Review Assessment Report

Part 1: Contact & Program Identification

Report Year and Contact Information
Academic Year	Modified By	Date Modified
2022-2023	hfitzgerald1@cnm.edu	2023-10-20T21:45:27.413Z

School	Name of Program	Courses
MSE	BIOL Science Gen Ed	BIOL 1110,BIOL 1110L,BIOL 1125,BIOL 1130,BIOL 1130L,BIOL 1140,BIOL 1140L,BIOL 1215,BIOL 1215L,BIOL 2110,BIOL 2110L,BIOL 2210,BIOL 2210L,BIOL 2225,BIOL 2225L,BIOL 2310,BIOL 2310L,BIOL 2410,BIOL 2410L,BIOL 2510,BIOL 2520,BIOL 2615,BIOL 2615L,BIOL 2635,BIOL 2635L,BIOL 2710,BIOL 2715,BIOL 2720

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
Data collection for this year was patchy and not as thorough as we would have liked. With the departure of our main assessment person, and an attempt to reorganize the leads for data gathering to garner more participation, the process went less smoothly and has given us information on what not to do in our next round of data gathering. Several courses are missing data from some sections, or some terms. On the other hand, in some of our larger courses we were able to assess more cleanly between distance learning (DL) and in-person (F2F) sections to see what, if any differences were arising in these metrics possibly due to course delivery type. In general, for most classes with larger data sets, the success rate in the metrics between DL and F2F courses were within 10% of each other. There are some exceptions and they will merit continued data collection to see if those are true differences or differences of small class size in one section type versus another, even as the overall numbers are sufficient. It doe

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

Data collection for this year was patchy and not as thorough as we would have liked. With the departure of our main assessment person, and an attempt to reorganize the leads for data gathering to garner more participation, the process went less smoothly and has given us information on what not to do in our next round of data gathering. Several courses are missing data from some sections, or some terms. On the other hand, in some of our larger courses we were able to assess more cleanly between distance learning (DL) and in-person (F2F) sections to see what, if any differences were arising in these metrics possibly due to course delivery type. In general, for most classes with larger data sets, the success rate in the metrics between DL and F2F courses were within 10% of each other. There are some exceptions and they will merit continued data collection to see if those are true differences or differences of small class size in one section type versus another, even as the overall numbers are sufficient. It doe

Part 3: Data Review

	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023
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	21.4	20.1	21.2
Annual Average Class withdrawal rate is 30% or below (SAGE 35%)	19%	18%	17%
Annual C-Pass rate for coursework is 60% or above	59%	62%	59%
Average class fill rate at 60% or above capacity within a term or over a year	74%	63%	68%
Graduate Transfer to 4-year Schools	n/a	n/a	n/a
Full-time Faculty Coverage by Section	51%	56%	27%

Summarize how your program met or did not meet the target measures based on the data above
The targets were met for Average class fill rate, and size as well as for class withdrawal rate. As this is a General Education program majors values is n/a. The C pass rate has slightly dipped but is very close to the average desired rate of 60% and the average for this target over the past 3 years averages out at slightly above the target rate. The % coverage of courses by FT faculty is not correctly listed for 22-23, the data pull for this variable should perhaps be looked at to see what is being pulled in for this data set and why it is not accurate across most of the reports we have written. For instance, in our MSE biotech report this value is also reported for this year in the 30%s, but no part-timers have ever taught in that course sequence and program.

Summarize how your program met or did not meet the target measures based on the data above

The targets were met for Average class fill rate, and size as well as for class withdrawal rate. As this is a General Education program majors values is n/a. The C pass rate has slightly dipped but is very close to the average desired rate of 60% and the average for this target over the past 3 years averages out at slightly above the target rate. The % coverage of courses by FT faculty is not correctly listed for 22-23, the data pull for this variable should perhaps be looked at to see what is being pulled in for this data set and why it is not accurate across most of the reports we have written. For instance, in our MSE biotech report this value is also reported for this year in the 30%s, but no part-timers have ever taught in that course sequence and program.

