Tips for Writing a Successful 5-Year QEP Impact Report
Tips for Writing a Successful 5-Year QEP Impact Report
Kathryn Brewer-Strayer, QEP Director
Standards for the 5-Year Report
•
A succinct list of the initial goals and intended outcomes of the QEP
•
A discussion of changes made to the QEP and reasons for making the changes
•
A description of the QEP’s impact on student learning and/or the environment supporting student learning as appropriate to the design of the QEP. This description should include the achievement of identified goals and outcomes and any unanticipated outcomes of the QEP.
•
A reflection on what the institution has learned as a result of of the QEP
Goals and Expected Student Learning Outcomes
List all goals of your plan, expected student outcomes, and actual student learning outcomes for each year of your plan or each phase of your plan.
SUCCINCT LIST OF INITIAL GOALS AND INTENDED OUTCOMES
To achieve the mission of enhancing written communication skills, the College established five goals: • • • • •
Having regular, consistent writing assignments written in different modes for different purposes helps students perform better academically. Having students write consistently in various courses and methods enhances student learning. Having ample in-class and out-of-class opportunities for writing with a variety of purposes and audiences produces a significant enhancement to student learning. Having faculty use writing as a method of engagement of students with course content material enhances student learning. Having students write in multiple disciplines using multiple modes of assignments appropriate to the different disciplines is more effective in writing instruction and enhances student learning.
Student Learning Outcomes
To achieve written communication skills, the College established student learning outcomes (SLOs) to enable students to: • • • • •
Synthesize and analyze various kinds of information from multiple sources in a manner that demonstrates critical thought and logical evaluation. Organize consistent, coherent, and effective paragraphs with smooth transitions between paragraphs. Compose essays free of all spelling, grammar, writing conventions, and sentence structure errors. Demonstrate the ability to use appropriate software to create assignments that illustrate their writing fluency. Demonstrate writing skills by writing to a specific audience, using accurate and appropriate word choices.
RATIONALE AND CHANGES
Faculty Training First Workshop 2010--3 Sessions Workshops at Beginning of Each Successive Year and Cohort Modifications to the WFL Plan Registered Students in English 131 Classes Rubric and Checklist Modified Staggered Assignments in 131 and 132 Courses Altered Number of Assignments for 200-300 Level Courses Altered Checkpoints
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (SLOs) Table 1: Checkpoints of Student Learning Outcomes
Checkpoints
Courses
One
English 131 Religion 131 Humanities 131
Two
English 132 Religion 132 Humanities 132
Assignments
Evaluation Outcomes
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
20% of students will be partially proficient
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
35% of students will be partially proficient
Three
200 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Discipline specific assignments such as research papers, lab reports, etc.
50% of students will be proficient
Four
300 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Annotated bibliography, abstract, prospectus for senior thesis
65% of students will be very proficient
Five
400 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Senior Thesis
80% of students will be extremely proficient
Instruments Measuring Student Learning Outcomes
Rubrics Checklists Surveys E-Portfolio Pre-Tests Post-Tests
Table 2: Grade Comparison 2009-2010 Percentages
A
50
B
C
D
38
25
13
0
A B C D F FA09 ENG 131
A B C D F WFL ENG 131
A B C D F FA09 HUM 131
A B C D F WFL HUM 131
A B C D F FA09 REL 131
A B C D F WFL REL 131
F
Table 3: Grade Comparison 2011-2012 Percentages
NON WFL 100
94
WFL
94 82 70
75
73
57
58
66
57
57
50
25 0
ENG 131
ENG 132
HUM 130
REL 131
REL 132
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (SLOs) Table 4: Pre-Test Assessments
Courses (STI 111) Pre-Test Checkpoints
Evaluation Outcomes
Exceptionally Proficient
27.4%
Proficient
50.6%
Partially Proficient
16.6%
Not Proficient
2.8%
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (SLOs) Table 5: Actual Checkpoint Assessments of Student Learning Outcomes Checkpoints
Assignments
Evaluation Outcomes
One
English 131 Religion 131 Humanities 131
Courses
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
82% of students was above partially proficient
Two
English 132 Religion 132 Humanities 132
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
65.4% of students was above partially proficient
43.8% of students was above proficient
Three
200 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Discipline specific assignments such as research papers, lab reports, etc.
