|Edison State College Response Report to the Visiting Committee|
|Comprehensive Standard 18.104.22.168 Institutional Effectiveness: Educational Programs|
Recommendation 7: The Committee recommends that the institution identifies expected outcomes, assesses the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of the results in educational programs, to include student learning outcomes.
During the past 18 months, Edison State College has undergone evolution in the areas of planning, assessment, and effectiveness. The resulting planning and review cycle [ 1 ] integrates assessment results, unit planning, and budget processes. This planning and review cycle capitalizes on the strengths of the existing program review model [ 2 ] and Institutional Portfolio assessment model (formerly the Seybert Model) [ 3 ] [ 4 ] to generalize a focus on actionable results to all areas of institutional operations.
By employing course-level assessment to gauge achievement of student learning outcomes, the academic units systematically apply assessment results to continuous improvement planning. Associate Deans, Discipline Chairs, Program Directors, and faculty members incorporate student satisfaction into their planning and assessment processes through data derived from specific components of the Student Instructional Report (SIR II). These components include Course Organization and Planning, Communication, Faculty/Student Interaction, and Assignments/Exams/Grading. Student success/retention rates represent a third source of information that guides the planning and review process.
Although we are midway through the first year of the new planning and assessment calendar [ 5 ], many academic departments have collected student performance information, analyzed their data, and are considering these analyses as they begin the 2012-2013 planning process. To ensure that this planning and review cycle is implemented in all academic units at Edison State College, the administration established a Response Team to examine:
Additionally, the Response Team provides support to unit planners who may require assistance in setting goals, gathering and analyzing data, reporting actual results, and “closing the loop” by using assessment data to inform program improvement. The Team consisted of representatives from a variety of departments [ 6 ] [ 7 ]. The Dean of Institutional Research, Planning, and Effectiveness provided oversight to ensure that academic units can demonstrate measurable improvement due to enhanced planning efforts.
Table 22.214.171.124-1 highlights the manner in which assessment results from the current plans are informing next year’s planning efforts.
Departmental Unit Plans, Mid-Year Assessments, and Use of Results
|2011-2012 Planning and Mid-year Results||Use of Mid-Year Assessment Results|
|Mathematics and Biological Sciences [ 8 ]
The math department will continue its efforts to provide a smooth transition between College Prep (Developmental) Math and MAT 1033 in order to provide educational pathways for under-prepared students.
|During the Fall 2011 semester, 26 FT College Prep and Math Department faculty, adjuncts and staff from Lee, Collier, and Hendry/Glades campuses participated in one or more of the 10 Community of Practice: Math sessions.
The overall feedback from the fall 2011 Community of Practice sessions was positive as measured on a series of Likert Scale items. Community of Practice facilitators will use results in planning spring sessions. Each of the areas has scheduled dates for the spring 2012 semester.
During the Summer 2011 semester, 70% of the students enrolled in MAT 1033 and had one or more developmental mathematics courses were successful. The MAT 1033 Success Rates table displays the rates from 2005-2011. An independent means t-test demonstrated that the overall success rates for students who complete the developmental mathematics sequence before enrolling in MAT 1033 are not significantly different from those who place directly into MAT 1033.
|The College Prep and Mathematics department used date preference surveys and session evaluation forms to modify Community of Practice session dates and incorporate new Math topics in planning the Spring 2012 semester.
Both the Developmental Mathematics success rates and the t-test results were shared with developmental and credit mathematics faculty at a cross-departmental meeting on Jan. 27, 2012. The review of the data served as a catalyst for discussions about offering continuing academic and social support to Developmental Mathematics (MAT 0018, MAT 0028) students
|Social Sciences: Economics, Political Science, and Psychology [ 9 ]
The department will ensure that dual enrollment demonstrates achievement on all assessed SLOs to the same extent as traditional college students.
