Campus Wide Assessment Project

1. Campus Wide Assessment Project Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning Assessment Team: David Nelson – Faculty Lead, Math Division Janet Ash, Technology Division Brenda Bindschatel, Business Division Keith Clay, Science Division Sandy Johanson, Humanities Division

2. Goals of the Project • Peer review of the Learning Outcome Tracking System (LOTS) database • Campus-wide assessment of the QSR outcome

3. Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning • Evaluate and interpret quantitative and symbolic reasoning information/data • Recognize which quantitative or symbolic reasoning methods are appropriate for solving a given problem, and correctly implement those methods • Demonstrate the ability to estimate a solution to a presented problem • Translate data into various formats such as symbolic language, equations, graphs and formulas • Implement calculator/computer technology to solve problems • Demonstrate logical reasoning skills through formal and informal proofs.

4. LOTS Database Courses are rated by instructors or departments • Level 0: Not taught, practiced or assessed • Level 1: taught or practiced, but not assessed • Level 2: assessed by not taught • Level 3: taught and assessed

5. Peer Review of LOTS • Review CARS of all courses claiming Level 3 for any of the QSR competencies

6. Review of LOTS Database CHEM 105: Marked QSR Competency 2 and Competency 5 at Level 3 The student will demonstrate proficiency in the following areas: • Metric conversions, using dimensional analysis • Naming chemical elements, and identifying atomic numbers and mass • Writing chemical formulas and naming compounds • Calculating molar masses • Quantitative composition of compounds • Writing and balancing chemical equations • Periodic properties Individual instructors will chose two (three?) of the following proficiencies as the last unit of the class : • Mass relationships in a balanced equation • Atomic structure of the first eighteen elements • Gas laws • Chemical bonds • Properties of liquids

7. Review of LOTS Database NATRS 183 claims QSR 1, 2, and 4 Students will learn: • The use of taxonomic keys to identify trees, and shrubs. • The use and comprehension of dendrology terminology. • Plant morphology • Identification of all required plants • How to establish grid plots Quantitative Reasoning: Students will measure physical, biological, and environmental parameters. Additional parameters and results will be obtained by calculations and graphing.

8. Review of LOTS Database • 158 CARs claiming Level 3 were reviewed • QSR documentation in 14 CARs were deemed inadequate • LOC Chair and division rep met with lead instructors and either changed LOTS rating or changed course syllabus • 13 of the 14 have been adjusted • Issue of authority and control needs to be decided

9. Campus Wide Assessment • Determine an appropriate assessment • Implement assessment with the aid of instructors • Analyze the data • Report to the community

10. Campus Wide QSR Assessment • Competencies 1, 2, 4 and 5 • 8 classes chosen randomly for each competency • Appropriate mix of day, night and distance courses • Appropriate mix full-time and adjunct instructors • Embedded assessment tool – created by the faculty • Scored according to the Community Rubric

11. Campus Wide QSR AssessmentChallenges with the Data • Several instructors did not participate or did not provide data in time for the assessment – 11 of the 35 selected classes • Minimal data collected for QSR 5 - 2 of 10 classes provided pre and post assessment data, one provided post assessment data only • One day class was substituted for the initial selection of a night class (QSR 1) • Difficult to distinguish between Competent & Mastering when there was a single problem

12. Positive shift towards mastering • Approximately 67.6% achieve competent or mastering on the post assessment

13. Evaluate and interpret quantitative and symbolic reasoning information • 51.8% reach competent or mastering

14. Recognize which quantitative or symbolic reasoning methods are appropriate for solving a given problem and correctly implement those methods. • 70.2% of students reached competent or mastering

15. Translate data into various formats such as symbolic language, equations, graphs and formulas • 69.4% of students achieve competent or mastering

16. Implement calculator/computer technology to solve problems. • 92.2% of students were able to reach competent or mastering level

17. Unusual Classes Math 97, B A 220 and BIO 100 show improvement, but not nearly as much as other courses. MATH 97, B A 220 - QSR Competency 1 BIO 100 - QSR Competency 4

18. Unusual Classes BA 110 and Chem 150 had a large number of competent/mastering students on the pre assessment. (Competency 4)

19. Full-Time and Adjunct Faculty

20. Day, Evening and Online Classes

21. Recommendations • Relatively few courses claim Competency 3 and Competency 6. Should we offer more? Do we expect mastering of all competencies? • Revise Competency 2, or use better assessment methods. Two different skills are listed. • Improve success rate of Competency 1 • Increase communication between full-time, adjunct, day, evening and online instructors • Look at math prerequisites for courses with a minority of students reaching the competent or mastering level.

22. Recommendations for follow-up studies • Check degree requirements with CWOs. Can a student graduate without taking QSR classes? • Use appropriate assessments. – Comp. 2 • Start earlier. • Contact instructors of classes selected for sample earlier/more frequently to get a better response rate.