Four
300 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Annotated bibliography, abstract, prospectus for senior thesis
79% of students were exceptionally proficient
Five
400 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Senior Thesis
60 % of students were exceptionally proficient
Table 2: Expected and Actual Checkpoints of Student Learning Outcomes Checkpoints One Two
Three
Four Five
Courses English 131 Religion 131 Humanities 131 English 132 Religion 132 Humanities 132
Assignments Three Writing to Learn WFL assignments from four modes Three Writing to Learn WFL assignments from four modes Discipline specific 200 Level assignments such as Discipline research papers, lab Specific Courses reports, etc. 300 Level Annotated bibliography, Discipline abstract, prospectus for Specific Courses senior thesis 400 Level Discipline Senior Thesis Specific Courses
Expected Outcomes 20% of students will be partially proficient 35% of students will be partially proficient
Actual Outcomes 82% of students were above partially proficient 65% of students were above partially proficient
50% of students will 44% of students be proficient were proficient 79% of students 65% of students will were exceptionally be proficient proficient 80% of students will 60% of students be extremely were exceptionally proficient proficient
Outcomes 2 Table 3: Percentages of Proficiency for Student Learning Outcomes on Pre-Test and Post-Test
Pre-Test
Post-Test
% Exceptionally Proficient % Proficient % Partially Proficient % Not Proficient % Exceptionally Proficient % Proficient % Partially Proficient % Not Proficient
SLO 3 – Language and Mechanics
SLO 4 – Software (LiveText and SafeAssign)
SLO – 5 Adaptation to Audience and Context
15%
6%
85%
18%
59% 23% 3%
56% 32% 6%
9% 3% 3%
70% 9% 3%
54%
78%
46%
62%
60%
20% 24% 2%
20% 2% 0%
26% 26% 2%
28% 8% 2%
40% 0% 0%
SLO 1 – Synthesis and Analysis
SLO 2 – Organizational Structure
18% 62% 18% 2%
Figure 1: Achieved Proficiency 2009-2015
Table 6: Faculty Evaluations of the WFL
ITEM By participating in the WFL, I learned how to assign the four writing modes. By participating in the WFL, I learned how to evaluate the writing assignments using the rubric. By participating in the WFL, I learned how to evaluate the writing assignments using the checklist. WFL increased the number of occasions where I required writing in assessments. WFL increased the frequency in which computer-based learning activities are assigned. WFL-required use of Blackboard enabled me to create assignments within units. WFL training in Blackboard enabled me to use SafeAssign. The amount of time allocated to LiveText training was adequate to allow me to use it effectively. The role of the FQD was presented in a fashion I understood. Table 7: Student Evaluations of WFL The role of the MAC was presented in a fashion I understood. The FQD carried out assigned roles as I understood them. The MAC carried out assigned roles as I understood them. The FQD performed in an excellent manner across all roles. The MAC performed in an excellent manner across all roles. Meetings of subject clusters would have been more effective in enhancing my own understanding. Full implementation of the WFL program will enhance student learning.
MEAN 5.22 6.16 5.91 5.3 5.41 5.87 5.87 5.55 6.17 5.9 6.4 6.07 6.35 5.85 4.4 5.67
Table 7: Student Evaluations of the WFL ITEM
MEAN
WFL classes have enhanced my learning.
3.27
WFL assignments have been a meaningful experience for me.
3.28
WFL assignments helped me organize my papers and write more effectively.
3.41
I was engaged in learning more consistently by WFL instructors than non WFL instructors.
3.04
WFL instructors explained the QEP and WFL assignments to me. Table 7: Student Evaluations of WFL WFL assignments better prepared me for my other classes.
3.1
Participating in WFL classes has strengthened and improved my learning in other classes.
3.1 2.41
WFL made a positive contribution to my educational experience.
