FINAL
Program Assessment Plan and Schedule for Fall 2014 – Spring 2015
College: Social Sciences & Performing Arts
Program: History
#1: MISSION STATEMENT & PROGRAM
OUTCOMES: Submit to College Liaison & Amy
Coots
• 1st Draft: Due September 12th
• 2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Due October 10th
Mission Statement
The mission of the Vincennes University History program is to engage students in historiographical practices
and knowledge in order to prepare students as they pursue degrees at transfer institutions, enter the labor
force, and engage in life-long learning. Students will exhibit comprehension of historical trends, theories,
people, and events that impact modern history by examining various sources, applying research strategies,
and demonstrating their understanding of that impact on the past and the present.
ATTN: Has your program Mission Statement
or Program Learning Outcomes changed from
last year? Place an ‘x’ by YES or NO.
Program Learning Outcomes
Students who complete course work in the History program will be able to:
• analyze source documents.
• evaluate the causes and/or impact of historic events.
• analyze the influence of key figures in history.
• apply critical thinking skills to historical topics and issues.
Mission Statement
YES:
NO: x
Program Learning Outcomes
YES:
NO: x
#2: LEARNING TO BE ASSESSED: Submit to
Program Faculty, College Dean, College
Liaison, and Amy Coots.
•
•
1st Draft: Due September 12th
2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Due October 10th
Outcome 1: Evaluate the causes and/or impact of historic events.
Learning Skill/Knowledge to be Assessed: It is the view of the History Department that students should be
able to identify significant events in US History II (1865-1991), such as defining Reconstruction, reasons for
Westward Movement, contributing factors to the Industrialization/Gilded Age, characteristics of the Roaring
20s WWI entry, the Great Depression causes, US entry into WWII, defining the character of the Cold War, and
the rise of Islamic terror. Students should also place these events in their chronological order.
Why is this Assessment Significant? Allows students to orient other content material and sequence of events
in US history, which will later help students identify and explain where current events/trends originate and/or
how the events developed, so that they can make informed decisions.
Faculty Collaborators: VU History Department: Gretchen Keller, Kristal Shick, Kirk Abendroth, John McClure
1
FINAL
Outcome 2: Apply critical thinking skills to historical topics and issues.
#3: PROJECT DETAILS: Submit to Program
Faculty, College Dean, College Liaison, and
Amy Coots.
•
•
1st Draft: Due September 12th
2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Due October 10th
Learning Skill/Knowledge to be Assessed: Students’ ability to look at US historical events critically.
Why is this Assessment Significant? As students become more actively engaged in current events, they need
to know how to historically orient those events in order to understand what happens, and why it happens. By
identifying and critically reviewing past events, students will make more informed decisions, which will
impact their lives.
Faculty Collaborators: VU History Department: Gretchen Keller, Kristal Shick, Kirk Abendroth, John McClure
Outcome 1: Evaluate the causes and/or impact of historic events.
Project A Title: (Exam) Pre-/Post-Test
Is this the first, second or third year for this project? First
Brief Project Description: Students will complete a pre-test and post-test in HIST 140 about US History events
and causes, which help orient and analyze current events. The pre-test is a 12 question multiple-choice test
given at the beginning of the semester. The post-test is the same 12 question test given at the end of the
semester, independent of their unit test. This is not the final exam.
Assessment Tool(s)Used: Pre-/Post-test in HIST 140-Faculty will incorporate a 12 question test in order to
better identify understanding of historical events, which help students understand and orient current events,
and make decisions important to their lives. The tests will indicate students’ strengths/weaknesses.
Success Standard: 65% of the students who complete the post-test will achieve 66% or better (7 right or
more out of 11 on pre-post-test). Comparisons will be made to the pre-test scores; satisfactory progress will
be indicated by 65% of the students or better improving from their original score.
