Department Program Assessment Plan
College: College of Letters and Science
Department: Mathematical Sciences
Submitted by: Elizabeth Burroughs, Department Head
Indicate all majors, minors, certificates and/or options that are included in this new assessment Plan
|Mathematics (Major)||Applied Math, Math, Math Teaching, Statistics|
Part 1: Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs):
PLOs should be written as specific, measurable statements describing what students will be able to do upon completion of the program. The assessment of PLOs provide feedback on the expected knowledge, skills, and attitudes that students develop as they progress through their program.
List the program learning outcomes:
|PLO #||PLO Description|
|1.||Students will demonstrate mathematical reasoning or statistical thinking|
|2.||Students will demonstrate effective mathematical or statistical communication|
|3.||Students will develop a range of appropriate mathematical or statistical methods for proving, problem solving, and modeling|
Part 2: Development of Assessment Plan
Each plan will require the following information:
Threshold Values: Along with PLOs, plans should include threshold values; minimums against which to assess student achievement for learning outcomes. Threshold values are defined as an established criteria for which outcome achievement is defined as met or not met.
Methods of Assessment and Data Source: Assessment plans require evidence to demonstrate student learning at the program level. This evidence can be in the form of a direct or indirect measure of student learning. Both direct and indirect assessment data must be associated with the program's learning outcomes. An assessment rubric will also need to be included that demonstrates how evaluation of the data was used to assess student achievement.
Timeframe for Collecting and Analyzing Data: Develop a multi-year assessment schedule that will show when all program learning outcomes will be assessed. As graduate assessment reports are biennial, faculty review of assessment results may only occur every other year, however, annual faculty meeting to review these data and discuss student progress may be beneficial.
2a. Curriculum Map
Assessment Planning Chart:
Program Learning Outcomes
Include rubric, number and course Title
Identification of Assessment Artifact
|1||M 242||Signature assignment (usually a problem or set of problems from an exam) from the bank|
|2||M 242||Signature assignment (usually a problem or set of problems from an exam) from the bank|
|3||M 384, M 329, Stat 412||Signature assignment (usually a problem or set of problems from an exam) from the bank|
|3||M 384, M329, Stat 412||X||X|
Part 3: Program Assessment:
The assessment plan will need to include: 1. how assessment will be conducted; 2. who receives the analyzed assessment data, and 3. how it will be used by program faculty for program improvement(s).
1) How will assessment artifacts be identified?
2) How will they be collected (and by whom)?
3) Who will be assessing the artifacts?
The Undergraduate Program Committee is responsible for annually assigning a program assessment task force. Members of the task force will be the two most recent faculty members to have taught the course in question; if they are not available, the Department Head will make a suitable alternate appointment. The assessment task force will select the signature assignments from the bank of signature assignments. The bank is initially populated with the signature assignments that have been used in the past five years and will be updated by the committee as necessary, based on results of the assessment.
The task force will determine whether to assess a census of the assignments from Math/Stat Majors/Minors in the course, or whether to assess a random selection. Where possible, a minimum of 10 student assignments should be assessed for each course.
The task force will report the results to the Undergraduate Program Committee and the Department Head, who will distribute it to the department. The first faculty meeting in September will annually be the forum at which the assessment report is discussed and action recommended.
Part 4: Program Assessment Plan:
All plans must include assessment rubrics (the methodology of how student artifacts
are to be assessed, and a threshold for student success attainment.
|PLO #1||Threshold Values|
|1. Students will demonstrated mathematical reasoning or statistical thinking.||Displays limited or inappropriate reasoning strategies in the mathematical or statistical content focus.||Adequately displays appropriate reasoning strategies in the mathematical or statistical content focus.||Displays thorough and appropriate reasoning strategies in the mathematical or statistical content focus.||The threshold value for this outcome is 70% of assessed students to score acceptable or proficient on the scoring rubric.|
|2. Students will demonstrated effective mathematical or statistical communication.||Communication is incomplete or unclear. Terms are used improperly or key definitions are missing.||Terms are properly used and flow is logical, though organization lacks the attention to detail that would lead to a clearly communicated result.||Work is fully correct and complete with relevant terms properly employed. Ideas are well-organized into a logical sequence.||The threshold value for this outcome is 70% of assessed students to score acceptable or proficient on the scoring rubric.|
|3. Students will develop a range of appropriate mathematical or statistical methods for proving, problem solving and modeling.||Work displays fundamental gaps between understanding and underlying mathematical or statistical methods||Work is almost correct with appropriate methods employed, with only minor errors or misunderstanding in mathematical or statistical methods.||Work is fully correct and complete and displays full understanding of the appropriate mathematical or statistical methods.||The threshold value for this outcome is 70% of assessed students to score acceptable or proficient on the scoring rubric.|
Part 5: Program Assessment Plan:
1) How will annual assessment be communicated to faculty within the department? How will faculty participating in the collecting of assessment data (student work/artifacts) be notified?
2) When will the data be collected and reviewed, and by whom?
3) Who will be responsible for the writing of the report?
4) How, when, and by whom, will the report be shared?
5) How will past assessments be used to inform changes and improvements? (How will Closing the Loop be documented)?
The department head will notify faculty teaching the courses involved at the beginning of each semester what artifacts are to be collected, and the department head will work with those faculty to ensure that they include appropriate assignments from the bank of signature assignments.
The data will generally be collected from final exams or other summative assessments. The assessment task force, as discussed in section 3, will review the assessments, generally in the time period between May 1 and September 1.
The assessment task force will write the report, with participation from the department head.
The draft assessment report will be circulated by the department head to the faculty on or about September 1 via email. The report will be discussed at a faculty meeting held the week of September 8.
The faculty will recommend the Undergraduate Program Committee with making changes and improvements to the program or to the assessment process. The UPC will set their annual agenda based on these recommendations.
6) Other Comments:
Submit report to firstname.lastname@example.org