Design Collaborative
Certificate -- Credit
Stage 2
Lauren Muller Nadereh Degani

Data Analysis

Data Shared With

Faculty and staff from related departments

Data Sharing Methods
  • Face-to-face meetings
  • Email
  • Phone
Next Steps PlannedWe will assess two of Program Level SLOs that match course MLOs in all core programs -- using the same assessment tool.

We will collect and share assessment information from the courses that match particular program level MLOs

We will share and discuss this information with all faculty who teach in the program, along with departments offering electives that meet our Program Level SLOs
Learning Outcomes1. Demonstrate knowledge of the historical and contemporary practice of collaboration across a wide range of disciplines

2. Work collaboratively within a creative team

3. Critically evaluate and discuss the merits of various concepts and approaches to design solutions, using design vocabulary

4. Employ a structured iterative process (identification, research, ideation, development, analysis and protoyyping) to solve a variety of design problems.

5. Use sketching as a tool for visual problem solving.

6. Demonstrate knowledge of color theories and select and apply color harmonies in a meaningful way in their creative work.

Changes

Categories
  • Updated program SLOs via the Curriculum Committee
  • Updated assessments
  • Developed/increased faculty and staff dialogue opportunities
  • Developed/increased faculty and staff mentoring opportunities
  • Created or expanded repository (website or hands on) of shared resources (news links, book or journal references, online tutorials, webinar series)
DetailsWe updated assessments for DSGN 101 and DSGN 110.

We meet as a cohort of faculty to discuss these at the beginning and middle of Fall 2012 semester, and have already met twice this semester.

We updated the student listserve for students to receive information about the Design Collaborative and internship opportunities

We update drop box to share syllabi, powerpoints, and assessments for the DSGN 101 faculty
Learning OutcomesOur assessments last semester focused on the following program level SLOs

- Work Collaboratively within a creative team

- Employ a structured iterative process (identification, research, ideation, development, analysis and prototyping) to solve a variety of design problems

- Use sketching as a tool for visual problem solving

Other Activities

DetailsWe developed the program level SLOs Spring 2012.

We discussed, refined, and submitted these to the curriculum committee Fall 2012.
Learning OutcomesAll

Diversity and Social Justice
Certificate -- Credit
Stage 3
Lauren Muller Nadereh Degani

Assessment Activities

Assessment Methods
  • Quizzes, exams, or homework items linked to specific learning outcomes
  • Assignments based on rubrics (such as essays, projects, and performances)
  • Student self-assessments ( such as reflective journals and surveys)
  • Student satisfaction surveys
Assessment DescriptionFor each 8 hour course offered in the fall (racism, sexism [2 sections], classism, abelism [two sections], transphobia, and classism),

The instructors linked assessment of the written assignment to specific learning outcomes, using a rubric.

In addition, they conducted student self-assessments, using a survey at the beginning and end of the class.

Some instructors offered an additional student satisfaction survey
Learning Outcomes1. Differentiate between key concepts and definitions commonly used to discuss diverse identities and related forms of oppression and social justice interventions as they relate to issues of diversity and oppression, including classism, racism, anti-semitism/anti-arabism, sexism, heterosexism, abelism, transphobia, and adultism/ageism (age-based oppression).

2. Assess and identify examples of conscious and unconscious manifestiations of social injustices, phobias and stereotypes on the individual, institutional and socio-cultural levels.

3. Formulate an understanding of the privileges and disadvantages conferred by normative representations and material facts of race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, gender, class, ability and age.

4. Analyze and differentiate personal beliefs, thoughts, feelings, biases, prejudices and stereotypes.

5. Identify and describe different ways of taking action against oppressions in personal, community and institutional lives and levels.

6. Evaluate social justice models of responding to oppressions.

7. Explain the intersectionality and interrelatedness of distinct forms o social oppression including classism, racism, anti-semitism/anti-arabism, sexism, heterosexism, abelism, transphobia, and adultism/ageism (age-based oppression).
Number of Courses7 :sexism (2 sections), racism, classism, transphobia, abelism (2 sections)
Number of Studentsapproximately 208
Data SummaryAll students increased in proficiency.