Course(s): HIST 140, American History II
Faculty Assessing Course(s) & Campus: Gretchen Keller, Kristal Shick, Kirk Abendroth, John McClure –
Vincennes Campus
Projected Sample Size: All students enrolled in HIST 140 (c. 150 students)
Student Assessment will Occur: Fall? Spring? Both Semesters? Spring
Faculty Responsible for Oversight/Compiling Student Results: Gretchen Keller
Project B Title: Pre-/Post-Test Reflective Survey
Is this the first, second or third year for this project? First
Brief Project Description: Students will complete a survey in Blackboard asking them to reflect on their
knowledge of US History topics and to reflect on their own interpretation of their success over the semester,
as well as their perception of how history relates to them and/or influences their lives. The History
Department expects to see that students make a connection between the past and their present.
Assessment Tool(s) Used: Reflective survey administered through Blackboard
2
FINAL
Success Standard: N/A
Course(s): HIST 140, American History II
Faculty Assessing Course(s) & Campus: Gretchen Keller, Kristal Shick, Kirk Abendroth, John McClure –
Vincennes Campus
Projected Sample Size: All students enrolled in HIST 140, US History II (c. 150 students)
Student Assessment will Occur: Fall? Spring? Both Semesters? Spring
Faculty Responsible for Oversight/Compiling Student Results: Gretchen Keller
Outcome 2: Apply critical thinking skills to historical topics and issues.
Project A Title: UCC Critical Thinking Assignment
Is this the first, second or third year for this project? Second
Brief Project Description: Critical thinking assignments that were approved by the UCC Committee will be
used.
Assessment Tool(s)Used: The VU Critical Thinking Rubric
Success Standard: 60% of the students will obtain an “acceptable” or higher on each of the dimensions of the
Critical Thinking rubric.
Course(s): HIST 139, American History I; HIST 140, American History II; HIST 235, World Civilization I; HIST
236, World Civilization II; HIST 155, Architectural History; HIST 131, Survey of European History I; HIST 132,
Survey of European History II
Faculty Assessing Course(s) & Campus: Gretchen Keller, Kristal Shick, Kirk Abendroth, John McClure –
Vincennes Campus
Projected Sample Size: The sample pool will be the 4th, 8th, and last students on the roll who completed the
projects– c. 50 - 60
Student Assessment will Occur: Fall? Spring? Both Semesters? Fall
Faculty Responsible for Oversight/Compiling Student Results: Gretchen Keller
Project B Title: UCC Reflective Survey
Is this the first, second or third year for this project? Second
Brief Project Description: Students will complete a survey which indicates their understanding and opinion on
the critical thinking assignment, as well as their reflection of the assignment’s efficacy.
Assessment Tool(s)Used: Reflective survey administered through Blackboard
Success Standard: N/A
Course(s): HIST 139, American History I; HIST 140, American History II; HIST 235, World Civilization I; HIST
236, World Civilization II; HIST 155, Architectural History; HIST 131, Survey of European History I; HIST 132,
Survey of European History II
Faculty Assessing Course(s) & Campus: Gretchen Keller, Kristal Shick, Kirk Abendroth, John McClure, Debbie
3
FINAL
Stanczak, Shirley Ray, Vince Sellers, Jason Fithian – Vincennes Campus
Projected Sample Size: All students in all sections of listed courses.
Student Assessment will Occur: Fall? Spring? Both Semesters? Fall
Faculty Responsible for Oversight/Compiling Student Results: Gretchen Keller
STEP 4: ASSESSMENT TOOLS & DATA – Submit aggregated assessment data and blank copies of assessment tools to: Amy Coots, College Liaison, and College
Dean. FALL ASSESSMENTS = DUE DECEMBER 17 / SPRING ASSESSMENTS = DUE MAY 13
#5: DATA ANALYSIS: Submit to Program
Outcome 1: Evaluate the causes and/or impact of historic events.
Faculty, College Dean, College Liaison, and
Amy Coots.
Project A: (Exam) Pre-/Post-Test
Success Standard: 65% of the students who complete the post-test will achieve 66% or better (7 right or more
out of 11 on pre-post-test). Comparisons will be made to the pre-test scores; satisfactory progress will be
FALL ASSESSMENTS:
indicated by 65% of the students or better improving from their original score.