Part 4: Program Learning Outcome Analysis

Learning Outcome	Population or Course(s) Assessed	Description	Summary of Assessment Results
1a. Critical Thinking: Problem Setting	BIOL 1110L	Final Exam	For BIOL1110L the students were asked to formulate a hypothesis for an experiment on lizards that was presented to the students as a final exam question. There were 144 students who took the final exam in either an online or f2f format, with 122/144 or 85% of students being able to correctly formulate a hypothesis for an experiment. This result is higher than both the 71%, then 83% of the two former years, suggesting that students are improving in this metric. The % proficient in F2F was 83% and in DL was 86% suggesting that both class formats saw improvement.
1b. Critical Thinking: Evidence Acquisition	BIOL 1125 BIOL 1215L BIOL 1110L BIOL 2110L	Final Exam Class Project Paper	BIOL1110L there were 69/144 or 48% of students who correctly identified an independent variable in a question in a common lab final. In distance learning sections 45% correctly identified the variable whereas in face to face classes 54% were able to correctly identify the variable. BIOL1125, data for this outcome was collected for the year in both F2F and DL classes. There were 46 students who completed the group project assignment with 41/46 or 89% of students successfully working together to apply critical thinking to the topic they researched. BIOL1215L were scored on having a passing (70% or higher) grade on the introduction of lab report submitted. There were 26/30 or 87% of students who had a successful introduction to their term paper. BIOL 2110L: students assessed on a lab report. In the one section from Fall 22 assessed, 16/18 students, or 89% earned a 70% or higher for their work on the discussion of this report.
2c. Personal and Social Responsibility: Ethical Reasoning	BIOL 1215L BIOL 1130L BIOL 1140L BIOL 2110/L	Instructor Observation Class Project	BIOL1130L students completed a group activity question n on blood typing problem that required following the scientific method. There were 100/127 or 79% of students who successfully completed this measure when combining the data for both F2F and DL classes. For DL students , 75/92 or 82% had success, while in F2F classes 25/25, or 71% were successful. This is a marked increase in success rate in the online classes (82% versus last year’s 44%). BIOL1140L F2F, only, students were observed by instructors for completion of at least 4 of the lab safety criteria during an osmosis and a mitosis lab. There was a success rate of 261/264 or 99% in the osmosis lab and 242/253 or 96% in the mitosis lab BIOL 1215L students completed a lab (Unit 4) on the topic of climate change. There were 26/30 or 87% of students who successfully completed the lab. BIOL 2110L were assessed on properly citing sources for a lab report/paper. Only one section from F22 reported data where 15/18 students (83%) were successful.
1d. Critical Thinking: Reasoning/Conclusion	BIOL 1125 BIOL 1110L	Final Exam Class Project	BIOL1110L there were 142/144 or 99% of students taking a final lab exam who correctly identified a resting heart rate in a question in a common lab final. The students had 2 questions on reading and interpreting a graph on heartrate to evaluate evidence presented. Of the students taking this class F2F, 45/46 students answered this question correctly and 97/97 of students taking this course DL answered it correctly. This is a significant increase over the correct response percentages from last year. This may be to having the tool as a single question this year.BIOL1125, data for this outcome was collected for the Fall and spring terms in bothF2F and DL classes. There were 46 students who completed the group project assignment with 41/46 or 89% of students successfully working together to complete a group project that required them to apply critical thinking to the topic they researched. This result is similar to the prior year’s results indicating students are successful in this measure.
2b. Personal and Social Responsibility: Sustainability and the natural and human worlds	BIOL 1140L BIOL 1110	Instructor Observation In-class Writing Assignment Homework Assignments	BIOL1110 lecture: the students completed a written assignment on a recent scientific discovery that they identified from a news source. There were 89/93, or 67% of students in DL course from the Fall 2022 semester that completed the assignment. The student needed to score a 70% or higher on the assignment which was on a topic related to the natural or human world. This is similar to the prior year’s results for DL classes which was a 75% success rate. BIOL1140L students were observed by instructors as to whether or not they completed at least 4 of the lab safety criteria during an osmosis and a mitosis lab. There were 261/264 or 99% in the osmosis lab and 242/253 or 96% in the mitosis lab that completed the expected lab safety items and lab clean up. These criteria were only observed and assessed in F2F labs. These values were similar to the previous year’s results (98%/99%) and show that our students do well in this outcome using this measure.
1c. Critical Thinking: Evidence Evaluation	BIOL 1110L	Final Exam	BIOL1110L there were 142/144 or 99% of students taking a final lab exam who correctly identified a resting heart rate in a question in a common lab final. The students had 2 questions on reading and interpreting a graph on heartrate to evaluate evidence presented. Of the students taking this class F2F, 45/46 students answered this question correctly and 97/97 of students taking this course DL answered it correctly. This is a significant increase over the correct response percentages from last year. This may be to having the tool as a single question this year.
2d. Personal and Social Responsibility: Collaboration skills, teamwork and value systems	BIOL 1125 BIOL 1130	Class Project	BIOL1125: Data for this outcome was collected from two DL and 1 F2F section over the F23 and Sp22 terms. There were 46 total students who completed the group project assignment with 41/46 or 89% of students successfully working together to complete a group project. This is similar to the value for the prior year for this assessment where 86% of the students also successfully completed this project. BIOL1130L students were assessed on a group activity question on blood typing in a crime solving problem set that required following the scientific method. There were 100/127 or 79% of students who successfully followed the scientific method abilities from combining the data for both F2F and DL classes. For students completing this activity online, 75/92 or 82% successfully completed this activity. In F2F classes 25/25, or 71% successfully completed this activity. This is a marked increase in success rate in the online classes (82% versus last year’s 44%). However, there were also many more students taking the cour
2e. Personal and Social Responsibility: Civic discourse, civic knowledge and engagement - local and global	BIOL 1110	Homework Assignments In-class Writing Assignment	BIOL1110 lecture: the students completed a written assignment on a recent scientific discovery that they identified from a news source. There were 89/93, or 67% of students in DL course from the Fall 2022 semester that completed the assignment. The student needed to score a 70% or higher on the assignment which was on a topic related to the natural or human world. This is similar to the prior year’s results for DL classes which was a 75% success rate.
3a. Quantitative Reasoning: Communication/Representation of Quantitative Information	BIOL 1110L	Final Exam	BIOL 1110L: There were 144 students total from both DL and F2F sections who completed a final exam for both terms. Combined 132/144, or 92%, of students were able to construct an accurate punnet square. This relates to a 97% success rate in the DL sections and an 80% success rate in the F2F classes. Whether this represents a true delivery type difference or is simply a variation expected with the fewer students in the F2F class is difficult to determine. This measure is also different from the tool reported in last year’s assessment report. This may be a difficulty in data collection interpretation and may represent an error in either year’s consideration of the tool to be used.
3b. Quantitative Reasoning: Analysis of Quantitative Arguments	BIOL 1110L	Final Exam	BIOL 1110L: There were 144 students total from both DL and F2F sections who completed a final exam for both terms. Combined 132/144, or 92%, of students were able to construct an accurate punnet square. This relates to a 97% success rate in the DL sections and an 80% success rate in the F2F classes. Whether this represents a true delivery type difference or is simply a variation expected with the fewer students in the F2F class is difficult to determine. This measure is also different from the tool reported in last year’s assessment report. This may be a difficulty in data collection interpretation and may represent an error in either year’s consideration of the tool to be used.
3c. Quantitative Reasoning: Application of Quantitative Models	BIOL1110L BIOL 1215L BIOL 2110L	Final Exam In-class Activities Paper	BIOL 1110L: : There were 98 students total from both DL sections who completed a final exam for both terms. For these students, 86/98, or 88% were able to correctly answer that genotype was the best value for calculating a probability of disease. This measure is also different from the tool reported in last year’s assessment report. This may be a difficulty in data collection interpretation and may represent an error in either year’s consideration of the tool to be used. In addition, this question seems not to have been included in the F2F class exam data collection for the year. The students in BIOL 1215L were assessed on passing the activities in the soil testing lab. There were 26 students assessed, with 26/30, or 87%, of students successfully passing the lab activities. This was slightly lower than last year’s value of 92% for this same activity. BIOL 2110L: students assessed on a lab report. In the one section from Fall 22 assessed, 16/18 students, or 89% earned a successful completion.

