Annual Assessment Report to the College 2010-11
College: _________HHD_______________________
Department: ______FCS______________________
Program: _______________________________
Note: Please submit report to your department chair or program coordinator and to the Associate Dean of your College by September 30, 2011.
You may submit a separate report for each program which conducted assessment activities.
Liaison: ______ANGIE GIORDANO__________________________
1. Overview of Annual Assessment Project(s)
1a. Assessment Process Overview: Provide a brief overview of the intended plan to assess the program this year. Is assessment under the
oversight of one person or a committee?
First, an innovative project was developed to collect and store student data, using the university-wide online system of Moodle, to assess our
department’s PLOs. Our aim was to efficiently evaluate, through the use of technology, whether our FCS students were gaining knowledge of
our student learning outcomes after having completed our program. We selected PLO #1 to use this year, and obtained assessment data from
incoming and graduating students in our program through a Moodle online system to store this information that, later, would be analyzed by the
faculty.
Second, we intended to review, discuss and, perhaps, revise our department’s PLOs. Since the initial PLOs were created, our department
personnel have changed quite dramatically through new faculty hires and faculty retirements. In addition, because all of the areas in our
department are closely affected by the changing nature of community issues, both national and global, the department felt it was worthwhile to
reexamine our PLOs in consideration of any new social developments that may have occurred and that may have made it necessary for us to
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
modify our existing PLOs. Thus, the department felt it was an opportune time to reevaluate the current focus of our department that shapes our
fundamental student learning outcomes. Several faculty discussions took place during faculty meetings; however, further efforts to revise the
PLOs still are needed. Therefore, as our department efforts with the online Moodle system to assess PLO #1 seemed to take priority over the
work to revise our existing PLOs, it will be necessary to examine our department PLOs in the upcoming 2011-2012 academic year because our
department will be due to complete the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences (AAFCS) accreditation during the spring
semester of 2013.
This year, the assessment liaison led most of the assessment activities with feedback from the full faculty on final decisions. However, it will be
necessary to select an assessment committee for the 2011-2012 academic year in order to analyze the student data for PLO #1 that was
collected this past year in the Moodle online system.
1b. Implementation and Modifications: Did the actual assessment process deviate from what was intended? If so, please describe any
modification to your assessment process and why it occurred.
For the most part, we did accomplish what we set out to do. The first goal of our assessment plan, using the Moodle online system, was a
success. For the second goal of reexamining our departmentPSLOs, I would have preferred to have more full faculty time and attention allotted
to accomplish this task. I did request to have “Assessment” included on every faculty meeting agenda, but we were only able to address
assessment issues part of the time due to other pressing department issues that needed to be handled. This has been the case every year,
though, and I intend to have “Assessment” placed on each meeting, again, this upcoming year.
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
2. Student Learning Outcome Assessment Project: Answer questions according to the individual SLO assessed this year. If you assessed an
additional SLO, report in the next chart below.
2a. Which Student Learning Outcome was measured this year?
Over the past four years, we have assessed each of our four (now five) department PLOs. This year, we decided to select our PLO #1 to use for
the Moodle online assessment system. Our department’s PLO #1 states:
PLO #1: Demonstrate knowledge of human ecological theory and the integrative nature of the family and consumer sciences profession.
2b. What assessment instrument(s) were used to measure this SLO?
The main intent behind the Moodle online assessment project this year was, using technology, to create a way to systematically assess our PLO
#1 among our incoming students enrolled in their gateway course (FCS 170) and then assess the same PLO again among our graduating
students in their capstone internship courses (FCS 491/494). In order to assess PLO #1, a signature assignment that included two essay
questions was created by the assessment liaison. Then the full faculty provided feedback on these questions and how to best ask students about
their knowledge of our department’s PLO #1. The final essay questions used in Moodle on this signature assignment were:
1. In your own words, explain the meaning of the human ecological theory.
2. In your own words, explain how the separate areas in our department (Apparel Design and Merchandising, Consumer Affairs, Family
Studies, Interior Design, Nutrition/Dietetics and Food Science) meaningfully fit together in the same field of Family and Consumer
Sciences.
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
2c. Describe the participants sampled to assess this SLO: discuss sample/participant and population size for this SLO. For example, what type of
students, which courses, how decisions were made to include certain participants.
During the fall semester, the assessment liaison created an FCS Assessment course in Moodle to collect the data. FCS 170 was selected as the
gateway course and our FCS 491/494 internship experience class was used as the capstone course in which to assess early, and then
graduating, students in our program. During the fall semester, students in all sections across these two courses responded to the two essay
questions on the signature assignment above, via the Moodle FCS Assessment class, as a way to assess PLO #1 and store the data. Students in
the FCS 170 gateway course responded to the essay questions early in the semester, and the FCS 491/494 capstone course students responded
to the essays at the end of the fall semester in attempt to accurately capture the two incoming and exiting populations.
This process was repeated for the spring semester students. The total number of student responses for FCS 170 and FCS 491/494 in the fall and
spring semesters are as follows:
Fall FCS 170 (4 sections of the course):
n = 71
Fall FCS 491/494 (6 sections of the course):
n = 85
Spring FCS 170 (3 sections of the course):
n = 41
Spring FCS 491/494 (3 sections of the course):
n = 91
2d. Describe the assessment design methodology: For example, was this SLO assessed longitudinally (same students at different points) or was
a cross-sectional comparison used (comparing freshmen with seniors)? If so, describe the assessment points used.