• 1st Draft: Due February 6th
• 2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Projected Sample Size: 150 students
Due March 20th
Actual Sample Size: pre-test 90/post-test 71
SPRING ASSESSMENTS:
Data Indicating Student Strengths/Learning: Based on the pre-test and post-test results, the percentage of
• 1ST Draft: Due May 22nd
nd
students with correct answers improved on all 11 questions. The pre-test results indicated that 43%
• 2 Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
(average) of the students’ responses were wrong, while the post-test indicated that 23% (average) of the
Due September 14
students’ responses were wrong. I.e.72% (average) of the post-test was successfully completed by the
students.
Individually, of the students who took both the pre-test and post-test, 69% of students (49 of 71) improved
their scores. 87% of students (62 of 71) received a 66% or better on the post-test, an improvement from the
pre-test (34 of 71), of 48% who scored 66% or better. This exceeds the improvement standards.
Data Indicating Student Weaknesses: While all questions on the post-test showed improvement, 28%
(average) of the post-test was answered incorrectly. The most commonly missed question was #2, putting
historical events in chronological order. 63% of the students missed this (an improvement of 10% from the
beginning of the semester [73%]).
Data Indicating Learning Trends: N/A – This is the first year for this assessment.
Project B: Pre-/Post-Test Reflective Survey
Success Standard: N/A
Projected Sample Size: 150 students
Actual Sample Size: 75
4
FINAL
Data Indicating Student Strengths/Learning: Students accurately identified their understanding of the
material on 8 of the 11 survey questions (1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11). For example, question #1 was answered
successfully by 97% of students – 77% agreed/strongly agreed on the survey that they knew the material;
question #8 was answered correctly by 77% of students, and 87% of students agreed/strongly agreed on the
survey that they knew the material.
Data Indicating Student Weaknesses: 39% of students reported they knew the material for question #6 of the
survey, and 48% reported they knew the material for question #7. The success rate on the post-test was 45%
and 52%, respectively.
Data Indicating Learning Trends: N/A – This is the first year for this assessment.
Analysis: With regard to the student self-assessment survey, 73% (average) of the students agreed/strongly
agreed that they could describe and/or explain the cause and effect of US History II events. Based on the
average number of successful completion of the post-test (72% correctly answered), students could
accurately predict their capabilities. Students have met the learning outcomes for the course, that they have
improved their understanding of historical events and their consequences, even when there was specific
content they found challenging.
Outcome 2: Apply critical thinking skills to historical topics and issues.
Project A: UCC Critical Thinking Assignment
Success Standard: 60% of the students will obtain an “acceptable” or higher on each of the dimensions of the
Critical Thinking rubric.
Projected Sample Size: The sample pool will be the 4th, 8th, and last students on the roll who completed the
projects– c. 50 - 60
Actual Sample Size: 54
Data Indicating Student Strengths/Learning: Overall, 64% of students scored Acceptable or higher on their
critical thinking projects. 69% (37/54) of students received ‘acceptable’ or higher re: explanation of the
problem; 70% (38/54) scored ‘acceptable’ or better on student position; and 67% (36/54) scored ‘acceptable’
or better on conclusions and related outcomes.
Data Indicating Student Weaknesses: 57% (31/54) scored ‘acceptable’ or better re: evidence and influence of
context.
Data Indicating Learning Trends: 64% of students scored acceptable or higher on their critical thinking
projects; however, rubric data indicates that student averages fell in 4 of the 5 components of “Qualities of
Critical Thinking.” For example, the previous year 77% of students scored “adequate” or higher on
5
FINAL
explanation of the problem (23/30 students); this year, 67% (37/54) were successful. Evidence compared
year-to-year (y/y) 60% (22/30) v. 54% (29/54). Influence y/y 60% (22/30) v. 57%. Conclusions y/y 73% (22/30)
v. 67% (36/54). Position is the only area of increase y/y: 67% (20/30) v. 70% (38/54). This may be explained
by a larger sample size and the participation of more faculty, who previously had not been trained in the
rubric use for assessment. Since then, faculty have been through ‘norming’ training to get more accurate
data collection.
