Faculty & OAC Meeting Report - Written Communication & Teamwork Assessment
The report provides a comprehensive analysis of written communication and teamwork skills based on Fall 2018 preliminary data. It includes assessments, number of course sections, student ratings, average scores, grades received, and more. The data is presented visually for easy interpretation and highlights areas of strength and improvement for courses.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Core Competencies Assessment Report- Fall 2018 (Preliminary data) FACULTY & OAC MEETING January 15, 2019 10am-noon 4901 OC WRITTEN COMMUNICATION & TEAMWORK & COLLABORATIVE SKILLS
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Number of Course Sections 31 Students Rated (Duplicated) 264 Average Rating 3.21 Number of Students by Written Communication Rating on VALUE Rubric 140 127 120 102 100 80 60 35 40 20 0 0 1 2 3 4 3
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION (CONTD.) Average Score by Written Communication Component 4.0 3.36 3.5 3.27 3.18 3.15 3.13 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Context of and Purpose for Writing Content Development Genre and Disciplinary Conventions Sources and Evidence Control of Syntax and Mechanics 4
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION (CONTD.) Grade Received Number of Grades Average Overall Score A 107 3.56 B 95 3.15 C 45 2.71 D 14 2.70 F 3 2.40 Written Communication Score 1 2 3 4 A 0.0% 1.9% 35.5% 62.6% B 0.0% 10.5% 58.9% 30.5% Course Grade C 0.0% 33.3% 57.8% 8.9% D 0.0% 50.0% 35.7% 14.3% F 0.0% 33.3% 66.7% 0.0% 5
Mean of all student scores on each criterion for WRITEN COMMUNICATION (from VALUE rubric) Course section number Context of and Purpose for Writing Genre and Disciplinary Conventions Control of Syntax and Mechanics Average overall score Content Development Sources and Evidence 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 3.2 3.0 3.6 3.3 3.9 3.2 3.7 3.7 3.1 2.5 3.7 3.8 2.7 3 3 1.1 3.1 3.0 2.8 3.6 2.9 2.9 3.5 3.1 2.8 3.4 3.6 2.8 3.2 3.1 2.8 3.2 3.7 2.6 3.5 3.6 3.6 2.9 3.8 3.6 2.5 2.7 3.0 3.2 3.0 3.7 2.9 3.3 3.5 3.1 2.8 3.6 3.6 2.7 2.8 3.5 2.9 3.7 3.0 3.3 3.4 2.9 3.0 3.5 3.7 2.1 3.1 3.1 2.7 3.5 3.0 2.9 3.5 2.8 2.8 3.6 3.6 3.6 6
TEAMWORK 7
TEAMWORK Number of Course Sections 4 Students Rated (Duplicated) 89 Average Rating 2.97 Number of Students by Teamwork Rating on VALUE Rubric 45 40 40 35 30 23 23 25 20 15 10 3 5 0 1 2 3 4 8
TEAMWORK (CONTD.) Average Score by Teamwork Component 4.0 3.5 3.21 3.09 2.94 2.92 3.0 2.53 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Contributes to Team Meetings Facilitates the Contributions of Team Members Individual Contributions Outside of Team Meetings Fosters Constructive Team Climate Responds to Conflict 9
TEAMWORK (CONTD.) Grade Received Number of Grades Average Overall Score A 52 3.28 B 28 2.61 C 7 2.14 F 1 2.20 P 1 1.00 Teamwork Score 1 2 3 4 A 0.0% 9.6% 51.9% 38.5% B 3.6% 42.9% 42.9% 10.7% Course Grade C 14.3% 71.4% 14.3% 0.0% F 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% P 100.0% 0% 0.0% 0.0% 10
Mean of all student scores on each criterion for TEAMWORK & COLLABORATIVE SKILLS (from VALUE rubric) Individual Contributions Outside of Team Meetings Facilitates the Contributions of Team Members Course Section number Fosters Constructive Team Climate Contributes to Team Meetings Responds to Conflict Average score 1 3.3 2.9 3.0 2.8 2.5 2.9 2 3.1 2.6 2.9 2.7 2.4 2.7 3 3.7 3.4 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.5 4 2.9 2.9 3.2 2.8 2.1 2.8 11
FACULTY SURVEY SurveyMonkey 10 responders (as of Jan 14, 2019) 12
QUESTION #1 Q#1. Have you previously participated in a CC assessment? no 50% yes 50% yes no 13
QUESTION #2 Q2. Do you feel that your CSLO & student assignment used in this asmt both aligned with the CC? other 10% not a good fit 0% yes, but modify 30% yes -well aligned 60% 14
QUESTION #3 Q3. Do You feel that you received sufficient guidance on the asmt. process through interaction with a member of the OAC? no 0% yes 100% 15
QUESTION #4 Q4. Do you have better understanding of CC asmt. process? none at all a little 0% 0% a moderate amount 50% a great deal 50% a great deal a moderate amount a little none at all 16
QUESTION #5 Q5. Was the MCC-calibrated rubric useful in terms of providing you wth info that may be used in action plan development? not very useful 10% extremely useful 30% somewhat useful 60% extremely useful somewhat useful not very useful 17
QUESTION #6 Q6. Do you use rubrics to evaluate students on your CSLOs? no 20% yes 80% no yes 18
QUESTION #7 Q7. Did you use an additional method to evaluate your students for their course grade? yes I used both VALUE & my own rubric no, only the VALUE rubric for both no, I designed the assigment for use with the VALUE rubric other 19
QUESTION #8 No, because I do not use embedded assignment 0% Possibly, but I would make a new assignment 30% Yes,rubric is comprehensive 30% Would you consider adopting VALUE rubric? Possibly, but rubric needs revision 40% 20
QUESTION #9 Q#9. Hours to complete scoring the artifacts 16 15 13.5 14 12 11 10 10 Hoursworked 8 6 6 5 4 4 2 1 0.17 0.08 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Faculty member 21