The students who entered the class with less knowledge show more improvement than those who entered the class with experience and knowledge.

Some students would like more outside resources, such as films, available.

More detailed data available in the department.

Data Analysis

Data Shared With
  • Faculty and staff in my same department
  • Faculty and staff from related departments
Data Sharing Methods
  • Face-to-face meetings
  • Email
  • Shared documents files
Next Steps PlannedFaculty shared assessment tools, data, and analysis via a website and in a binder with all faculty in the program. Individuals teaching the same section met face to face, and individuals teaching for the youth workers cohort in collaboration with Child Development, also met face-to-face

Faculty are sharing data and discussing assessment results: topics that have come up in the discussion: how to teach key terms, how to share resources, how to challenge students already versed in the subject, whether and how to revise course MLOs (mainly by consolidating and shortening them).
Learning Outcomes1. Differentiate between key concepts and definitions commonly used to discuss diverse identities and related forms of oppression and social justice interventions as they relate to issues of diversity and oppression, including classism, racism, anti-semitism/anti-arabism, sexism, heterosexism, abelism, transphobia, and adultism/ageism (age-based oppression).

2. Assess and identify examples of conscious and unconscious manifestiations of social injustices, phobias and stereotypes on the individual, institutional and socio-cultural levels.

3. Formulate an understanding of the privileges and disadvantages conferred by normative representations and material facts of race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, gender, class, ability and age.

4. Analyze and differentiate personal beliefs, thoughts, feelings, biases, prejudices and stereotypes.

5. Identify and describe different ways of taking action against oppressions in personal, community and institutional lives and levels.

6. Evaluate social justice models of responding to oppressions.

7. Explain the intersectionality and interrelatedness of distinct forms o social oppression including classism, racism, anti-semitism/anti-arabism, sexism, heterosexism, abelism, transphobia, and adultism/ageism (age-based oppression).

Changes

Categories

Updated program SLOs via the Curriculum Committee

DetailsConsolidated and updated program SLOs and submitted to the Curriculum Committee.
Learning Outcomes1. Differentiate between key concepts and definitions commonly used to discuss diverse identities and related forms of oppression and social justice interventions as they relate to issues of diversity and oppression, including classism, racism, anti-semitism/anti-arabism, sexism, heterosexism, abelism, transphobia, and adultism/ageism (age-based oppression).

2. Assess and identify examples of conscious and unconscious manifestiations of social injustices, phobias and stereotypes on the individual, institutional and socio-cultural levels.

3. Formulate an understanding of the privileges and disadvantages conferred by normative representations and material facts of race, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, gender, class, ability and age.

4. Analyze and differentiate personal beliefs, thoughts, feelings, biases, prejudices and stereotypes.

5. Identify and describe different ways of taking action against oppressions in personal, community and institutional lives and levels.

6. Evaluate social justice models of responding to oppressions.

7. Explain the intersectionality and interrelatedness of distinct forms o social oppression including classism, racism, anti-semitism/anti-arabism, sexism, heterosexism, abelism, transphobia, and adultism/ageism (age-based oppression).

Trauma Prevention and Recovery
Certificate -- Credit
Stage 5
Janey Skinner or Lauren Muller

Assessment Activities

Assessment Methods

Quizzes, exams, or homework items linked to specific learning outcomes

Assessment DescriptionUngraded survey in two of the four courses offered in the fall, targeting 2 of the program-level SLOs
Learning Outcomes• Analyze the causes & consequences of diverse forms of violence and trauma on individuals and groups.

• Demonstrate knowledge and skills regarding considerations of ability/disability, age, culture, ethnicity/race, gender, gender identity, sexuality, and immigration status in relation to trauma and violence, with cultural humility and sensitivity.
Number of Courses2 in Fall 2012, 4 in Spring 2013
Number of Students100 combined
Data SummaryTo: Lauren Muller

From: Janey Skinner

Date: 2/17/13

Re: Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) Assessment in the Trauma Certificate

This summarizes what we’ve discovered by conducting a cross-course assessment of 2 of our program-level Student Learning Outcomes for the Trauma Prevention and Recovery Certificate program.

