revised 3/19/07
Spring 2007 Semester Program Assessment Report
(Please provide electronic and hard copy to your college facilitator.)
Degree program*: German B.A. Department: Foreign Languages
Chair: Prof. Dominique van Hooff Department Phone: 4-4616
Report Prepared by: Romey Sabalius Date: 05/15/007
*Where multiple program curricula are almost identical, and SLOs and assessment plans are identical, it is acceptable to list more than one program in this report.
Please list all Student Learning Outcomes/Objectives (SLOs) for this program in Tables 1A & 1B.
Table 1A. Learning Outcomes (all outcomes if one program reported, or common outcomes if multiple programs reported on this form.)
SLO # / Exact wording of Student Learning Outcome/Objectives (SLO)1 / Language & Communication. Written Expression. Develop advanced (ACTLF) skills in writing German.
2 / Language & Communication. Reading Comprehension. Develop advanced (ACTLF) skills in reading German.
3 / Language & Communication. Oral Expression. Develop advanced (ACTLF) skills in speaking German.
4 / Language & Communication. Listening Comprehension. Develop advanced (ACTLF) skills in understanding spoken German.
5 / Literacy: Develop the students' ability to use appropriate terminology in linguistic, cultural, or literary analysis.
6 / Linguistics: Develop the students' ability to recognize the various components that make up the German language, to understand complex syntactical features, and to analyze and reflect the grammar.
7 / Cultural Knowledge: Develop the students' ability to understand the cultural and intellectual development of German-speaking civilizations and societies within their socio-political contexts.
8 / Literary Analysis and Traditions: Develop the students' knowledge of major periods, genres, authors, and movements of German-language literature within their cultural, intellectual and socio-political contexts.
9 / Global Perspective and Comparisons: Develop the students' ability to relate the German-speaking civilizations and societies to events in other countries around the world, with a special focus on Europe in the early years and to the United States since the 20th century.
Table 1B. Unique Learning Outcomes, if multiple programs reported on this form.
N/A
Please complete the schedule of learning outcome assessment below by listing all program SLOs by number down the left column and indicating whether data were/will be collected (C), when they were/will be discussed by your faculty (D) and when changes resulting from those discussions were/will be implemented (I).
NOTE: * SJSU must provide data to WASC for all SLOs by the end of Sp07.
Table 2
C = data Collected D = results Discussed I = changes (if any) Implemented
SLO # / F05 or earlier / Sp06 / F 06 / Sp07 / F07 / Sp081 / C, D, I / I
2 / C, D
3 / C, D
4 / C, D, I / I / I
5 / C, D
6 / C, D
7 / C, D / C, D
8 / C, D
9 / C, D
1. Check the SLOs listed at the UGS Website (www.sjsu.edu/ugs/assessment/programs/objectives). Do they match the SLOs listed in Tables 1A and 1B?
__X__ YES _____ NO
http://www.sjsu.edu/foreignlanguage/slos/dfl_index.html#germanslos
2. Fall 2006 Performance Data: Describe the direct assessment (performance) data that were collected fall 2006 (‘C’ in F06 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific. For example: Instructors in two sections (60 students) of PSYC 150, Anagnos and Cooper, gave an embedded exam question and in their summary report indicated the % of students who earned a ’B’ or better, ‘C’, or less than ‘C’ using the same grading rubric for that question.
SLO # / Data collected, how much, by whom**1 / The students’ ability to write in German correctly and clearly was improved in both upper-division courses offered by the German Program during the fall semester.
In German 101A (Advanced German) taught by Larissa Chireaeva, students were required to write 5 essays and one dictation. The first essay drafts were returned to the students – with their mistakes marked – for self-correction. The second version was graded. The grades ranged from A to B- (A to C for dictation), and improvement in correctness of grammar and spelling (dictation: focus on punctuation) was noticeable. The final also had a written component (short essay), and the students performed satisfactory in that section.
In German 102B (German Culture from 1871 until the Present) taught by Romey Sabalius, students were required to take class minutes, prepare an informational hand-out to accompany their oral report, and to submit a 5-6 pages research paper. The grades for all written exercises and examinations ranged from A to C-. Although most students showed adequate or good progress, it was evident that some students needed extra assistance to write with sufficient confidence and correctness. A German tutor, hired by the department, provided intensive and focused help to individual students.
7 / The students’ ability to understand the cultural and intellectual development of German-speaking civilizations and societies within their socio-political contexts was tested and improved in German 102B (German Culture from 1871 until the Present), taught by Romey Sabalius, through a variety of tasks and exams. The students were required to prepare an oral report on a chosen cultural topic. This oral report needed to be accompanied by an informational hand-out for all the other students. After the delivery of the oral report and the ensuing class discussion, the students were required to submit a research paper. Two midterms and the final also served as tools to assess the students’ cultural knowledge.
3. Fall 2006 Indirect Measurement (if any): Describe the indirect assessment data that were collected in fall 2006 (‘C’ in F06 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific, for example: 50 employers were surveyed by Margaret Wilkes, Career Planning and Placement about performance of recent hires who graduated from our program in 2004-5.
