Ana G. Mendez University System

1. Ana G. Mendez University System Assessment of Adult Learning in a Discipline-Based Dual Language Immersion Model® Fidel R. Távara, M.Ed. Assessment coordinator Florida Campuses

2. ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS The School of Professional Studies Assessment Plan focuses on: • Assessment of Student Learning • Midpoint and Capstone Assessment • Evaluation of Student Portfolios • Language Placement Testing • Assessment of Program Effectiveness • Student Representative Meetings • End-of-Course Evaluations • External Peer Reviews • Continuous Assessment of Program Activities • Classroom Observations • Student Satisfaction Survey

3. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING

4. MIDPOINT ASSESSMENT • Is formative • Occurs at a crucial decision point • Helps them to see that assessment is helping them • Aids in retention • Provides information to the stakeholders

5. CAPSTONE ASSESSMENT • Is summative • Provides opportunity to identify whether students have achieved selected program outcomes • Determines the strengths and weaknesses of students toward achievement of outcome expectations • Helps assess skills other than professional content mastery

6. CREATING MIDPOINT/CAPSTONE ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENTS

7. CREATING DLP OBJECTIVES • Small group met off campus at corporate house. • Consultant from Regis led discussion. • Group brainstormed list of possible DLP objectives. • Group classified objectives in categories: conceptual, language, communication, and interpersonal.

8. CREATING AREA MANIFESTATIONS • The entire faculty met by academic areas on campus. • Using the DLP objectives, faculty wrote area manifestations aligning them with each objective.

9. SELECTION OF PROGRAMS • Select diverse program areas. • Involve faculty and administration. • Identify programs which have heavy enrollment.

10. SELECTION OF MID-POINT AND CAPSTONE COURSES • Qualitative analysis • Faculty opinion on content and coverage of program objectives and outcomes • Quantitative analysis • Significant achievement increment • Large enrollment

11. ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT DESIGN • Alignment chart • Assessment instruments • Diagnostic profile • Portfolios • Case studies • Metacognitive papers • Strategic Business Plan • Organization’s Financial Analysis • Rubrics

12. ALIGNMENT CHART TEMPLATE

13. ASSESSING OBJECTIVE OR OUTCOME/DUAL LANGUAGE AREA MANIFESTATION

14. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT OF PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

15. Student Achievement of Program Objectives • Mid Point Assessment (Program Level) • Designed by Faculty Experts • Rubrics and Evaluation Criteria developed specifically to measure program and language objectives • “Graded” by other Faculty Experts (not facilitator of the course) • Inter-rater reliability of over 80%

16. Student Achievement of Program Objectives • The performance of the students is measured as follows: • 3.50 - 4.00 Excellent • 3.00 - 3.49 Very Good • 2.00 - 2.99 Satisfactory • Less than 1.999 Unsatisfactory

17. Statistical analysis results

18. Statistical Analysis Results

19. Statistical Analysis Results

20. Statistical Analysis Results

21. Statistical Analysis Results

22. USE OF ASSESSMENT OF LEARNING RESULTS

23. Dissemination of Results • Internal: • Board of Directors • Faculty and Staff • External: • Professional and community forums • Data base for reaccreditation visits • Possible institutional and corporate alliances

24. Program Improvement • Addition of language courses for graduate programs: 050, 500 and 501 • Emphasis on early or concurrent enrollment in these courses for graduate students

25. Program Improvement • Revision of all course modules to explicitly include language objectives: “3rd generation of modules” • Inclusion of language development in class assignments, activities and resources • Evaluation activities to be 70% content, 30% language • Prioritization of graduate courses in the development of 3rd generation of modules

26. Program Improvement • Replication of midpoint assessment model in MBA program to verify possible differences between bachelors and masters