|According to student performance on items 8, 17, 20, and 27 of the Test of Understanding in College Economics (TUCE), Edison students met or exceeded the national means (based on the TUCE norm); only on question 24 did students score below this mean. However, we believe that these means are slightly below our expectation for student learning outcome achievement; this implies the potential for instructional improvement. The aggregated results suggest that, on average, the macroeconomic competence of Edison State College students is of a high order. Results of internally developed DEP 2004, PSY 2012, and POS 2041 course assessments will be available at the end of the 2011-2012 Academic year (June 2012).||Based on these baseline data, the faculty plans to review instruction on Monetary and Fiscal policies. The TUCE results are informing our efforts to: 1) review all assessments for learning outcomes concerning fiscal policies, 2) search for best teaching practices on the concepts and share findings with colleagues, 3) evaluate the TUCE and similar items for content targets, and 4) monitor question results on subsequent TUCE administration.|
|College Prep: English Competency [ 10 ] Students will write at the post-secondary level that correlates with college success by completion of the developmental English sequence.||During the summer 2011 semester, 80% of the students who were enrolled in ENC 1101 and had one or more developmental writing courses were successful. The ENC 1101 Success Rates table that displays the rates from 2005-2011 highlights this trend. Results of an independent means t-test indicate that students who complete the developmental English sequence before enrolling in ENC 1101 are not significantly different (in terms of success and retention) from those who place directly into ENC 1101. An e-studio study of ENC and REA courses (November 2011) yielded the following results: 1)ENC 1101 performance is significantly correlated with student performance in College Prep reading and writing courses; 2) Student performance in reading and writing exit exams are significantly related to their performances on the reading and writing portions of the CPT; 3) Performance on exit exams were not related to course modality, and 4) Student performance in ENC 1101 was not related to their performance on CPT or course modality. During the Fall 2011 semester, 64% of ENC 0025 students district-wide successfully completed the course and passed the mastery exam. The success rate for each campus is as follows: Collier 77%, Charlotte 74%, Hendry-Glades 83%, Lee 65%.||Both the Developmental Writing success rates data and the t-test results were shared with faculty at the February 2012 department meeting; these analyses served as a catalyst for discussions about offering continuing academic and social support to Developmental Writing (ENC 0015, 0025) students [ 11 ]. On Dec. 7, 2011, faculty and administrators met to review the results of a study regarding success rates of students in ENC 9020 and REA 9003 in both traditional (face-to-face) and e-studio modalities. The Dean of IRPE reviewed 14 data tables and highlighted instances where the study yielded significant correlations. The group discussed the implications and how the data could inform future program offerings. The Dean and Department chair shared the data with the faculty at the February 2012 department meeting to serve as a point of departure for discussions on emporium offerings and the possibility of expanding courses in alternative modalities in other disciplines such as mathematics.|
In addition to the Associate in Arts degree, in which students can potentially earn all required credits online, Edison State College provides students with the opportunity to earn the majority of required credits for six Associate in Science and Baccalaureate programs online, including the AS in Accounting Technology, Business Administration and Management, and Criminal Justice Technology, and the Baccalaureate in Science in Nursing, and the Baccalaureates in Applied Science in Public Safety Administration, and Supervision and Management.
Academic programs with substantial online course offerings include both traditional and online sections. Edison Online administrators work to ensure that student and program achievement are not dependent on the modality of instruction. In many cases, these programs and their constituent courses are assessed through achievement of student learning outcomes. This is demonstrated through course-level assessment studies, student satisfaction as measured by SIR II (e-SIR), and course success/retention rates. Table 126.96.36.199-2 highlights unit plans associated with ensuring comparability between traditional and online course sections from programs with substantial online offerings.
Departmental Unit Plans and Comparability Between Modalities
|2011-2012 Annual Unit Plan||Highlighted Student Learning Outcome, Satisfaction, and Success/Retention Results||Use of Results|
|Math and Science [ 12 ]||MAC 1105: Results from the Fall 2011 semi-common final exam have been uploaded (see document entitled MAC 1105 201210 All Summaries 02282012). We considered the performance of all students on the course outcome items. Statistically different test scores between DE and non-DE sections were noted, but (on overall test scores) the effect size indicated a very low practical difference. This will be addressed in the general improvement plans (see use of results). BSC 1005: Fall 2010 (pilot) and Fall 2011 data derived from pre-test/post-test (common final exam) study indicated that student performance increased significantly by the end of each term. Items associated with cellular metabolism, photosynthesis, and reproduction consistently provided students with difficulty. SIR II - eSIR Comparison for BSC 1005 and MAC 1105: According to both the SIR II and the eSIR, students (in general) express satisfaction with course sections across all components. However, students taking traditional sections consistently express greater satisfaction with their experiences than those who took BSC 1005 or MAC 1105 online. MAC 1105 Success/Retention Rates: During Fall 2011, the general success/retention rate was 71.21% (withdrawal rate was 7.58%). Sections that served dual enrollment students exclusively enjoyed substantially higher than average success/retention rates. Edison Online and Lee Campus success rates were slightly below the general average. The highest withdrawal rates were in sections offered via Edison Online and the Charlotte campus. BSC 1005 Success/Retention Rates: During the Fall 2011 term, the overall success/retention rate was 69.36% (withdrawal rate was 10.26%). Edison Online had a withdrawal rate slightly higher than average; however, Edison Online's success/retention rate was very close to the general average. Hendry/La Belle sections enjoyed the smallest success/retention rate (56.76%).