exponential, and logarithmic equations
MPO 1.6 calculate Riemann sums to estimate definite integrals
MPO 2.2 solve marginal cost, marginal profit, and marginal revenue problems by using
differentiation and integration as necessary
MPO 2.5 solve growth and decay problems (in finance, biology, chemistry, physics, etc.)
MPO 2.6 solve elasticity of demand problems
Students did not achieve the following 2 MPOs:
MPO 1.4 determine a derivative of a function by using limits and difference quotients
MPO 2.3 solve rate-of-change and related rates problems
30
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
SOC 101 – AKIL KHALFANI, SOCIAL SCIENCES DIVISION

The Social Sciences Division administered an assessment instrument for all
students taking Introduction to Sociology (SOC 101) for the 2010 Fall semester.
We looked at three questions that assessed 5 MPOs from 2 Course Goals.

Recognize and describe sociological concepts and terms:




articulate the three major sociological theories: Conflict, Structural Functional, and
Symbolic Interaction;
explain and apply the concept of the sociological imagination; and
discuss the methods used for sociological analysis
Recognize the names of important figures in the development of sociology and
recognize and explain theories and concepts they espoused or critiqued:



identify early European and American sociological thinkers, such as Marx and Du
Bois;
describe the contributions of the Atlanta Sociological Laboratory and the Chicago
School and identify the central scholars who brought recognition to these
institutions; and
identify contemporary sociologists and discuss their ideas
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
31
SOC 101 – AKIL KHALFANI, SOCIAL SCIENCES DIVISION

QUESTIONS
 Identify and explain the three major sociological theories and
name the major theorists behind each.
Conflict Theory
 Structural Functional Theory
 Symbolic Interaction Theory

State three major contributions to the field of sociology by W.E.B.
Du Bois.
 Who coined the term “Sociological Imagination;” and what does
it mean?

32
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
SOC 101 – AKIL KHALFANI, SOCIAL SCIENCES DIVISION
Structural Functional Theory
Conflict Theory
Q1A.1
Q1A.2
Q1B.1
Q1A.3
Q1B.2
Q1B.3
27%
24%
47%
50%
26%
26%
Symbolic Interaction Theory
Q1C.1
Q1C.2
Q1C.3
26%
54%
20%
33
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
SOC 101 – AKIL KHALFANI, SOCIAL SCIENCES DIVISION
Sociological Imagination
Q3.1
16%
Q3.3
65%
Q3.2
19%
34
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011
Thank you for attending
the First Annual
ECC SLO Assessment Symposium
35
The First Annual ECC SLO Assessment Symposium – February 2011