Project B: UCC Reflective Survey
Success Standard: N/A
Projected Sample Size: All students in all sections of listed courses.
Actual Sample Size: 88 students completed the history survey
Data Indicating Student Strengths/Learning: Students agree/strongly agree that they understood the project,
the expectations, and what they needed to do to succeed (75% of students felt this way). Additionally, the
survey results overwhelmingly show (in student comments) that students’ advice for future students is that
they not wait until the night before to work on their projects (don’t procrastinate) if they want to be
successful on their projects.
Data Indicating Student Weaknesses: 35% of respondents spent 4 or more hours preparing their projects
(65% spent less than 4 hours preparing their projects).
Data Indicating Learning Trends: Survey results continue to overwhelmingly show that students’ advice for
future students is that they should not procrastinate.
Analysis: According to the critical thinking rubric data, Project A goals were mostly met. Students fell short
on providing evidence and considering the contextual influence. The evidence and contextual influence
shortcomings indicate students’ lack of content knowledge, which is a complication of a critical thinking
project at this level of education (survey courses). Poor preparation (as mentioned above) follows the
conversations held by professors that their students wait until the night before, or somewhere in the
immediate vicinity of the due date, to complete the project. There is a lack of attention to detail and effort.
Although there is no collected evidence for this, conversations by professors indicate that several students a
semester continue to ignore the assignment.
#6: LEARNING IMPROVEMENT PLAN: Submit
to Program Faculty, College Dean, College
Liaison, and Amy Coots.
Outcome 1: Evaluate the causes and/or impact of historic events.
Impact of Previous Year’s Plan: N/A – This was the first year for this assessment.
6
FINAL
FALL ASSESSMENTS:
• 1st Draft: Due February 6th
• 2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Due March 20th
SPRING ASSESSMENTS:
• 1ST Draft: Due May 22nd
• 2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Due September 14
New Improvement Plan: More comprehensive faculty use of pre-test, post-test, and student survey.
Outcome 2: Apply critical thinking skills to historical topics and issues.
Impact of Previous Year’s Plan: (Keller’s HIST 140) – A model assignment was prepared for students. While
some students benefited from this – organization, brevity, focus – the majority of students continued to
ignore the model, procrastinate, and ignore repeated invitations to meet with their professor to go over a
draft, and improve their skills. The majority of students who saw their professor, and reviewed a draft, had
improved skills and success on their critical thinking project.
New Improvement Plan: (Keller’s HIST 140) The due date for the critical thinking project has been moved to
week 10 of the semester instead of weeks 4 and 7. This is an effort to get students used to critical analysis,
and content information. Additionally, only 1 project is assigned this semester instead of 2. To encourage
student participation/focus/attention, a study session has been organized.
#7: ASSESSMENT TOOLS IMPROVEMENT
PLAN: Submit to Program Faculty, College
Dean, College Liaison, and Amy Coots.
FALL ASSESSMENTS:
• 1st Draft: Due February 6th
• 2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Due March 20th
SPRING ASSESSMENTS:
• 1ST Draft: Due May 22nd
• 2nd Draft w/Revisions (if needed):
Due September 14
Outcome 1: Evaluate the causes and/or impact of historic events.
Project A: (Exam) Pre-/Post-Test
Improvement Plan: Revision of 3 of the test questions (#6, #8, #10) to address more specifically the issues of
cause/effect.
Project B: Pre-/Post-Test Reflective Survey
Improvement Plan: Survey itself needs to address relevancy of history to the lives of students. A 12th
question will be added to the survey for students to rank the impact of history on their current experiences.
Outcome 2: Apply critical thinking skills to historical topics and issues.
Project A: UCC Critical Thinking Assignment
Improvement Plan: N/A
Project B: UCC Reflective Survey
Improvement Plan: N/A
7