Lawson Data Archive Solution Overview
Navigate through the challenges and opportunities in migrating legacy Lawson data to modern platforms like Workday or Oracle. Explore the risks, costs, and benefits associated with maintaining or transitioning your data infrastructure. Dive into real-world case studies and a sample project outline for insights into successful data migration projects.
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
Psychology and Human Ecology School of Education and Behavioral Sciences B.S. in Psychology CIP Code: 420101 Program Code: 165 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 1
Student-Learning Outcomes 1. Demonstrate knowledge in research methods. 2. Application of knowledge in research methods. 3. Demonstrate knowledge in clinical areas. 4. Demonstrate knowledge in experimental areas. 2 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Alignment of Outcomes to University Mission Statement CU provides a diverse and dynamic student body access to quality educational opportunities; fosters a student-centered academic environment that combines innovative classroom teaching with experiential learning; prepares students for professional success, responsible citizenship, life-long learning, and meaningful contributions to a rapidly changing world; and is a driving force in the cultural life and economic development of the region. 3 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Alignment of Outcomes (cont.) Combines innovative classroom teaching with experiential learning Application of knowledge in research methods Prepares students for professional success Demonstrate knowledge in research methods Application of knowledge in research methods Demonstrate knowledge in clinical areas Demonstrate knowledge in experimental areas Life-long learning, and meaningful contributions to a rapidly changing world Demonstrate knowledge in research methods Application of knowledge in research methods Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 4
Alignment of Outcomes to Department Mission Statement Psychology is the scientific study of behavior. Through courses in psychology, students will learn principles which govern human behavior. The courses offered reflect the diversity in psychology and meet the educational objectives of at least three groups of students: Those who seek a general survey course in the field of psychology or those who wish to study a program of psychology in depth at the undergraduate level but do not contemplate entrance into psychology as a profession Those who wish to enter psychology as a profession immediately after the BS Those who plan to attend graduate school and then enter psychology as a profession Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 5
Alignment of Outcomes (cont.) Those who wish to enter psychology as a profession immediately after the BS Demonstrate knowledge in research methods. Application of knowledge in research methods. Demonstrate knowledge in clinical areas. Demonstrate knowledge in experimental areas. Those who plan to attend graduate school and then enter psychology as a profession Demonstrate knowledge in research methods. Application of knowledge in research methods. Demonstrate knowledge in clinical areas. Demonstrate knowledge in experimental areas. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 6
Alignment of Outcomes to Strategic Plan 2013 Goal 1.1: Maintain and enhance Cameron s commitment to providing programs of the highest quality in instruction, research, and service to better meet the needs of the citizens of the region Lawton United Way Needs Assessment Demonstrate knowledge in clinical areas. Demonstrate knowledge in research methods. Application of knowledge in research methods. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 7
Measures of Learning Outcomes Direct measures of student learning outcomes ACAT Score Statistics Experimental Abnormal Personality Developmental History Social Learning Locally Developed Test Score Statistics Experimental Application Abnormal Personality Counseling and Clinical Developmental History Social Learning Cognitive Performance on Psychological Research Course Project 1. 8 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Measures of Learning Outcomes (cont.) 2. Indirect measures of student learning outcomes Exit interviews 3. Strategies that address shortfalls in student learning or services prior to graduation Students who answer less than 70% of the items correctly on the locally developed tests will be identified as deficient Faculty are considering: Offering deficient undergraduates tutoring by graduate students Offering a one-hour senior capstone course in which deficiencies are cleared Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 9
Report on actions from the three previously chosen priority outcomes 1. Action plans for demonstrating knowledge in research methods All students must take ACAT and Exit Interview before their final degree check. Too late for this year, but is currently being strictly enforced ACAT offered on-line for ease in scheduling Computers in Psychology office/laptop so the exit interview and ACAT can be conveniently administered Departmental members will examine locally developed tests to determine if they need to be modified. This was done and a few changes were made (e.g., Experimental Psychology) 10 10 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Report on actions from the three previously chosen priority outcomes (cont.) 2. Action plans for applying knowledge in research methods Faculty will examine the locally developed Applications Test to determine if it needs to be modified. This was done; the test was judged to have face validity so it was not modified. Psychological Research instructor provided training among raters prior to the Psychological Research course project presentations to improve inter-rater reliability (.21). The inter-rater reliability was .55. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 11
