Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Semester Assessment Report Form - Principles of Feminist Inquiry | WMST 702, Exams of International Women's Voices

Material Type: Exam; Class: PRIN FEM INQUIRY; Subject: Women's Studies; University: University of Nevada - Las Vegas; Term: Spring 2008;

Typology: Exams

2009/2010

Uploaded on 02/24/2010

koofers-user-98e
koofers-user-98e 🇺🇸

4

(1)

10 documents

1 / 3

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
Date Received
Semester Assessment Report Form: Spring 2008 Data
DUE October 31, 2008
Directions: Please complete a form for each of the programs within your department. This
form was designed to provide a format for assessment reporting and should not be used to limit
the amount of information provided. Each box that is attached to each of the sections is designed
to adjust to varying lengths. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Bea Babbitt at x51506
or via email at: bea.babbitt@unlv.edu.
***Please submit the report electronically to bea.babbitt@unlv.edu
1. Program Information:
Program Bachelor of Arts
Department Communication Studies (COM)
College Greenspun College of Urban Affairs
Program
Assessment
Coordinator
Thomas R. Burkholder
Semester Data
Collected
Spring 2008
Report
Submitted by
Thomas R. Burkholder
Phone/email 702.245.4376 tom.burkholder@unlv.edu
Date Submitted February 2, 2009
2. According to the Assessment Plan for this program, what were the planned assessments to be
conducted during the Spring 2008 semester? You may want to copy and paste from this
program’s assessment plan.
Which outcomes for
this program were
measured?
How did you measure
the outcomes?
What results did you expect? If the
students performed well what would
their performance look like, i.e.
percentages, means, or comparisons to
a national standard?
__8_outcomes out of a total of _9__ outcomes evaluated this semester.
A. Define
communication
Pre-test and post test in
appropriate courses
Progress from pre-test to tests at end of
term
B. Analyze
communication in
diverse settings
Research projects in
advanced courses
Student progress in data collection,
analysis, and writing
C. Identify and explain
historical developments,
theory, etc.
Examinations, student
writing, oral presentations
Individual and collective improvement
from initial tasks to end of term.
D. “Self-Reflexivity” Examinations, student
writing, and self-critique
Improved test scores, progress in writing,
increased perceptiveness in self-
evaluation
pf3

Partial preview of the text

Download Semester Assessment Report Form - Principles of Feminist Inquiry | WMST 702 and more Exams International Women's Voices in PDF only on Docsity!

Date Received Semester Assessment Report Form: Spring 2008 Data DUE October 31, 2008 Directions: Please complete a form for each of the programs within your department. This form was designed to provide a format for assessment reporting and should not be used to limit the amount of information provided. Each box that is attached to each of the sections is designed to adjust to varying lengths. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Bea Babbitt at x or via email at: bea.babbitt@unlv.edu. *** Please submit the report electronically to bea.babbitt@unlv.edu

  1. Program Information: Program Bachelor of Arts Department Communication Studies (COM) College Greenspun College of Urban Affairs Program Assessment Coordinator Thomas R. Burkholder Semester Data Collected Spring 2008 Report Submitted by Thomas R. Burkholder Phone/email 702.245.4376 tom.burkholder@unlv.edu Date Submitted February 2, 2009
  2. According to the Assessment Plan for this program, what were the planned assessments to be conducted during the Spring 2008 semester? You may want to copy and paste from this program’s assessment plan. Which outcomes for this program were measured? How did you measure the outcomes? What results did you expect? If the students performed well what would their performance look like, i.e. percentages, means, or comparisons to a national standard? __ 8 _outcomes out of a total of _ 9 __ outcomes evaluated this semester. A. Define communication Pre-test and post test in appropriate courses Progress from pre-test to tests at end of term B. Analyze communication in diverse settings Research projects in advanced courses Student progress in data collection, analysis, and writing C. Identify and explain historical developments, theory, etc. Examinations, student writing, oral presentations Individual and collective improvement from initial tasks to end of term. D. “Self-Reflexivity” Examinations, student writing, and self-critique Improved test scores, progress in writing, increased perceptiveness in self- evaluation

E. Assess research articles Student writing and oral presentations on selected research projects. Mastery of how research questions are framed, investigations conducted, and data evaluated. F. Multiple perspectives

... critical attitude Examinations, student writing, and oral presentations. Progress in tests and student writing, increased sophistication of presentations. G. Conduct research project Completed research project. Frame research question, collect data, present project. H. Ethics Exams, student writing, academic honesty. Improved exam scores and writing, reduced dishonesty.

  1. Results. What are the results of the planned assessments listed above? Describe below or attach to the form. Results COM 101, COM 102, and COM 216 are the three courses required before students can declare a major in COM. COM 101: During the Spring, 2008, semester the majority of students in COM 101 enrolled in large lecture/breakout lab sections with the balance enrolled in small ( seat) stand-alone sections. Identical, textbook-specific, twenty-five item pre- and post- tests were administered to a random sample of COM 101 students enrolled in both large and stand-alone sections (large pre-test N=200; stand-alone pre-test N=90; aggregate pre-test N=290; large post-test N=170; stand-alone post-test N=64; aggregate post-test N=234). Scores suggest moderate improvement: Pre-test Post-test +/- Large Sections 46% 54% +8% Small Sections 52% 56.8% +4.8% Aggregate 49% 55.4% +6.4% COM 102: During the Spring, 2008, semester the majority of students in COM 102 enrolled in large lecture/breakout lab sections with the balance enrolled in small ( seat) stand-alone sections. Identical, textbook-specific, twenty-five item pre- and post- tests were administered to a random sample of COM 102 students enrolled in both large and stand-alone sections (large pre-test N=94; stand-alone pre-test N=106; aggregate pre-test N=200; large post-test N=75; stand-alone post-test N=95; aggregate post-test N=170). Scores suggest improvement: Pre-test Post-test +/- Large Sections 43.2% 61.6% +18.4% Small Sections 45.2% 59.2% +14% Aggregate 44.2% 60.6% +16.4% COM 216: Sixty-five (65) students enrolled in COM 216; fifty-nine (59) completed the course and received final grades. Evaluation was based on a series of written assignments and objective examinations. Final course grades included four (4) As, thirty-one (31) Bs, twenty (20) Cs, three (3) Ds, and one (1) F. Seven (7) students earned C- grades or worse; thus, 88.1% (52/59) successfully completed the course.