Archived Assessment Report
| Program | Political Science AA Degree |
| Assessment Reporter | [email protected] |
| Theme | Practicing Community |
| Review Year | 2024-2025 - Final Report |
| Learning Outcome (or Gen Ed Essential Skill) | Focus Area |
|---|---|
| 3. Incorporate more than one perspective (e.g. source, method, technique, and/or approach) | Are students able to apply the incorporation of more than one perspective throughout their college career and beyond? How can we better support this? |
| 5. Effective Communication | Students struggle to synthesize readings and clearly apply them in written communication formats to real-world situations. |
| Learning Outcome (or Gen Ed Essential Skill) | Description of Assessment Tool | Population or Courses Assessed | Hypothetical Analysis/Target |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3. Incorporate more than one perspective (e.g. source, method, technique, and/or approach) | Short essay (POLS 2110) and discussion post and replies (POLS 2150) | POLS 2110 and POLS 2150 | Students will perform better when the assigned material covers contrasting views or students are encouraged to help classmates consider alternate angles. Our threshold will be 80% and higher compared to any students that scored under 80% on questions assessing the ability to incorporate more than one perspective. |
| 5. Effective Communication | Short essay (POLS 2110) and short critique (POLS 2150) | POLS 2110 and POLS 2150 | Students who are encouraged to submit rough drafts before submission are able to organize their arguments more clearly. Our threshold will be 80% and higher compared to students who scored under 80% on effective communication. |
| Learning Outcome (or Gen Ed Essential Skill) | Summary of Results | Reflection on Focus Area | Intepretation of Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3. Incorporate more than one perspective (e.g. source, method, technique, and/or approach) | On the Learning Outcome 3, Incorporating More Than One Perspective, 92 percent scored in the highest range of 9-10 out of 10. Four percent of the students scored within the next highest range of 6 to 8 points. Only one student out of 25 scored within the lowest rung (0 to 5 points). The average score was 93.2 percent. | The overwhelming majority demonstrated the ability to consider conservative and liberal positions in Iran and the United States, respectively. Only one student scored a zero when they failed to offer any submission. | Overall, the learners’ demonstration of their ability to incorporate more than one perspective was very strong. One student scored a high B (89). The only student who did not meet the learning outcome did so because they failed to submit the essay. |
| 5. Effective Communication | On Learning Outcome 5, Effective Communication, 75 percent scored in the highest range of 9-10 out of 10. Fifteen percent of the students scored within the next highest range of 6 to 8 points. Two students out of 20 scored within the lowest rung (0 to 5 points). The average score was 85.6 percent. | No students submitted rough drafts before final submission of the short critique. Nevertheless, one learner who struggled with clear and direct communication throughout the semester was able to submit a more succinct final product because of detailed feedback and coaching on the previous five discussion assignments. Rough drafts should continue to be encouraged. | Overall, the Public Policy cohort was able to respond specifically and directly to the assigned material. The prompt included clear questions to which learners had to respond, including: • What did you learn from the article, podcast, or video? • What did you agree with? • What did you disagree with? • What questions remain? Some students chose to approach these questions in the order they were presented in the prompt. Other learners chose to present their critiques as an integrated whole. The detail missing from critiques on the problem of the unhoused lay in the specifics of the New Jersey and Mississippi cases. One of the learners scoring in the lowest rung failed to submit any work. The second learner scoring in the lowest rung submitted the assignment four days late and chose to cover all four topic options rather than focus on only one topic as the prompt instructed. |
| 3. Incorporate more than one perspective (e.g. source, method, technique, and/or approach) | |
|---|---|
| Describe the change that was implemented. | The SAS data was difficult to navigate, 19 different assessments were used to collect data and facuty engagement in the process varied making it difficult to understand where there may be room for improvement. Standardizing assessment tools and grading will be necessary going forward. |
| Type of Change |
|
| Change in Assessment Approach or Tools? | Yes, for consistency. Or we can collect data only from a representative sample of courses. |
| What data motivated the change? | No consistent assessment tool or rubric used |
| Hypothesis about the effect the change will have? | More consistent processes will provide useful data |
| 5. Effective Communication | |
|---|---|
| Describe the change that was implemented. | The SAS data was difficult to navigate, 19 different assessments were used to collect data and faculty engagement in the process varied making it difficult to understand where there may be room for improvement. Standardizing assessment tools and grading will be necessary going forward. |
| Type of Change |
|
| Change in Assessment Approach or Tools? | Yes, for consistency. Or we can collect data only from a representative sample of courses. |
| What data motivated the change? | No consistent assessment tool or rubric used |
