Narrative

Outcomes/measures tracked and tools utilized

At JCCC, assessment of the curriculum, including the general education objectives and co-curricular activities, is driven by departmentally designed tools. Programs tailor the assessment process so it answers research/assessment questions meaningful to the teaching faculty as well as campus stakeholders and oversight organizations. Departments use direct assessment tools appropriate to the research question. The results of assessments are discussed and reported out at the program level, then aggregated for campuswide reporting. Both the comprehensive and annual portions of the academic program review include a section on reporting assessment activities and actions taken. The Office of Outcomes Assessment (OOA) collects progress reports and raw data from programs and aggregates results using the standardized master matrix designed by the faculty.  This data is reported annually to the campus and disaggregated and reported by division.  Annual results are published on the OOA website. Additionally, beyond course-embedded assessments, some career and technical programs utilize nationally benchmarked tests and certifications to monitor student success in the programs.

 

Summary results of measures 

General Education Assessment: The 2015–2016 academic year marks the second full year of implementation of the general education assessment plan across the College. The chart above shows the two-year combined assessment levels of the general education curriculum by student learning outcome.  Over the course of the last two years, a total of 19,262 student assessments were conducted and reported in the general education curriculum.

 

 

1.2 General Education Assessment

 

 Comparison of results with internal targets and external benchmarks

The general education student learning goals include both direct and indirect benchmarks. Programs determine levels of Mastery for direct measures of student learning outcomes and report these in a matrix.  Institutional Targets are reflected in the table below. Since the College uses embedded assessment measures, there are no external benchmarks of the learning outcomes. The career and technical programs are an exception to this because many have have external capstone exams/licensure requirements.

 

 

Table 1.1 Institutional Target—Student Learning Outcomes

Mastery

At least 10–15% of students should gain mastery of the SLO being assessed.

Progressing

At least 65–70% of students should be progressing on the SLO being assessed.

Low/No Mastery

Less than 20% of students should exhibit low or no mastery of the SLO being assessed.

 

 

While the first two years of assessment show targets well above the institutional targets, some of these results are due to maturing assessment instruments.  The overall mastery indicators should fall over time to more accurately reflect students progressing in their skills.

 

Institutional targets for indirect assessment of general education curriculum: The campus has spent the first two years of developing the assessment establishing baseline data for survey questions within CCSSE that reflect student perception of the general education curriculum.  The College is administering the full CCSSE survey in Spring 2018.  Along with the baseline data, this should provide some strong indications of student perception of learning in the general education requirements.

 

 

Table 1.2 Institutional Target—Indirect Assessment of General Education Curriculum
Indirect Assessment of

 

Student Learning Outcomes
Institutional Benchmarks

Survey results from CCSSE question(s):

 

"How much has your experience at this college contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in the following areas?"

  • Acquiring a broad general education
  • Writing clearly and effectively
  • Speaking clearly and effectively
  • Thinking critically and analytically
  • Solving numerical problems
  • Using computing and information technology
  • Working effectively with others
  • Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds

Student Perception

 

National 50th percentile of community college students responding to CCSSE questions

  

 

Interpretation of results and insights gained

In this second year of data submission for general education outcomes, no general education courses chose student learning outcome number two—collaborate respectfully with others. Although there are several career and technical programs that assess this particular outcome, it does not appear to be an integral part of the general education curriculum and will need to be revisited by the faculty at the end of the three-year cycle of data collection. The other learning outcome receiving little assessment activity is outcome number eight—use current technology efficiently and responsibly. Although technology is used throughout the College in multiple disciplines and coursework, it may be that it is used primarily as a tool for learning, and not as a learning outcome within the disciplines and coursework. As with learning outcome number two, the faculty will need to revisit outcome eight following completion of the three-year assessment cycle for the general education curriculum.  

 

Overall mastery remains somewhat higher than expectations, but assessment instruments are still maturing after only two cycles of general education assessment.  The Office of Outcomes Assessment has provided additional training and information on Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy as a way to discuss appropriate levels of assessment and how to approach writing assessment questions and assessment instruments. As the overall assessment measures mature over time, the results should shift more toward progressing as the prevailing measurement of student performance. 

Evidence
URLOffice of Outcomes Assessment
File  1.2 General Education Assessment