Report on actions from the three previously chosen priority outcomes (cont.) 3. Action plans for demonstrating knowledge in clinical areas All students must take ACAT and Exit Interview before their final degree check. Too late for this year, but is currently being strictly enforced ACAT offered on-line for ease in scheduling Computers in Psychology office so the exit interview and ACAT can be conveniently administered Departmental members will examine the locally developed Abnormal test to determine if it needs to be modified. This was done and the test was judged to have face validity; it was not modified. Faculty will create an assessment test to measure knowledge of Personality and Counseling and Clinical These tests were created and data from the tests are presented in this report. 12 12 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Student-learning outcome and measurements MEASUREMENTS OF STUDENT LEARNING OR SERVICE OUTCOME Methods used to determine validity of measurement instruments Methods used to determine reliability of measurements CURRICULUM AREA OR TARGET AUDIENCE PROGRAM OUTCOME Schedule for measurements Measurements Application of knowledge in research methods PSY 3423, 4423, and 4433 1. Score on locally developed Applications Test (direct) Only face validity is assessed Chronbach s alpha Annual 2. Performance on Psychological Research course project presentation (direct) Inter-rater reliability Inter-rater reliability Fall and Spring semesters 3. Student exit interview (indirect) Only face validity is assessed None Annual 13 13 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Mean Performance on Locally Developed Applications Test (n = 10) Item Mean Standard Deviation Rating Identify IVs 52% 30.20 Unsatisfactory Identify DVs 80% 42.20 Satisfactory Identify statistical tests 90% 31.60 Satisfactory Describe results 73% 24.06 Satisfactory Total 73.60% 21.08 Satisfactory On average, the students are performing satisfactorily on the locally developed applications test, in which students are asked to read a psychology journal article, identify the key components of the study, and interpret the results. However, students are having difficulty identifying independent variables. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 14
Performance on Locally Developed Applications Test (n = 10) Item < 70% 70% < X < 90% > 90% Identify IVs 90% 0% 10% (2- 0%; 7 60%) (1 100%) Identify DVs 20% (2 0%) 0% 80% (8 100%) Identify statistical tests 10% (1 0%) 0% 90% (9 100%) Describe results 30% 50% 20% Total 30% 50% 20% Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 15
Mean Performance on Locally Developed Applications Test Over Time Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 16
Mean Performance on Psychological Research Course Project (n = 23) Section Average Rating Standard Deviation Performance Abstract 4.02 .99 Outstanding Background 3.69 1.18 Satisfactory Methodology 3.86 1.12 Satisfactory Results 3.95 1.11 Satisfactory Discussion 3.48 1.14 Satisfactory Presentation 3.76 1.07 Satisfactory Overall Quality 3.92 .87 Satisfactory On average, the students are performing satisfactorily on the Psychological Research course project, in which the students perform a literature review, create hypotheses, design a study, collect data, analyze the data, interpret their results, and present their study in a poster at a mini-conference to students and faculty. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 17
Mean Performance on Psychological Research Course Project Over Time Section 2009-2010 (n = 23) 2008-2009 (n = 30) 2007-2008 (n = 13) 2006-2007 Abstract 4.02 4.23 3.89 4.08 Background 3.69 3.93 3.77 3.50 Methodology 3.86 4.63 3.88 3.75 Results 3.95 4.37 3.94 4.58 Discussion 3.48 3.96 3.85 3.75 Presentation 3.76 3.97 4.14 4.33 Overall Quality 3.92 4.07 3.97 4.33 Over time, the students have performed satisfactorily on the Psychological Research course project. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 18
Exit interview Three items assessed knowledge in research methods using seven point Likert-format scales from low to high Rate how well the program promoted competence in research skills Rate how well the program prepared you (provided you knowledge) in the area of Statistics Rate how well the program prepared you (provided you knowledge) in the area of Experimental T-tests were performed to compare the average score with the midpoint of the scale. Average responses that are significantly below or equal to the midpoint will be unsatisfactory Average responses that are significantly above the midpoint of the scale will be satisfactory Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 19
Display Assessment Data from Exit Interview Item Mean t-test Significance Level Research Skills 5.44 4.36 p < .01 Statistics 6.19 7.89 p < .01 Research Design 5.80 4.89 p < .01 N = 16 On average, students believe the program prepared them in Statistics and Research, and that they are competent researchers. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 20