3.36
The instructor gave me ample time to complete the assignments before the due date.
3.93
The classroom technology (Blackboard and LiveText) enhanced my learning experience.
3.51
A REFLECTION ON WHAT THE INSTITUTION HAS LEARNED Results of the QEP WFL program indicate that overall student learning was enhanced. The checkpoints show that student writing improved over the four-year period. The post-test assessment of the Senior Thesis showed that 77% of students were exceptionally proficient as compared to 28% of incoming freshman students. Finally, while students’ grades only indicated a slight improvement in 100 level WFL courses as compared to traditional courses, the intent of the WFL was to have students write better, not penalize their grades in courses or affect their overall GPA. Student learning was enhanced as students were given opportunities to present several written drafts of assignments. This allowed them to address their individual strengths and weaknesses with faculty conferencing. Students also learned to reflect more on the materials they were using in order to write about them. However, the 500-750 word essays did not prepare students for the thesis
The WFL did not meet the 80% exceptionally proficient fifth checkpoint. The data from the rubric, indicated that the weaknesses in student writing occurred in the synthesis/analysis section and in the language/mechanics section of student writing. Students were only proficient in analyzing and synthesizing information and using appropriate language/mechanical skills necessary for completing the researched senior thesis. As a result, more assignments should be required in lower level courses that emphasize synthesis, analysis, language, and grammatical skills needed for the senior thesis. The data also indicated that students were exceptionally proficient in writing shorter papers of 500-750 words which were required in the 100 and 200 level courses but were only proficient in writing the longer capstone piece of 20 pages in the senior thesis course. Thus, as the College continues to strategically improve writing, faculty workshops that address creating longer assignments dealing with synthesis, analysis, language and grammar skills will be offered. In addition, faculty will require longer papers as students progress through the 100, 200, 300, and 400 level courses.
Group Activity
•
Come up with one or two goals for your plan.
•
How would you assess each goal?
•
What are your Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
•
For each SLO, what is the measurement for your assessment?
•
How do you know if you have achieved the SLO?
Kathryn Brewer-Strayer, QEP Director
Standards for the 5-Year Report
•
A succinct list of the initial goals and intended outcomes of the QEP
•
A discussion of changes made to the QEP and reasons for making the changes
•
A description of the QEP’s impact on student learning and/or the environment supporting student learning as appropriate to the design of the QEP. This description should include the achievement of identified goals and outcomes and any unanticipated outcomes of the QEP.
•
A reflection on what the institution has learned as a result of of the QEP
Goals and Expected Student Learning Outcomes
List all goals of your plan, expected student outcomes, and actual student learning outcomes for each year of your plan or each phase of your plan.
SUCCINCT LIST OF INITIAL GOALS AND INTENDED OUTCOMES
To achieve the mission of enhancing written communication skills, the College established five goals: • • • • •
Having regular, consistent writing assignments written in different modes for different purposes helps students perform better academically. Having students write consistently in various courses and methods enhances student learning. Having ample in-class and out-of-class opportunities for writing with a variety of purposes and audiences produces a significant enhancement to student learning. Having faculty use writing as a method of engagement of students with course content material enhances student learning. Having students write in multiple disciplines using multiple modes of assignments appropriate to the different disciplines is more effective in writing instruction and enhances student learning.
Student Learning Outcomes
To achieve written communication skills, the College established student learning outcomes (SLOs) to enable students to: • • • • •
Synthesize and analyze various kinds of information from multiple sources in a manner that demonstrates critical thought and logical evaluation. Organize consistent, coherent, and effective paragraphs with smooth transitions between paragraphs. Compose essays free of all spelling, grammar, writing conventions, and sentence structure errors. Demonstrate the ability to use appropriate software to create assignments that illustrate their writing fluency. Demonstrate writing skills by writing to a specific audience, using accurate and appropriate word choices.
