Undergraduate Academic Assessment Executive Summary

Department: (English, Communication, and Theatre Arts). Academic Year: (2013-14)

This summary prepared by: (Dr Gabriel Haley)

  1. Background: What factors caused you to choose this particular assessment target? If you chose this target because of a perceived problem, please explain.

ENG 102 and ENG 201 are courses that are taught in multiple sections every semester and are regularly assessed and nurtured. In addition, assessment material from these courses will be used in a revisiting of course objectives for these courseswithin the coming year.

  1. Question: What specific question were you attempting to answer through this assessment? There may be more than one question, but no more than three.

For ENG 102, we continue to ask the following: How do students effectively use information literacy in a research paper? How does this category compare to the other categories assessed (Clarity/Efficiency, Rhetorical Strategies, Depth/Originality, Conventions)?

For ENG 201, we ask: Regarding three categories – Clarity, Conventions, and Content – how do students perform?

For both, we ask: Do the assessed data suggest areas that can be better clarified and/or emphasized in our course objectives?

  1. Methodology: Briefly explain your assessment methodology. The process used to collect data and the data itself are important pieces. Attach a copy of the assessment tool used.

For ENG 102, students wrote a research paper, and instructors used the associated rubric to assess papers. For ENG 201, students wrote a literary analysis, and instructors used the associated rubric (attached). The rubrics answer the first two questions. The question that is asked of both courses also depends upon a consideration of current course objectives and a continuing discussion with the instructors involved.

  1. Summary of results: Summarize the results of your assessment. A narrative summary is required. Charts, tables or graphs are encouraged, but optional.

Pertaining to the ENG 102 question, of the five categories assessed (Clarity/Efficiency, Rhetorical Strategies, Depth/Originality, Conventions, and Information Literacy), the average score, when calculated as a percentage, was the highest average score, though not dramatically higher (just over 3%).

Pertaining to the ENG 201 assignment, as a whole the students performed without much variation across the three categories of Clarity, Conventions, and Content. Charts attached.

  1. Conclusions: Summarize your conclusions and the implications for teaching and learning in your department. Most importantly answer the following question: What did you learn from this assessment and how will it impact the teaching/learning process in your department?

Pertaining to ENG 102, Information literacy is being effectively taught relative to the other categories assessed. One observation based on the assessment data, which does not relate to the original question but influences the department’s action plan, is that different instructors seem to use the rubric is slightly different ways. This is addressed in the action plan.

Pertaining to the ENG 201 assignment, the data suggest that students’ performance in one category correlates to their performance in another. Only a small percentage of the data showed a disproportionate ability in one category over another. The data suggest that the weight given to each area of focus is appropriate.

  1. Action Plan: As a result of this assessment, outline what your department will do and what timeline will be followed for making any changes.

Going forward, we can be fairly confident that, for both ENG 102 and ENG 201 assignments, there is not a disproportionate weight given to any particular category that is assessed. All categories generally trend relative to each other, so when a student does well or poorly in one area that students tends to do correspondingly well or poorly in all other area.

What the data from the ENG 102 assessment suggest is that a conversation among 102 instructors should address the issue of varying practices in using the rubric. A simplified metric might be a solution.

Regarding the question of course objectives, the department as a whole will discuss the assessment priorities for the coming year. It may be that any newly articulated objectives require a slightly different focus for assessment.

Appendix A: ENG 102 Rubric


Appendix B: ENG 102 Data

Note: The chart does not distinguish instructors, but it is clear from the collected data that instructors use the rubric in differing ways. The chart does not reflect final grades given, only the scores calculated on the rubric.
Appendix C: ENG 201 Rubric


Appendix D: ENG 201 Data

Clarity/Efficiency—25 point max (42% of grade)

Conventions—20 point max (33%)

Content—15 point max (25%)