Exit Interview Over Time Research Statistics Experimental 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 2002-3 2003-4 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 21
Action Plan To improve students ability to identify independent variables in research studies Instructors of Applied Quantitative Methods will consider adding assignments focused on this skill This skill will be assessed in Psychological Research in addition to Applied Quantitative Methods Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 22
Student-learning outcome and measurements MEASUREMENTS OF STUDENT LEARNING OR SERVICE OUTCOME CURRICULUM AREA OR TARGET AUDIENCE Methods used to determine validity of measurement instruments Methods used to determine reliability of measurements PROGRAM OUTCOME Schedule for measurements Measurements Demonstrate knowledge in clinical areas Upper division psychology courses, especially PSY 4363, 4393, and 3333 1. Score on ACAT Abnormal (direct) Norm-referenced scores ACAT publishes its reliability score Annual 2. Score on locally developed Abnormal Test (direct) Correlations with standardized test score (ACAT Abnormal)* Chronbach s alpha Annual 3. Score on ACAT Personality (direct) ACAT publishes its reliability score Annual Norm-references scores 4. Score on locally developed Personality Test (direct) Annual Correlations with standardized test score (ACAT Personality)* Chronbach s alpha 5. Score on locally developed Counseling and Clinical Test (direct) Only face validity is assessed None Annual 6. Student exit interview (indirect) Only face validity is assessed None Annual *ns 23 23 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
A little bit about Area Concentration Achievement Tests (ACAT) The ACATs are produced as part of a national project; the project assists departments with outcome assessment The ACAT is used at four-year institutions nationwide Both public and private institutions are participants The ACAT uses a random sample of the items submitted in each area Scores range from 200 to 800, however, we will report the standardized scores allowing for easy comparison with national norms Crain (1989) and Markus, Mukina, & Golden (1996) have established that the ACAT is reliable and valid Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 24
Scores on ACAT Personality Test Unsatisfactory (z < -1) Satisfactory (-1 < z < 1) Outstanding (z > 1) N 0 9 0 % 0 100 0 Three seniors did not take PSY 4393 Personality at CU. All students who took the ACAT performed satisfactorily. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 25
Scores on ACAT Personality Test Over Time 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 2000- 1 Scores are consistently satisfactory. 2001- 2 2002- 3 2003- 4 2004- 5 2005- 6 2007- 8 2008- 9 2009- 10 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 26
Scores on Locally Developed Personality Test Unsatisfactory (< 70 % Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 33 1 0 % 97.06 2.94 0.00 Posttest N 8 18 9 % 22.86 51.43 25.71 t(33) = 6.70, p < .01 M-posttest = 78.00%, s = 19.82 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 27
Scores on ACAT Abnormal Test Unsatisfactory (z < -1) Satisfactory (-1 < z < 1) Outstanding (z > 1) N 2 8 1 % 18.18 72.72 9.09 One senior did not take PSY 4363 Abnormal at CU. The majority of students who took the ACAT performed satisfactorily. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 28
Scores on ACAT Abnormal Test Over Time 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 2000- 1 (n=40) (n=23) (n=41) (n=49) (n=37) (n=34) (n=19) (n=25) (n=12) Scores are consistently satisfactory. 2001- 2 2002- 3 2003- 4 2004- 5 2005- 6 2007- 8 2008- 9 2009- 10 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 29
Scores on Locally Developed Abnormal Test Unsatisfactory (< 70 % Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 35 2 0 % 94.59 5.41 0 Posttest N 8 16 12 % 22.22 44.44 33.33 t(34) = 13.66, p < .01 M-posttest = 81.94%, s = 17.70 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 30
Mean Performance on Abnormal Locally Developed Test Over Time Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 31
Scores on Locally Developed Counseling and Clinical Test Unsatisfactory (< 70% Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 38 5 0 % 88.37 11.63 0 Posttest N 6 24 12 % 14.29 57.14 28.57 t(38) = 12.47, p < .01 M-posttest = 83.10%, s = 17.18 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 32
Exit Interview Two items assessed knowledge in clinical areas using seven point Likert-format scales from low to high Rate how well the program prepared you (provided you knowledge) in the area of Abnormal Rate how well the program prepared you (provided you knowledge) in the area of Personality T-tests were performed to compare the average score with the midpoint of the scale. Average responses that are significantly below or equal to the midpoint will be unsatisfactory Average responses that are significantly above the midpoint of the scale will be satisfactory Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 33
Display Assessment Data from Exit Interview Item Mean t-test Significance Level Abnormal 5.88 6.54 p < .01 Personality 5.81 6.54 p < .01 N = 16 On average, the students believe the program prepared them in Abnormal and Personality. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 34