RATIONALE AND CHANGES
Faculty Training First Workshop 2010--3 Sessions Workshops at Beginning of Each Successive Year and Cohort Modifications to the WFL Plan Registered Students in English 131 Classes Rubric and Checklist Modified Staggered Assignments in 131 and 132 Courses Altered Number of Assignments for 200-300 Level Courses Altered Checkpoints
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (SLOs) Table 1: Checkpoints of Student Learning Outcomes
Checkpoints
Courses
One
English 131 Religion 131 Humanities 131
Two
English 132 Religion 132 Humanities 132
Assignments
Evaluation Outcomes
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
20% of students will be partially proficient
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
35% of students will be partially proficient
Three
200 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Discipline specific assignments such as research papers, lab reports, etc.
50% of students will be proficient
Four
300 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Annotated bibliography, abstract, prospectus for senior thesis
65% of students will be very proficient
Five
400 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Senior Thesis
80% of students will be extremely proficient
Instruments Measuring Student Learning Outcomes
Rubrics Checklists Surveys E-Portfolio Pre-Tests Post-Tests
Table 2: Grade Comparison 2009-2010 Percentages
A
50
B
C
D
38
25
13
0
A B C D F FA09 ENG 131
A B C D F WFL ENG 131
A B C D F FA09 HUM 131
A B C D F WFL HUM 131
A B C D F FA09 REL 131
A B C D F WFL REL 131
F
Table 3: Grade Comparison 2011-2012 Percentages
NON WFL 100
94
WFL
94 82 70
75
73
57
58
66
57
57
50
25 0
ENG 131
ENG 132
HUM 130
REL 131
REL 132
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (SLOs) Table 4: Pre-Test Assessments
Courses (STI 111) Pre-Test Checkpoints
Evaluation Outcomes
Exceptionally Proficient
27.4%
Proficient
50.6%
Partially Proficient
16.6%
Not Proficient
2.8%
STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES (SLOs) Table 5: Actual Checkpoint Assessments of Student Learning Outcomes Checkpoints
Assignments
Evaluation Outcomes
One
English 131 Religion 131 Humanities 131
Courses
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
82% of students was above partially proficient
Two
English 132 Religion 132 Humanities 132
Three mini Checkpoint WFL assignments from four modes
65.4% of students was above partially proficient
43.8% of students was above proficient
Three
200 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Discipline specific assignments such as research papers, lab reports, etc.
Four
300 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Annotated bibliography, abstract, prospectus for senior thesis
79% of students were exceptionally proficient
Five
400 Level Discipline Specific Courses
Senior Thesis
60 % of students were exceptionally proficient
Table 2: Expected and Actual Checkpoints of Student Learning Outcomes Checkpoints One Two
Three
Four Five
Courses English 131 Religion 131 Humanities 131 English 132 Religion 132 Humanities 132
Assignments Three Writing to Learn WFL assignments from four modes Three Writing to Learn WFL assignments from four modes Discipline specific 200 Level assignments such as Discipline research papers, lab Specific Courses reports, etc. 300 Level Annotated bibliography, Discipline abstract, prospectus for Specific Courses senior thesis 400 Level Discipline Senior Thesis Specific Courses
Expected Outcomes 20% of students will be partially proficient 35% of students will be partially proficient
Actual Outcomes 82% of students were above partially proficient 65% of students were above partially proficient
50% of students will 44% of students be proficient were proficient 79% of students 65% of students will were exceptionally be proficient proficient 80% of students will 60% of students be extremely were exceptionally proficient proficient
Outcomes 2 Table 3: Percentages of Proficiency for Student Learning Outcomes on Pre-Test and Post-Test
Pre-Test
Post-Test
% Exceptionally Proficient % Proficient % Partially Proficient % Not Proficient % Exceptionally Proficient % Proficient % Partially Proficient % Not Proficient
SLO 3 – Language and Mechanics
SLO 4 – Software (LiveText and SafeAssign)
SLO – 5 Adaptation to Audience and Context
15%
6%
85%
18%
59% 23% 3%
56% 32% 6%
9% 3% 3%
70% 9% 3%
54%
78%
46%
62%
60%
20% 24% 2%
20% 2% 0%
26% 26% 2%
28% 8% 2%
40% 0% 0%
SLO 1 – Synthesis and Analysis
SLO 2 – Organizational Structure
18% 62% 18% 2%
Figure 1: Achieved Proficiency 2009-2015
Table 6: Faculty Evaluations of the WFL