||MAC 1105 Mid-year application: For the 2011-12 assessment cycle, the departmental final exam questions of interest (post-test version A) are 4, 5, 6, 9, 12, 13, 19, and 20. Less than 50% of the students answered these questions correctly on the post-test we used during the 2010-11 cycle. The assessment report for MAC 1105 from the previous year is included. MAC 1105 Mid-year application: Refine the exam. Possibly break up to basic skills. Possibly break up outcome 12. MAC 1105 Mid-year application: Use of departmental exam was not required of all representative populations in the Fall semester (For example, Charlotte Dual Enrollment did not participate --- more than half of the DE population.) Use of departmental final has become mandatory for Spring 2012. BSC 1005: The pilot data resulted in the rewording of certain questions on the test, and the identification of biological concepts that needed more in-depth instruction during the course (which were communicated to all faculty).|
|Edison Online [ 13 ]||Students in GEB1011 are meeting the learning outcomes at a comparable rate to on-campus classes. In general eSIR scores demonstrate that students are satisfied with online sections. However, through comparing SIR II with eSir results, we found a general trend indicating that student satisfaction with Edison Online sections is lower than student satisfaction with traditional sections; sample size differences precluded us from conducting a test of statistical significance Edison Online had lower completion rates for 36/60 of the subject codes (60%); of the courses that had lower completion rates, the percentage difference between the on-campus rate and Edison Online ranged from 1.17% to 56.25%; four of the courses (31%) differed by more than 25% from the corresponding on-campus subject.||COMPLETION RATES: The Director of Academic Review and Improvement will examine the courses in all given subject codes that have more than a 25% difference between the online completion rate and the on- campus completion rate. This review will include all high enrollment class regardless of success/retention rates. Individual sections will be analyzed in terms of success/retention rates, course materials, learning activities/projects, and tests/quizzes; we will be paying particular attention to withdrawal rates. In addition, a survey will be sent to all students who were enrolled in these courses to identify additional factors that may have impeded success. A written report to the discipline area faculty members and the Dean of Edison On-line will contain suggested strategies for improvement. This review will be completed by the next term in which each identified course is taught.|
|Business Administration & Management [ 14 ]||Results of Fall 2010 and 2011 common-finals in GEB 1011 indicate the following: 1) in both terms, student learning outcome scores associated with “comparative and absolute advantage” were among the lowest across all campuses and modalities; 2) Student performance improved between the Fall 2010 and Fall 2011 terms; 3) in both terms, student learning outcome scores associated with “economic advantage” were among the highest scores across all campuses and modalities; 4) the general improvement trend between Fall 2010 and Fall 2011 was also apparent in this outcome. An analyses of variance (course outcome scores for GEB 1011) highlighted significant differences across campuses and modalities for a number of student learning outcomes; in each of these cases, students from Edison Online performed better than their colleagues in Collier (and in some cases, all traditional campus locations). ANOVAs conducted with overall test score as a dependent variable and campus/modality as the independent variable was significant at the alpha = .05 level. The pair-wise comparisons indicate that Edison Online, Lee, and Charlotte students performed better (on average) than Collier campus students. As comparisons of success/retention rates and satisfaction rates (SIR II and e-SIR) indicate, we have substantial differences among campuses. These comparisons indicate that students who take the course online withdraw at higher rates and are less satisfied (in general) with their course experiences. These differences are more pronounced in GEB 1011 than MAN 2021.||For the 2012-2013 academic year, the GEB 1011 final will be revised to provide students with more opportunities answer questions concerning “comparative and absolute advantage.” More importantly, the department chair will work with faculty to re-allocate teaching time to emphasize this student learning outcome topic. To address differing levels of success/retention and satisfaction among the campuses, the department will develop a targeted, collaborative 2012-2013 unit outcome plan.|
To ensure that student achievement of general education competencies is assessed and reinforced throughout the curriculum, the General Education planning unit participates in the institution-wide planning and review cycle. In addition to the institution’s administration, the General Education planning unit collaborates with the Student Assessment Committee and the Department of Institutional Research, Planning, and Effectiveness. These collaborative efforts promote achievement of General Education by establishing planning outcomes in the areas of academic support, systematic assessment, and faculty professional development. Table 188.8.131.52-3 highlights examples of progress in these areas.