Process:

In spring 2011, Louise Nayer and I developed a short “quiz” to assess student learning. Three of the questions were objective multiple-choice questions, with a clear “right” answer (and 3 “wrong” answers for each as choices). The assessment also asked students to subjectively self-assess (using a modified retrospective pre/post test style of question) whether their knowledge or confidence had increased during this course or certificate, focused on 4 aspects of their learning, and allowing them to answer “yes, a little” or “yes, a lot” or “not at all.” In the first iteration of the assessment tool (spring 2011), students could answer each of the 4 aspects twice, so some students answered both “a little” and “a lot.” In the second iteration, students had to choose just one answer (fall 2011 & spring 2012), which is probably going to be more useful to analyze. There was one also qualitative objective question – that is, a question that students write a brief response to, and to which there are better and worse answers – although of course there is some subjectivity in “grading” these responses, as with any essay question. The first seven questions could be tallied using Scantron forms.

This assessment tool (“quiz”) was distributed to trauma classes for 3 semesters. Data collection was incomplete in part due to late distribution of the materials and/or lack of follow-up by the coordinator. Nonetheless, a significant cross-section of students enrolled in trauma certificate courses did complete the assessment: 51 respondents in spring 2011; 36 respondents in fall 2011; and 78 respondents in spring 2012. Students who take multiple trauma courses in a single semester were asked to only fill out the assessment once per semester.

The questions in this assessment are aimed toward the following program-level SLOs, which we thought were likely to be addressed (at least to some extent) in all courses in the program:

• Analyze the causes & consequences of diverse forms of violence and trauma on individuals and groups.

• Demonstrate knowledge and skills regarding considerations of ability/disability, age, culture, ethnicity/race, gender, gender identity, sexuality, and immigration status in relation to trauma and violence, with cultural humility and sensitivity.

Results:

As seen in the Excel sheet, the percent of correct answers to the first three questions on the assessment are as follows:

Question & Percent of Correct Answers Spring 2011 Fall 2011 Spring 2012

1-recognize components of the definition of trauma 76% 81% 81%

2-changes in how trauma is addressed in the US now compared to the past 86% 89% 79%

3-respond to a scenario or case study, recognizing what is important to trauma in the story 84% 83% 82%

It was anticipated that changes in knowledge are easier to attain than changes in confidence or skills. The following results bear this out for the two spring semesters, but not the fall semester. For these questions, keep in mind the methodological changes between the first semester and the second, which may have inflated the numbers for Spring 2011.

Question & Responses saying their knowledge or confidence “Increased A Lot” Spring 2011 Fall 2011 Spring 2012

4-Knowledge of the specific triggers or causes of trauma 71% 58% 58%

5-Knowledge of the consequences of trauma on individuals and groups 71% 69% 65%

6-Knowledge of diversity in relationship to trauma and violence (the experiences of different cultures, ages, genders, etc.) 76% 50% 63%

7-Confidence in your ability to respond to an individual or group experiencing trauma 59% 58% 45%

Less than 10% of respondents indicate that their knowledge of confidence increased “not at all” in the two semesters for which that response was calculated. (Depending on the question, the percent of “not at all” responses range from 0% to 9%.)

For the qualitative (write-in) question which asked students “What main insights have you gained about cultural sensitivity or cultural humility when working with people affected by trauma, in this course or certificate program?” most responses were aligned with the intention of the question – what would have been an acceptable answer on a quiz or exam. A few responses were off-topic, indicating perhaps a misunderstanding of the question. Only one response was flagged as “troubling,” for the cultural assumptions embedded in it. While the majority of responses indicated some awareness of the importance of culture and cultural sensitivity in response to trauma, there were a large number of responses along the lines of “we are all human,” or “trauma happens to all groups of people.” This is undoubtedly true and can be helpful in responding to trauma, but this attitude could also reflect a kind of “color-blind approach” or culturally insensitive homogenizing of the diversity of experiences of trauma. In such a brief response as we collected in this assessment, it is impossible to tell.

