General Education Course Review -- Evaluation & Feedback: PHYS 2034
The purpose of the General Education Committee (GEC) is to provide guidance and direction to the VCAAR to improve the quality and relevance of the University's general education curriculum. The GEC considers proposals for modification of the general education curriculum and reviews each course in the general education program once every four years to determine its acceptability as a general education course.
The GEC will review assessment data on the general education program provided by the Assessment Office and make recommendations to the VCAAR.
Year: 2015-2016 General Education Goal: Using Science to Accomplish Common Goals
Title of Course: PHYS 2034, University Physics
_N__Syllabi reflect brief course description (40 words or fewer), as it appears in bulletin.
All syllabi are in the repository but none of them include the Bulletin description.
_~~_ Syllabi list general education goal and related student learning outcome.
The SLO appears on all syllabi, but not the goal.
_Y__ Prerequisites are appropriate for level of course.
_Y__Level of education of instructors for this course complies with ADHE and ASU Faculty Handbook.
ADHE - Master’s degree with at least 18 graduate hours in field for general education courses
ASU Faculty Handbook - section II.h. Credentials, p. 40
Assessment of General Education Goal –Using Science to Accomplish Common Goals
_X_ Understand concepts of science as they apply to contemporary issues
_?_The above student learning outcome is being assessed across sections for continuous quality improvement of student learning.
It is not evident that the items used for assessment of the lecture portion provide evidence that students understand concepts of science as they apply to contemporary issues. (The items used to assess the laboratory most certainly do not measure learning with respect to the SLO; they are students’ perceptions of the laboratory experience.) The lecture assessment data are presented on an item basis which means that there is no way to determine how students score over the entire battery of nine items. What percentage of students correctly answers, say, seven of the nine questions? What percentage less than five? It is not clear why the results are given separately for different semesters, nor why the assessment for spring 2015 seems to deviate from that of the other terms. The report also does not clearly state when (in the semester) or how the data were collected. Presumably the data come from the universe of enrollees, but again this is not made explicit.
_Y_ Report of the assessment findings has been submitted.
_N_ Data are being used to improve student learning.
The discussion of results focuses on reasons why students may have given incorrect responses on particular items, not on what the results overall suggest about student learning. After noting, “The assessment data show some very interesting results, but the available information does not appear to give definite answers to the puzzles,” the report says, “Regardless of this, the physics faculty has been and will continue to adjust the class to improve student understanding.” It is hard to for the GEC to see how the results prepared for the quadrennial review will be of much help.
decision of general education committee
_____Course is acceptable as a general education course linked to the General Education goal.
_____Course is not acceptable as a general education course linked to the General Education goal.
__X__Course is acceptable as a general education course linked to the General Education goal given the following modifications:
The department takes appropriate corrective actions to address the issues of concern shown above.
_____Unable to evaluate as a general education course linked to the General Education goal.
Action required
__X__None
_____Follow up Review
_____Meeting with Department Chair
GEC Chair ______Date______
Approved 10/30/2012; revised 18 Nov 14