Review Assessment Report

Part 1: Contact & Program Identification

Report Year and Contact Information
Academic Year	Modified By	Date Modified
2021-2022	kferris@cnm.edu	2022-11-15T16:45:07.523Z

School	Name of Program	Courses
BIT	ECON Social Behavioral Gen Ed	ECON 1110,ECON 2110,ECON 2120,ECON 2125

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
The pandemic shift to online classes has posed a significant challenge for economics, as specific research on principles of economics classes concludes that, “taking a course online, instead of in-person, reduces student success and progress in college. Grades are lower both for the course taken online and in future courses. Students are less likely to remain enrolled...” (Bettinger et al. 2017) In response, this year economics faculty have offered a variety of delivery methods, including hybrid, attend anywhere and real time online options. Creating and offering new delivery methods was challenging and time consuming; meeting CNM’s targets for face-to-face options may have resulted in lower fill rates. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW VOL. 107, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2017(pp. 2855-75)

Provide a high level review of the program to include highlights, successes, challenges, significant changes, and significant resources needed to support the program

The pandemic shift to online classes has posed a significant challenge for economics, as specific research on principles of economics classes concludes that, “taking a course online, instead of in-person, reduces student success and progress in college. Grades are lower both for the course taken online and in future courses. Students are less likely to remain enrolled...” (Bettinger et al. 2017) In response, this year economics faculty have offered a variety of delivery methods, including hybrid, attend anywhere and real time online options. Creating and offering new delivery methods was challenging and time consuming; meeting CNM’s targets for face-to-face options may have resulted in lower fill rates. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW VOL. 107, NO. 9, SEPTEMBER 2017(pp. 2855-75)

Part 3: Data Review

	2019-2020	2020-2021	2021-2022
Annual number of graduate awards is greater than 10	n/a	n/a	n/a
Number of declared majors	n/a	n/a	n/a
Average Class Size	25.2	25.3	20.1
Annual Average Class withdrawal rate is 30% or below (SAGE 35%)	12%	12%	13%
Annual C-Pass rate for coursework is 60% or above	72%	67%	71%
Average class fill rate at 60% or above capacity within a term or over a year	82%	84%	71%
Graduate Transfer to 4-year Schools	n/a	n/a	n/a
Full-time Faculty Coverage by Section	77%	55%	21%

Summarize how your program met or did not meet the target measures based on the data above
All targets met. The 21% for FT coverage can’t be correct - we have two FT instructors teaching at least 5 sections each in spring and fall when we offered 15-20 sections.

Part 4: Program Learning Outcome Analysis

Learning Outcome	Population or Course(s) Assessed	Description	Summary of Assessment Results
2. Critical Thinking	ECON 2110, 2120
2. Critical Thinking	ECON 2110 and ECON 2120

Interpretation of Assessment findings
The Department of Economics General Education assessment was coordinated by the CHSS assessment team. Students in 5 sections of ECON 2120 (n=64) were included in the sample; the prompt for the critical thinking assessment was common to courses in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (GenEd) area. The following reflects the percentage of students who achieved proficient or exemplary scores for the critical thinking criteria. Problem Setting: Delineate a problem or question = 45% Use of Evidence: Identify the information/data necessary to support claims about the problem or question = 75% Evidence Evaluation: Evaluate evidence/data for credibility, probable truth, and relevance to a situation = 63% Reasoning/Conclusion: Develop conclusions, solutions, and outcomes that reflect an informed, well-reasoned evaluation = 31% Students' performance with the assessment, based on the total score for the 4 critical thinking criteria, does not correlate with the semester GPA (r=.001) or total credit hours (r=-.15).

Interpretation of Assessment findings

The Department of Economics General Education assessment was coordinated by the CHSS assessment team. Students in 5 sections of ECON 2120 (n=64) were included in the sample; the prompt for the critical thinking assessment was common to courses in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (GenEd) area. The following reflects the percentage of students who achieved proficient or exemplary scores for the critical thinking criteria. Problem Setting: Delineate a problem or question = 45% Use of Evidence: Identify the information/data necessary to support claims about the problem or question = 75% Evidence Evaluation: Evaluate evidence/data for credibility, probable truth, and relevance to a situation = 63% Reasoning/Conclusion: Develop conclusions, solutions, and outcomes that reflect an informed, well-reasoned evaluation = 31% Students' performance with the assessment, based on the total score for the 4 critical thinking criteria, does not correlate with the semester GPA (r=.001) or total credit hours (r=-.15).

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

Upcoming Year	Changes Planned for the upcoming year	Data Motivating this change
2021-2022
2021-2022
2021-2022

Please select all of the following that characterize the types of changes described in the above action plan

Back