Application of Assessment Results to Continuous Improvement Planning
|2011-2012 Unit Plan||2011-2012 Planning and Mid-year Results||Use of Results|
|During the 2011 2012 academic year, students will identify, describe, and apply responsibilities, core civic beliefs, and values present in a diverse society in their coursework to achieve the Global Socio-Cultural Responsibility General Education competency
||Mid-Year Results: On Oct. 22, 2011, the Lee Campus Student Government Association raised more than $1,000 for the Susan G. Komen - Relay for Life held at the Tanger Outlets in Fort Myers, Florida. Over 40 students participated in the walk. Mid-Year Results: Thursday, November 10th The Student Veterans Organization hosted their Annual Veteran’s Day celebration at Edison State College. During the event they collected more than $200 in toys for the local Toys for Tots organization to give children toys during the holidays. Mid-Year Results: Saturday, December 3rd the SGA delivered gifts, held activities, and brought lunch to the 35 kids of the RCMA Migrant Daycare in Bonita Springs, Florida. Mid Year Results (All Sections): The GSR Gen Ed study included 44 student artifacts. The mean score for these artifacts (across all rubric dimensions) was 2.0 out of 4.0. According to the scoring team evaluations, the students achieved the highest average score (2.4) on dimension one of the rubric (Identified and Describes Socio-Cultural Perspectives). The lowest average score (1.6) was associated with the third dimension (Demonstrates awareness of civic responsibilities resulting from living in a diverse society). Mid Year Results (Online Sections Only): The GSR study included 13 artifacts from students taking courses online during the summer term. The mean score of these artifacts (across all rubric dimensions) was 2.0; this is comparable to the scores associated with artifacts taken from traditional sections. The highest average score is associated with dimension one of the rubric (2.2); the lowest average is associated with dimension three (2.0).||As the participation levels in the Komen Relay for Life, the Veterans Day Celebration, and SGA Migrant Day Care Gift programs indicate, fewer than 10% of the students (who have earned > 45 credit hours) participated in service activities facilitated by student life. Suggested solutions include
|The Assessment Chair (with input center managers and the Dean of Institutional Research, Planning and Effectiveness) will develop direct and indirect evidence that students are achieving the competencies included in ESCs general education curriculum. This evidence will foster the development of centers and (if necessary) modifications to existing centers [ 16 ].||77.75% of all enrolled students completed ENC 1101 successfully (successful completion implies that a student earned a C or higher). 80.93% of center participants who were enrolled in ENC 1101 completed the course successfully. The results of analysis of variance indicated that students who participated in the writing center earned (on average) significantly better grades in ENC 1101 than those who did not (f = 5.11; df = 3258; pr> f 0.024). 76.33% of all enrolled students completed ENC 1102 successfully. 91.14% of center participants who were enrolled in ENC 1102 completed the course successfully. The results of analysis of variance indicated thatstudents who participated in the writing center earned (on average) significantly better grades in ENC 1102 than those who did not (f = 8.69; df = 1410; pr> f 0.003). 85.79% of all enrolled students completed SPC 1017 successfully. 95.24% of center participants who were enrolled in SPC 1017 completed the course successfully. The results of analysis of variance indicated that students who participated in the writing center earned (on average) significantly better grades in SPC 1017 than those who did not (f = 11.07; df = 1160; pr> f 0.0009). NOTE: Cell sizes are so different as to preclude the reliability of ANOVA results. 75.53% of all enrolled students completed SPC 2023 successfully. 95.65% of center participants who were enrolled in SPC 2023 completed successfully. The results of analysis of variance indicated that students who participated in the writing center earned (on average) significantly better grades in SPC 2023 than those who did not (f = 9.92; df = 187; pr> f 0.0019).||Since the number of times a student came to the center was not correlated with grade improvement, the group concluded that pursuing assistance in the center was the primary factor associated with improved performance. Given these considerations, the group spent a sizeable portion of the meeting discussing methods through which more students could be served through the Writing Center, including: 1) Increasing the center’s capacity to meet student demand for services (additional instructional assistants), 2) increasing the number of workshops offered per semester, 3) increasing the percentage of composition students served by the writing center, and 4) increasing the students served from 6.7% to 10% (from 315 to 467). On Feb. 28, the Dean of College and Career Readiness reviewed the Academic Success Center Data Analysis (provided by the IRPE) with the Academic Success Staff. The group discussed inferences to be made from data as well as future studies that could be run to provide additional insight into the connection between use of the Writing Center and Oral Communication Center and success in related courses (ENC 1101, 1102, SPC 1017, 2023). These results will also be shared with the faculty liaison for the center.|