N/A
4. Fall 2006 Findings/Analysis: Describe the findings that emerged from analysis of data collected in F06. Be specific. For Example: less than 50% of students met criteria for teamwork outcome. OR Employers indicated students have sufficient teamwork skills, no change needed.
Finding 1 (SLO 1) / The method of marking mistakes in students’ first drafts of their essay and returning them for self-correction seems to be effective since clear improvement was made by all students.Finding 2 (SLO 1) / The hiring of a German tutor happened too late in the semester to have a noticable effect on the skills of the students.
Finding 3 (SLO 7) / The performance and progress of the students was satisfactory with final grades ranging from A- to C (two students received an F due to unauthorized withdrawal). No changes in developing and assessing the students’ cultural knowledge were necessary.
5. Fall 2006 Actions: What actions are planned and/or implemented to address the findings from fall 2006 data? These are indicated by ‘I’ in Table 2 for the SLO data collected in fall ’06. Examples of actions taken include curricular revision, pedagogical changes, student support services, resource management. Be specific. For example: revising ENGR 103 to include more teamwork.)
Planned (SLO 1) / The department is committed to maintain the tutoring service to improve the writing skills of the students.Planned (SLO 1) / The method of marking mistakes in students’ first draft of essays and returning them for self-correction as practiced in the Advanced German (101A) class in fall will be adopted for the Elementary German (1B) class in the spring as well.
6. Fall 2006 Process Changes: Did your analysis of fall 2006 data result in revisiting/revising the Student Learning Outcomes or assessment process? Yes __ No X
If the answer is yes, please explain and submit an updated version of the Student Learning Outcomes and/or assessment plan.
7. Spring 2007 Performance Data: Describe the direct assessment (performance) data that were collected spring 2007 (‘C’ in Spr07 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific. For example: Instructor for MATH 188 (30 students), Stone, gave 3 embedded exam questions and in his summary report indicated the % of students who met or did not meet SLO #2.
SLO # / Data to be collected, how much, by whom**5 / The students’ ability to use appropriate terminology in linguistic, cultural, or literary analysis was developed and assessed in German 160 (Special Topics: German Short Story) taught by Romey Sabalius. The students’ improvement was assessed by 10 text analyses, 2 midterms, and the final.
Generally, students made good progress: 7 out of 8 students scored between 20-30 points (out of 30 points maximum) in the ten text analyses, in which theknowledge of literary terminology was required. 1 student did not make adequate progress, scoring only 12 out of 30 points. Average grades in the two midterms range from A- to C-, and the final had not yet been given by the time of writing of this report.
8 / The students' knowledge of major periods, genres, authors, and movements of German-language literature within their cultural, intellectual and socio-political contexts was developed and assessed in German 150 (German Literature and Film) taught by Romey Sabalius. The students’ improvement was assessed by 5 text analyses and 5 media comparative analyses, as well as 2 midterms and the final.
The results in the ten analyses range between 12 and 26.5 points (out of 30 maximum points). The low score is mostly due to absences or assignments not submitted. The average grades of the two midterms (taken by all students) range from A- to C+, which indicates the typical learning success of students in upper-division classes. The final had not yet been given by the time of writing of this report.
8. Spring 2007 Indirect Measurement (if any): Describe the indirect assessment data that were collected (‘C’ in Spr07 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific, for example: 100 alumni were surveyed by the department with questions related to SLOs #1 & #2.
SLO # / Data collected, how much, by whom**5 + 8 / A survey conducted by the department in spring 2007 yielded 6 responses from B.A. students and alumni. The question regarding “the understanding and appreciation of literary works” was answered 3 times with a rating of 5 (out of 5), once with 4, once with 3, and once with “cannot evaluate” (presumably a major who hasn’t taken literature classes yet). The sample group is still too small to draw definite conclusion, however the trend points to general satisfaction.
9. Fall 2007 Direct Measurement: For the SLOs scheduled to be assessed in fall 2007, describe the direct (performance) data that will be collected, how much and by whom.
Be specific, for example: Instructors in two sections of ART144, will assess SLOs #3 & #4 using a common rubric on the students’ final paper.
SLO # / Data to be collected, how much, by whom**7 + 9 / The students’ cultural knowledge as well as their global perspective and comparative ability will be developed and assessed in German 102A (German Culture until 1871) to be taught by Romey Sabalius. The students’ expected improvement will be assessed by a diagnostic assessment at the beginning and at the end of the semester, by two midterms and a final, and by a variety of other assessment tools and methods such as class notes, oral presentations, class hand-outs, etc.
10. Fall 2007 Indirect Measurement (if any): Describe the indirect assessment data that will be collected (‘C’ in F07 column of Table 2), how much and by whom. Be specific, for example: graduating seniors in all capstone course sections will be surveyed on curriculum strengths weaknesses.
SLO # / Data to be collected, how much, by whom**several / The department will continue to collect surveys from B.A. students and alumni to assess their satisfaction with the program.
Page 1