Review Assessment Report

Part 1: Contact & Program Identification

Report Year and Contact Information
Academic YearModified ByDate Modified
2021-2022nholtschulte@cnm.edu2022-09-25T16:45:04.286Z
SchoolName of ProgramCourses
BITCSCI Flex Gen EdCSCI 1108,CSCI 1151,CSCI 1152,CSCI 1153

Part 2: Program Summary

Provide a high level review of the program to include highlights, successes, challenges, significant changes, and significant resources needed to support the program
During the 2022-2023 school year we hired a full time CS instructor, Guadalupe Torres. CSCI 1152 underwent a review in conjunction with Instructional Support. BHT is looking at course shells and considering separate course templates for 15 week versus 12 week courses. Naming conventions for CS and CIS courses are being discussed in collaboration with representatives from educational institutions across the state in order to improve clarity for students and simplify transfer of credits between institutions. Changes in technology as well as the need to support online and in-person students continues to be a challenge and a significant mental and time burden on faculty. Making time to clarify course learning outcomes, craft assessments that effectively measure such outcomes, and compile such data has fallen by the wayside and is going to be re-emphasized in the near future.

Part 3: Data Review

2019-20202020-20212021-2022
Annual number of graduate awards is greater than 10n/an/an/a
Number of declared majorsn/an/an/a
Average Class Size20.322.417
Annual Average Class withdrawal rate is 30% or below (SAGE 35%)24%17%15%
Annual C-Pass rate for coursework is 60% or above55%59%67%
Average class fill rate at 60% or above capacity within a term or over a year68%75%67%
Graduate Transfer to 4-year Schoolsn/an/an/a
Full-time Faculty Coverage by Section69%90%35%
Summarize how your program met or did not meet the target measures based on the data above
Average class fill rate has been consistently above 60% for the past three school years (2019 - 2022) and is expected to continue above 60%. Other metrics have similarly been met. Full-time Faculty Coverage by Section dropped to 35% in 2021-2022, but this number should be back up again now that the full-time faculty vacancy has been filled. I'm a little confused by this form because one of the targets listed is "Annual retention rate is 70% or above (SAGE 65%)" but that information is not provided in the above data unless it's the inverse of "Annual Average Class withdrawal rate is 30% or below (SAGE 35%)", in which case the target has been met. Though on this note, it would be great to improve retention as the average is not spread evenly across all classes (anecdotally) with a lot more students dropping the harder core Java courses 1152 and 2251 compared to courses such as Netlogo 1108 and Matlab 1153.

Part 4: Program Learning Outcome Analysis

Learning OutcomePopulation or Course(s) AssessedDescriptionSummary of Assessment Results
1.Critical Thinking
CSCI 1108, CSCI 1151, CSCI 1152, CSCI 2251, and CSCI 1153.
  • Final Exam
  • Test or Quiz
  • In-class Activities
  • Homework Assignments
Critical thinking skills are assessed by tests, homeworks, and in-class activities requiring students to not only use correct syntax, but determine how to approach and organize their code in a logical and methodical fashion. Testing of the code is emphasized and the formation of hypotheses prior to writing code, but also experimentation to explore the effects of changes to code. Difficulties arise in student time management and patience leading to "quick and dirty" programming or explanations such as "I did it this way because it worked" or haphazard changes to student code "until it works" without developing a mental model of the underlying processes. From the instructor side, teaching critical thinking is always a difficult and time intensive process that can easily fall by the wayside when students have not yet mastered basic syntax.
3.Quantitative Reasoning
CSCI 1108, CSCI 1151, CSCI 1152, CSCI 2251, and CSCI 1153.
  • Final Exam
  • Test or Quiz
  • In-class Activities
  • Homework Assignments
First off, I understand quantitative reasoning to include such things as the ability to assess program output and distinguish between reasonable unreasonable outcomes. Also, identifying appropriate tools for different tasks, such as the use of while loops for unbounded repetition and the use of for loops for "counting" repetition. 1108 has many opportunities for students to engage in quant reasoning due to its many "real world" assignments. Likewise 1153 draws many of its questions from the sciences. Assessments show that there is a significant divide between successful students engaging in quantitative reasoning and the remainder of students flailing around in their implementations, with some students in the middle developing over the course of each semester. Another challenge is the need for better aligned assessments to gather this data as it is currently mostly anecdotal due to the shifting responsibilities and new faculty over the past few years.
2.Information and Digital Literacy
CSCI 1108, CSCI 1151, CSCI 1152, CSCI 2251, and CSCI 1153.
  • Final Exam
  • In-class Activities
  • Test or Quiz
  • Homework Assignments
I understand information and digital literacy to include things such as the ability to use books and the internet to seek out and integrate information, as well as computer skills including but not limited to: typing proficiency, use of hotkeys, folder navigation, file naming, use of zip files, effective emailing, etcetera. These skills are assessed by open-internet assignments, required citation of sources, and the use of tools such as the command prompt, which introduces students to text interfaces. These skills are mostly assessed indirectly and constantly as the use of the internet as an external brain is essential to success in any computer science class. As with the other sections, I do not have percentages or other concrete data at this time.
Interpretation of Assessment findings
All three of these skills are taught and assessed, some more directly than others. Not included on this list (or at least I'm not clear where they fit into this trio of categories) are formation of correct mental models (critical thinking?) and basic syntax (info and literacy?) which are two major categories I perceive when considering teaching and assessment. Perhaps my most significant interpretation is that assessment has become misaligned with course outcomes such that hard numbers relating to these outcomes are not available. I personally have been scrambling to modify or recreate assessments (and lectures) throughout all my courses to improve student outcomes along my own metrics (for instance providing opportunities to receive feedback over the course of a large project rather than a harsh one-shot grade at the due date) and I have not been mindful of alignment with measured outcomes. In order to gather meaningful data, this will have to change.

Part 5: Additional Action Plan in Support of Student Learning (If Appropriate)

Upcoming YearChanges Planned for the upcoming yearData Motivating this change
2021-2022
Provide more support and opportunities for students with inadequate computing background. Opportunities to practice syntax separate from broader computer program construction.
Retention and the C-passing rate
2021-2022
Create a direct connection between assessments and learning outcomes that we wish to measure.
The motivation is a lack of data on desired learning outcomes.
2021-2022
Please select all of the following that characterize the types of changes described in the above action plan
2021-2024 CNM - Digital Services
Site version v1.0.62 built at 2024-02-01T17:31:19.000Z