Analysis:

It is difficult to assess these results, given that the assessment tool itself has not be validated in any objective way. Still, assuming the tool is valid and reliable to an acceptable level, the following analysis or conclusions may be helpful for program improvement.

In Spring 2012 I would feel better about seeing us consistently hitting at least 85% correct answers for the first three “objective” questions, and we are not attaining that mark yet. To that end, I developed a small set of definitions, materials or common understandings of trauma that could be repeated and/or reinforced across the curriculum. In Fall 2012, this was distributed in all of the classes taught in the program. In Spring 2013, it will be distributed again.

For the self-reported increase in their level of knowledge or skill, again, it would be terrific to see higher numbers, but 50-70% of students reporting that their knowledge or skill changed “a lot” does not seem too bad. It would be great to get a more objective assessment of these items.

At least one student in each of the last two semesters reported that they did not learn anything related to cultural sensitivity or cultural humility in a trauma course. These are very small numbers, yet worrisome. I would like to see this definitely and clearly included in the curriculum of every trauma certificate required course.

We will discuss these results among Trauma Faculty which aspects of this subject they cover, and in what ways, so that the material reinforces but does not repeat excessively.

Changes

Categories

Updated program SLOs via the Curriculum Committee

DetailsMapped program level SLOs to course level SLOs and presented before the curriculum committee
Learning OutcomesAnalyze the causes and consequences of diverse forms of violence on individuals and groups.

Access, summarize and evaluate public health research related to violence and trauma, for its application to prevention and intervention programs.

Compare programmatic approaches to prevention and intervention.

Discuss historic and aesthetic approaches to understanding violence, trauma and recovery.

Describe, recognize and respond to specific effects of violence on children and their families.

Demonstrate peer counseling and client-centered communication skills for working with victims and survivors in ways that are culturally relevant and culturally sensitive.

American Cultures in Literature and Film
Disclipline
Stage 2
Abdul Jabbar

Assessment Activities

Assessment Methods
  • Quizzes, exams, or homework items linked to specific learning outcomes
  • Assignments based on rubrics (such as essays, projects, and performances)
  • Direct observation of performances, practical exams, group work
  • Student self-assessments ( such as reflective journals and surveys)
  • Student satisfaction surveys
Assessment DescriptionThe focus in this SLO is on literary and cinematic interpretation, and the essential step in interpretation is grasping the work's theme. Students were asked to write reflective journals. Other indicators of student success were exams, essays, and class discussions.
Learning Outcomes"Interpret literary works and films in their historical, social, and political contexts to trace the themes of racial conflict, prejudice, compromise, and resolution."
Number of CoursesOne
Number of Students20
Data SummaryMost students did very well by successfully following advice on skills of interpretation and analysis. However, despite clear instructions, some could not distinguish between topics and themes, between plot summaries and interpretations.

Data Analysis

Data Shared With
  • Faculty and staff in my same department
  • Students
Data Sharing Methods
  • Face-to-face meetings
  • Email
  • Phone
  • Shared documents files
Next Steps PlannedTo help the struggling students, during Spring 2013, I am giving them more advice on distinguishing topics from themes and both of them from supporting details. I am also giving them sample essays demonstrating literary and cinematic interpretations by their peers. I have also placed helpful instructional material on reserve in the library. In addition, I have prepared a handout that addresses the students' needs in a step-by-step and easy-to-follow format.
Learning Outcomes"Interpret literary works and films in their historical, social, and political contexts to trace the themes of racial conflict, prejudice, compromise, and resolution."

Changes

Categories
  • Updated assessments
  • Improved communication
DetailsWhen taught online, I am the only instructor for this course. However, when taught in the face-to-face format, two or three instructors teach this course. Dividing the course material suitably and coming up with a unified and effective instructional approach are among the challenges that we have met through frequent meetings, phone calls, and e-mail exchanges.
Learning OutcomesIdentify qualities one needs to possess in order to be a harmonious and productive member of a multicultural society.

Back to Overview