| Hypothesis about the effect the change will have? | More consistent processes will provide useful data |
| Learning Outcome (or Gen Ed Essential Skill) | Description of Assessment Tool | Population of Courses Assessed |
|---|---|---|
| 3. Incorporate more than one perspective (e.g. source, method, technique, and/or approach) | Final essay assignment, Single-dimension rubric along Likert Scale | POLS 2110 Comparative Politics and POLS 2150 Public Policy and Administration |
| 5. Effective Communication | Single-dimension rubric along Likert Scale, Written essays and discussion posts | POLS 2110 Comparative Politics and POLS 2150 Public Policy and Administration |
| Learning Outcome (or Gen Ed Essential Skill) | Summary of Second Round Results | Intepretation of Results, Pre- and Post-Change | Follow up questions, possible next steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3. Incorporate more than one perspective (e.g. source, method, technique, and/or approach) | For Comparative Politics (POLS 2110), there was one section of 25 students total assessed. On the Learning Outcome 3, Incorporating More Than One Perspective, 92 percent scored in the highest range of 9-10 out of 10. Four percent of the students scored within the next highest range of 6 to 8 points. Only one student out of 25 scored within the lowest rung (0 to 5 points). The average score was 93.2 percent. | Follow-up Questions Because over 90 percent of learners demonstrated the strongest aptitude for analysis of varying viewpoints, the only remaining question would be how to help the student who failed to submit an essay. Possible actions for improvement To encourage all students to submit an essay, deadlines may be extended for those struggling to juggle many responsibilities or all modules opened up at the beginning of term to allow for more self-pacing. | |
| 5. Effective Communication | On Learning Outcome 5, Effective Communication, 57 percent scored in the highest range of 9-10 out of 10. A third of the students scored within the next highest range of 6 to 8 points. Two students out of 20 scored within the lowest rung (0 to 5 points). The average score was 82.5 percent. | This semester was the first time students were given the option of preparing a policy design project through a paired video assignment. However, no students opted for this format in the end. In order to support students who fail to submit any assignment at all, instructors should try to encourage students who are overwhelmed with other obligations to drop the course earlier in the term and try again during a subsequent term. |
Describe any change in student achievement observed as part of this assessment process, and what led to those changes.
Not enought data to determine at this point
Describe long-term changes in the program(s) that the assessment process led to, and what motivated those changes?
While representing less than a fifth of the cohort assessed, AI-generated submissions by students led to alternate assessment methods such as “make your own podcast” assignments as well as the elimination of essays in favor of discussion boards where peer pressure would incentivize learners to avoid AI-generated work.
Did you see any change in student achievement as part of this assessment process? If so, please describe the changes and what led to them.
Overall, there was no change in student achievement as part of this assessment process. Those students who submitted work consistently scored in the A range on the learning outcomes assessed. Only a few students who submitted work scored in the B range. There continued to be a small segment of each cohort who were not dropped before the census date and who failed to submit any work at all. In short, those students who submitted work did very well. Those students who did poorly failed to submit any work at all.
What did you learn about the teaching and learning of "Practicing Community" in your programs?
Both AA Degree and General Education results were strong. For the AA degree, over 80 percent of students were able to incorporate more than one perspective (e.g. source, method, technique, and/or approach) as well as communicate effectively. For the General Education component, over 80 percent of students were able to demonstrate personal and social responsibility through Intercultural reasoning and intercultural competence. They were able to grasp concepts fundamental to media-produced sub-cultures. In addition, most learners showed strong performance in personal and social responsibility through civic discourse, civic knowledge, and engagement – local and global. They absorbed and interpreted the compromises involved in framing the United States Constitution.
The changes introduced—providing exemplar essays, having students submit rough drafts before final drafts—failed to help those few students who failed to submit any work at all. Moreover, instructors are beginning to grapple with the advent and spread of the use of generative artificial intelligence in producing written essays.
Since each instructor used a different assessment tool and rubric for each learning outcome for each course, SAS data was difficult to interpret. Both AA Degree and General Education components hope to streamline and coordinate a common rubric for the next universal theme, Professional Skills.
Describe any external factors affecting the program or affecting assessment of the program.
There were no external factors besides more common use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) such as ChatGPT. During the Spring 2025 and into the Fall 2025 term, some students demonstrated reluctance to share their political viewpoints due to the political climate