Exit Interview Over Time Abnormal Personality 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 2002-3 2003-4 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 35
Action Plan To increase performance on locally developed posttests Perform an item analysis to determine which areas are frequently missed and address these in lectures To increase the number of seniors that complete the ACAT and the Exit Interview Require students complete both before they are given their degree check Offer the ACAT on-line for ease in scheduling Offer exit interview on-line and in hard copies Send e-mail stating they must complete both before they can enroll in their last semester To measure the validity of the locally developed tests, we should perform correlations between ACAT scores and locally developed tests. However, for each area, there were few students that took both the locally developed test and the ACAT Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 36
Student-learning outcome and measurements MEASUREMENTS OF STUDENT LEARNING OR SERVICE OUTCOME Methods used to determine validity of measurement instruments Methods used to determine reliability of measurements CURRICULUM AREA OR TARGET AUDIENCE PROGRAM OUTCOME Schedule for measurements Measurements Demonstrate knowledge in experimental areas Psychology courses, especially PSY 2113, 3353, 3413, 3313, 3383 1. Score on ACAT for History, Developmental, Learning, and Social (direct) Norm-referenced scores ACAT publishes its reliability score Annual 2. Score on locally developed History, Developmental, Learning, and Social , and Cognitive Tests (direct) Chronbach s alpha Correlations with standardized test score (ACAT tests)* Annual 3. Student exit interview (indirect) None Annual Only face validity is assessed *ns 37 37 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010
Scores on ACAT History Test Unsatisfactory (z < -1) Satisfactory (-1 < z < 1) Outstanding (z > 1) N 2 10 0 % 16.67 83.33 0.00 The majority of students who took the ACAT performed satisfactorily. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 38
Scores on ACAT History Test Over Time (n=40) (n=23) (n=41) (n=49) (n=37) (n=34) (n=19) (n=25) (n=12) Scores are consistently satisfactory. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 39
Scores on Locally Developed History Test Unsatisfactory (< 70 % Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 21 5 0 % 80.77 19.23 0.00 Posttest N 11 13 0 % 45.83 54.17 0.00 t(23) = 3.50, p < .01 M-posttest = 64.58%, s = 15.60 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 40
Scores on ACAT Developmental Test Unsatisfactory (z < -1) Satisfactory (-1 < z < 1) Outstanding (z > 1) N 3 5 1 % 33.33 55.56 11.11 Three seniors did not take PSY 3353 Lifespan Human Growth and Development at CU. The majority of students who took the ACAT performed satisfactorily. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 41
Scores on ACAT Developmental Test Over Time (n=40) (n=23) (n=41) (n=49) (n=37) (n=34) (n=19) (n=25) (n=12) Scores are consistently satisfactory. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 42
Scores on Locally Developed Developmental Test Unsatisfactory (< 70 % Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 74 2 0 % 97.37 2.63 0.00 Posttest N 26 40 6 % 34.67 53.33 8.00 t(64) = 12.09, p < .01 M-posttest = 70.93%, s = 18.10 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 43
Scores on ACAT Learning Test Unsatisfactory (z < -1) Satisfactory (-1 < z < 1) Outstanding (z > 1) N 4 5 1 % 40.00 50.00 10.00 Two seniors did not take PSY 3413 Psychology of Learning at CU. The majority of students who took the ACAT performed satisfactorily. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 44
Scores on ACAT Learning Test Over Time (n=40) (n=23) (n=41) (n=49) (n=37) (n=34) (n=19) (n=25) (n=12) Scores are consistently satisfactory. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 45
Scores on Locally Developed Learning Test Unsatisfactory (< 70 % Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 17 1 0 % 94.44 5.56 0.00 Posttest N 13 5 0 % 72.22 27.78 0.00 t(17) = 1.65, p > .05 M-posttest = 54.44%, s = 16.17 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 46
Scores on ACAT Social Test Unsatisfactory (z < -1) Satisfactory (-1 < z < 1) Outstanding (z > 1) N 4 5 0 % 44.44 55.56 0.00 Three seniors did not take PSY 3383 Social Psychology at CU. The majority of students who took the ACAT performed satisfactorily. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 47
Scores on ACAT Social Test Over Time (n=40) (n=23) (n=41) (n=49) (n=37) (n=34) (n=19) (n=25) (n=12) Scores are consistently satisfactory. Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 48
Scores on Locally Developed Social Test Unsatisfactory (< 70 % Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 25 4 0 % 86.21 13.79 0.00 Posttest N 3 13 15 % 9.68 41.94 48.39 t(21) = 10.36, p < .01 M-posttest = 88.71%, s = 14.32 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 49
Scores on Locally Developed Cognitive Test Unsatisfactory (< 70 % Correct) Satisfactory (70 < % Correct < 90) Outstanding (% Correct > 90) Pretest N 38 5 0 % 88.37 11.63 0.00 Posttest N 7 19 3 % 24.13 65.52 10.34 t(28) = 6.72, p < .01 M-posttest = 77.93%, s = 17.80 Program Quality Improvement Report 2009-2010 50