ITEM By participating in the WFL, I learned how to assign the four writing modes. By participating in the WFL, I learned how to evaluate the writing assignments using the rubric. By participating in the WFL, I learned how to evaluate the writing assignments using the checklist. WFL increased the number of occasions where I required writing in assessments. WFL increased the frequency in which computer-based learning activities are assigned. WFL-required use of Blackboard enabled me to create assignments within units. WFL training in Blackboard enabled me to use SafeAssign. The amount of time allocated to LiveText training was adequate to allow me to use it effectively. The role of the FQD was presented in a fashion I understood. Table 7: Student Evaluations of WFL The role of the MAC was presented in a fashion I understood. The FQD carried out assigned roles as I understood them. The MAC carried out assigned roles as I understood them. The FQD performed in an excellent manner across all roles. The MAC performed in an excellent manner across all roles. Meetings of subject clusters would have been more effective in enhancing my own understanding. Full implementation of the WFL program will enhance student learning.
MEAN 5.22 6.16 5.91 5.3 5.41 5.87 5.87 5.55 6.17 5.9 6.4 6.07 6.35 5.85 4.4 5.67
Table 7: Student Evaluations of the WFL ITEM
MEAN
WFL classes have enhanced my learning.
3.27
WFL assignments have been a meaningful experience for me.
3.28
WFL assignments helped me organize my papers and write more effectively.
3.41
I was engaged in learning more consistently by WFL instructors than non WFL instructors.
3.04
WFL instructors explained the QEP and WFL assignments to me. Table 7: Student Evaluations of WFL WFL assignments better prepared me for my other classes.
3.1
Participating in WFL classes has strengthened and improved my learning in other classes.
3.1 2.41
WFL made a positive contribution to my educational experience.
3.36
The instructor gave me ample time to complete the assignments before the due date.
3.93
The classroom technology (Blackboard and LiveText) enhanced my learning experience.
3.51
A REFLECTION ON WHAT THE INSTITUTION HAS LEARNED Results of the QEP WFL program indicate that overall student learning was enhanced. The checkpoints show that student writing improved over the four-year period. The post-test assessment of the Senior Thesis showed that 77% of students were exceptionally proficient as compared to 28% of incoming freshman students. Finally, while students’ grades only indicated a slight improvement in 100 level WFL courses as compared to traditional courses, the intent of the WFL was to have students write better, not penalize their grades in courses or affect their overall GPA. Student learning was enhanced as students were given opportunities to present several written drafts of assignments. This allowed them to address their individual strengths and weaknesses with faculty conferencing. Students also learned to reflect more on the materials they were using in order to write about them. However, the 500-750 word essays did not prepare students for the thesis
The WFL did not meet the 80% exceptionally proficient fifth checkpoint. The data from the rubric, indicated that the weaknesses in student writing occurred in the synthesis/analysis section and in the language/mechanics section of student writing. Students were only proficient in analyzing and synthesizing information and using appropriate language/mechanical skills necessary for completing the researched senior thesis. As a result, more assignments should be required in lower level courses that emphasize synthesis, analysis, language, and grammatical skills needed for the senior thesis. The data also indicated that students were exceptionally proficient in writing shorter papers of 500-750 words which were required in the 100 and 200 level courses but were only proficient in writing the longer capstone piece of 20 pages in the senior thesis course. Thus, as the College continues to strategically improve writing, faculty workshops that address creating longer assignments dealing with synthesis, analysis, language and grammar skills will be offered. In addition, faculty will require longer papers as students progress through the 100, 200, 300, and 400 level courses.
Group Activity
•
Come up with one or two goals for your plan.
•
How would you assess each goal?
•
What are your Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
•
For each SLO, what is the measurement for your assessment?
•
How do you know if you have achieved the SLO?
