Cal State Hayward
Academic Programs and
Graduate Studies
Program Level Student Learning Outcomes
for Special Majors
May 2004
In the context of academic program review and improvement based on student learning outcomes, Special Majors represent a unique challenge. Special Majors, by definition, are individualized programs of study designed to meet student needs and interests in areas not adequately or appropriately addressed by formalized programs of study offered by the university. Therefore, there can be no constant intended program-level learning outcomes in terms of content.
While the challenge is unique, it is far from insurmountable. Every principle and method of outcomes assessment applied to formalized programs of study with common learning goals for a group of students can be applied to individualized programs of study with unique learning goals for each student.
For example, It is typically recommended that regular academic programs have from three to five program level learning outcomes that represent the essence of what a student should know and be able to do upon completion of the program. The same principle can be applied to Special Majors. Every Special Major should have from three to five intended core learning outcomes defined as part of the program proposal. The outcomes, in fact, better than anything else, define the nature and purpose of the program (as it should be with all formalized programs).
It is also recommended that regular academic programs identify publicly verifiable indicators of the level of achievement for each core learning outcome (not to be confused with course grades (except perhaps in the rare event that a course is exclusively designed to meet one or more specific program-level learning outcomes)), and that there should be multiple means and opportunities for students to demonstrate their level of achievement for each core learning outcomes. Every Special Major should identify one or more publicly verifiable indicator(s) of the level of achievement for each core learning outcome, and identify the means and opportunities for demonstration of the level of achievement. The means of assessing learning outcomes can include any means available to any regular academic program, (e.g. exam questions, research papers, oral presentations, portfolios, supervisor evaluations, documentation of service learning, etc.) The opportunities may be identified within the context of courses to be taken or independently of coursework, as with all formalized programs. Levels of achievement attainable, as in any case, ideally, can and should be articulated through appropriate rubrics, selected or created at the outset of the program. The means and opportunities for assessment, and the rubrics used to evaluate performance, should be chosen or agreed to by the student and supervising faculty at the outset of the program of study.
Outcomes assessment in regular academic programs should incorporate at least three occasions of assessment: entry, one or more interval assessments, and exit. In some cases, evidence of previous study or accomplishment or demonstrating a certain level of achievement on a test, is accepted as entry assessment, even though the ideal would be to implement entry assessment designed to address specific program learning outcomes. Assessments of core program learning outcomes at one or more intervals during the program of study are essential to evaluate progress and provide feedback to the student and faculty. This is obviously of even greater importance for Special Majors, since there will not be a history of program improvements based upon the experiences of previous students. Every Special Major program should (1)EITHER identify the previous study, work accomplishments, or test results, serving as entry levels of ability OR incorporate entry assessments of intended outcomes identified in the program proposal, (2) exit assessments demonstrating the level of achievement attained for each learning outcome. Again, as with regular academic programs, the nature of the targets for levels of achievement will vary with the nature of the program. In some cases, mastery will be a necessary target. In other cases, performance at or above a designated level will be a desired, but not required, target.
With these requirements for the design and implementation of Special Majors in place, the review and improvement of the quality and educational effectiveness of Special Majors programs in general can be undertaken in much the same manner as regular academic programs. The academic progress and achievements of students in Individual Special Major programs, like individual students within a regular academic program, can be compared and analyzed for the purpose of improving general operating procedures, for improving the guidelines for, or guidance in, defining learning outcomes, and improving the means, opportunities, and rubrics, for assessment, all contributing the improved quality and educational effectiveness of future Special Majors programs.
This assessment plan for Special Majors will be phased in beginning with the Fall Quarter 2004. Special Majors beginning Fall Quarter 2004 will require learning outcomes and indicators. By Spring Quarter 2005, all Special Majors will be required to have learning outcomes, indicators, entry measures, and exit assessment.
Assessment results for each Special Major who graduates will be annually reviewed by the Associate Vice President, Academic Programs and Graduate Studies.