Interpretation of Assessment findings
In general students were more successful with assessment that was in the form of a lab report, a group assignment, in-class assignment, or an instructor observed rubric. They were less successful on exam-based questions. Overall, on these selected tools and metrics our students exhibit high success levels. A few exceptions for this 2022-23 year include difficulty with an exam question in BIOL 1110L on quantitative reasoning (ES 3b) with an averaged pass rate of only 57%. Similarly, for BIOL 1110L again, a question to determining the variables on a graph showed poor success overall, at 48%. This year we were able to compare scores for both F2F and DL sections. In many assessments these class delivery types did not make much of a difference, but in some measures there were differences up to 10% by section type. We had difficulties in gathering as thorough data as we have in the past in some classes and some sections. Departmental process is being revamped to improve this in future assessments.

Interpretation of Assessment findings

In general students were more successful with assessment that was in the form of a lab report, a group assignment, in-class assignment, or an instructor observed rubric. They were less successful on exam-based questions. Overall, on these selected tools and metrics our students exhibit high success levels. A few exceptions for this 2022-23 year include difficulty with an exam question in BIOL 1110L on quantitative reasoning (ES 3b) with an averaged pass rate of only 57%. Similarly, for BIOL 1110L again, a question to determining the variables on a graph showed poor success overall, at 48%. This year we were able to compare scores for both F2F and DL sections. In many assessments these class delivery types did not make much of a difference, but in some measures there were differences up to 10% by section type. We had difficulties in gathering as thorough data as we have in the past in some classes and some sections. Departmental process is being revamped to improve this in future assessments.

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

Upcoming Year	Changes Planned for the upcoming year	Data Motivating this change
2022-2023	WE are starting an entirely new assessment process for the next year. We have gathered a team to lead assessment and have made progress mapping out our assessments and tools. We hope to implement the first round of assessments in Spring of 2024.	The new assessment is looking to have a test, results, reflection and then change in the tool over a two year cycle, while also linking assessment across through major themes, across schools at this college.
2022-2023
2022-2023

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

Back