Incoming students to the program who were enrolled in our FCS 170 gateway course, and then graduating students from the program who were
enrolled in our capstone internship courses, FCS 491/494, were included in the two semester samples over the academic year (i.e., fall and
spring semesters).
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
2e. Assessment Results & Analysis of this PLO: Provide a summary of how the data were analyzed and highlight important findings from the
data collected.
The assessment liaison initially developed a grading rubric to be used to analyze the student data. All faculty members were encouraged to
provide feedback, which resulted in the following grading rubric:
Rubric for Assessing FCS Program Learning Outcome #1
Stated
Category or
Performance
Unacceptable
Developing
Competent
Outstanding
1
2
3
4
Human
Ecological
Theory
accurately
discussed
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
Score
Complexity of
the Human
Ecological
Theory
discussion
All 5
Department
areas
mentioned
Discussion of
how the 5 areas
fit under the
FCS field
Overall
grammar &
punctuation
The fall and spring student data are stored in the FCS Assessment Moodle class, and a data analysis plan will be created for the upcoming
academic year to assess this data. The liaison plans to ask the department to nominate an Assessment Committee to divide the data, analyze,
and compare the students’ responses to the two essay questions assessing PLO #1.
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
2f. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Think about all the different ways the results were or will be used. For example, to recommend
changes to course content/topics covered, course sequence, addition/deletion of courses in program, student support services, revisions to
program SLO’s, assessment instruments, academic programmatic changes, assessment plan changes, etc. Please provide a clear and detailed
description of how the assessment results were or will be used.
In addition to analyzing the student data, ways to use and implement the data in possible “closing the loop” tasks will be addressed in the
upcoming academic year. For instance, based on the analyses, possible modifications to FCS 170 and/or 491/4 will be made so that students are
adequately being taught and appropriately assessed on our PLO #1. In addition, the extent in which the students have gained knowledge of PLO
#1 may lead us to realize that we need to better teach the concepts in courses throughout the program (and, in particular, make sure to address
PLO #1 in our core courses) and in a systematic way across all sections of the class. Or, perhaps, the students’ responses to the signature
assignment may prompt necessary changes in how our PLO #1 is being assessed and/or modifications that need to be made to the grading
rubric.
The department also will begin preliminary planning for the upcoming American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences (AAFCS)
accreditation that is due to be completed in the Spring of 2013. Our first step will be to examine how well our existing department PLOs align
with the core content areas put forth by AAFCS and the faculty will make modifications to the content and/or wording of our PLOs as necessary.
Following this work, we will begin to identify how well and in what courses/assignments each of our department PLOs is being met and then
propose modifications as necessary.
In addition, this year the assessment liaison plans to better educate the faculty and be more cognizant of department activities that are, in fact,
“closing the loop” efforts. For example, many course and curricular changes that take place in the areas are a direct result of information
gleaned from assessment tasks (e.g., adding a new course because an existing PLO was not being met). Hence, our department will stay
informed about how some of the work that is being completed directly reflects faculty use of assessment activities and results.
Some programs assess multiple SLOs each year. If your program assessed an additional SLO, report the process for that individual SLO below. If
you need additional SLO charts, please cut & paste the empty chart as many times as needed. If you did NOT assess another SLO, skip this
section.
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
2a. Which Student Learning Outcome was measured this year?
2b. What assessment instrument(s) were used to measure this SLO?
2c. Describe the participants sampled to assess this SLO: discuss sample/participant and population size for this SLO. For example, what type of
students, which courses, how decisions were made to include certain participants.
2d. Describe the assessment design methodology: Was this SLO assessed longitudinally (same students at different points) or was a crosssectional comparison used (comparing freshmen with seniors)? If so, describe the assessment points used.
2e. Assessment Results & Analysis of this SLO: Provide a summary of how the data were analyzed and highlight important findings from the
data collected.
2f. Use of Assessment Results of this SLO: Think about all the different ways the results were (or could be) used. For example, to recommend
changes to course content/topics covered, course sequence, addition/deletion of courses in program, student support services, revisions to
program SLO’s, assessment instruments, academic programmatic changes, assessment plan changes, etc. Please provide a clear and detailed
description of each.
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
3. How do your assessment activities connect with your program’s strategic plan?
Our plan to review, discuss and, perhaps, revise our department’s PLOs aligns with our strategic plan because it calls for our full department
faculty, across all five areas, to collectively revisit the core question of our FCS Department: what basic student learning outcomes do we deem
most important and essential for our graduates from the department to understand/apply? Although we were able to fit in several interesting
discussions of our department PLOs at the full faculty meetings, no specific modifications were made this year. In addition, the development of
an online Moodle Assessment system that was used to evaluate PLO #1 seemed to be an effective system and could also be implemented in the
future to assess the other department PLOs.
4. Overall, if this year’s program assessment evidence indicates that new resources are needed in order to improve and support student
learning, please discuss here.
Our department is not able to predict the need for new resources at this point in time. Once the student data for PLO #1has been analyzed, new
resources may be needed.
5. Other information, assessment or reflective activities not captured above.
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller
6. Has someone in your program completed, submitted or published a manuscript which uses or describes assessment activities in your
program? Please provide citation or discuss.
No, but the assessment liaison has a strong interest in doing so.
March 30, 2009, prepared by Bonnie Paller