|During the 2011-2012 academic year, students will use analysis, synthesis, and evaluation in their coursework to achieve the Critical Thinking General Education competency [ 17 ].||Dr. Nosich's Critical Thinking workshop was attended by 67 members of the faculty, staff, and administration representing all four campuses on 7/12, was attended by 58 on 7/13. Forty attendees responded to a workshop evaluation. “Excellent” scores were awarded for all categories on 14 of the evaluations. The remaining evaluations scored, primarily, no lower than “good” in various areas; however, 16 scored “needs improvement” in the area of “Visual Aids.” Pam Mangene’s Critical Thinking Workshop received ratings of “excellent” in all areas from 12 of the participants, and “good” in all areas from one of the participants.||Based upon the success of the past Critical Thinking Workshops, and the attendance at the summer session, the QEP Implementation Team is currently seeking an external Critical Thinking expert to lead a 1-2 day spring or summer workshop. At a Community of Practice meeting on Feb. 27, faculty shared insights gained from Steve Piscitelli's Critical Thinking session, and activities they intend to apply with students. The group agreed to invite Piscitelli to lead a summer workshop at ESC.|
|Faculty will successfully incorporate the lab services into their course designs, and this will have a direct and positive impact on student capacity to achieve Speech Learning Outcomes. [ 18 ]||85.79% of all enrolled students completed SPC 1017 successfully 95.24% of Center participants who were enrolled in SPC 1017 completed the course successfully The results of analysis of variance indicated that students who participated in the Writing Center earned (on average) significantly better grades in SPC 1017 than those who do not (f = 11.07; df = 1160; pr> f 0.0009) NOTE: Cell sizes are so different as to preclude the reliability of ANOVA results 75.53% of all enrolled students completed SPC 2023 successfully 95.65% of center participants who were enrolled in SPC 2023 completed the course successfully Analysis of variance indicated that students who participated in the writing center earned (on average) significantly better grades in SPC 2023 than those who did not (f = 9.92; df = 187; pr> f 0.0019)||Given the value of participation in the Center, methods will be implemented to increase student participation. The Center’s staff, faculty, and divisional leadership will consider a variety of tactics; these include 1) Focusing on internal marketing (expressed through a percentage increase in the number of Facebook fans), 2) increasing the staffing capacity to serve more students at more times (perhaps reclassification of one instructional assistant to a full-time position), 3) enhancing efforts to track the number of student participants from term to term, and 4) identifying an Oral Communications Center lead faculty member for each campus to promote the Center’s utility and advocate for its use|
|1. Planning Calendar and Cycle Diagrams||Diagrams describing the ESC planning cycle and the annual planning calendar|
|2. Annual Program Review Secondary Biology||B.S. in Secondary Education Biology Annual Program Review reports 2009-2011|
|3. Seybert Description||Written description of the Seybert assessment model|
|4. Sample Gen Ed Course Level Assessment||Written Communication assessment and analysis reporting form|
|5. Course Assessment Schedule Report||Course assessment schedule through 2014-2015|
|6. 184.108.40.206 Response Team Members||List of faculty and staff Response Team members|
|7. 220.127.116.11 Response Team minutes and notes||Minutes from Response Team meetings|
|8. 2011 2012 Outcome 1443 Math||Sample Mathematics discipline 2011-2012 unit outcome|
|9. 2011 2012 Outcome 1502 Tuce Exam||Sample Social Science discipline 2011-2012 unit outcome|
|10. 2011 2012 Outcome 1340 College Prep||Sample College Preparatory discipline 2011-2012 unit outcome|
|11. 2012 2013 Outcome 1653 College Prep||Sample use of results and development of 2012-2013 unit outcome|
|12. 2011 2012 1439 Math Science Assessment||Sample Mathematics and Science discipline unit outcomes|
|13. 2011 2012 Outcome 1581 EOL||Sample Edison Online 2011-2012 unit outcome|
|14. 2011 2012 Outcome 1536 Business Technology||Sample Business and Technology discipline 2011-2012 unit outcomes|
|Sample Global Social Responsibility 2011-2012 outcomes|
|16. 2011 2012 1419 Support Center||Sample writing and oral communication center outcomes 2011-2012|
|17. 2011 2012 1421 Gen Ed CT||Sample critical thinking 2011-2012 outcomes and activities|
|18. 2011 2012 1587 Speech Center||2011-2012 Sample Speech discipline learning outcomes|