uccs general education assessment report spring 2010 general... · general education assessment...

University of Colorado at Colorado Springs

Assessment of General Education

Spring 2010

General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 iii Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office

Table of Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Core Goals Mapping by Measurement Instrument

General Education, Core Goal 1 ......................................................................................................... 5 General Education, Core Goal 2 ......................................................................................................... 5 General Education, Core Goal 3 ......................................................................................................... 6 General Education, Core Goal 4 ......................................................................................................... 6

General Education Core Goals by SAAC Achievement Topics

General Education, Core Goal 1 ...................................................................................................... 7-8 General Education, Core Goal 2 ......................................................................................................... 9 General Education, Core Goal 3 .................................................................................................. 10-11 General Education, Core Goal 4 .................................................................................................. 12-13

Assessment of General Education: Goal 1 ....................................................................................... 15

Reading

Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 16 Evidence Source 2, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 17

Critical Thinking

Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 18 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, Q2b ............................................. 19 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, Q2d ............................................. 20 Evidence Source 4, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, Q2c ................................. 21

Writing

Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 22 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, Q3d ............................................. 23 Evidence Source 3, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, Q1a ................................. 24 Evidence Source 4, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, Q1d ................................. 25 Evidence Source 5, Writing Competency Portfolio ..................................................................... 26 Mean comparisons, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College ..................................... 27-30

Oral Communication

Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1b ................................................ 31 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11d .............................................. 32 Evidence Source 3, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 33

Assessment of General Education: Goal 2 ........................................................................................ 35 Depth

Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 36 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11b .............................................. 37 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 7a ................................................ 38 Evidence Source 4, National Survey of Student Engagement, 2e ................................................ 39 Evidence Source 5, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2g ..................................... 40

Breadth Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile, Humanities .................................................................... 41 Evidence Source 2, Proficiency Profile, Social Sciences ............................................................. 41 Evidence Source 3, Proficiency Profile, Natural Sciences ........................................................... 42 Evidence Source 4, Proficiency Profile, Scaled/Combined Score ................................................ 42 Evidence Source 5, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11a .............................................. 43 Evidence Source 6, Proficiency Profile, Native and Transfer Scaled Score ................................. 44

Assessment of General Education: Goal 3 ........................................................................................ 45 Technology

Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1L ................................................ 46 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11g .............................................. 47 Evidence Source 3, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 48

Information Literacy Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 49

Presentations

Evidence Source 1, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2i ...................................... 50 Evidence Source 2, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2h ..................................... 51 Evidence Source 3, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 52

Research Evidence Source 1, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2d ..................................... 53 Evidence Source 2, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 2f ..................................... 54 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 7d ................................................ 55 Evidence Source 4, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 56

Self-Guided Learning

Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, llj ................................................. 57 Evidence Source 2, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 58

Quantitative Abilities Evidence Source 1, Proficiency Profile ........................................................................................ 59 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11f ............................................... 60

General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 v Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office

Learning Activities Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1d ................................................ 61 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 2c ................................................ 62 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11m ............................................ 63 Evidence Source 4, National Survey of Student Engagement, 6d ................................................ 64 Evidence Source 5, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 4b .................................... 65

Assessment of General Education: Goal 4 ....................................................................................... 67

Community Involvement

Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 7b ................................................ 68 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1k ................................................ 69 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11o .............................................. 70

Values and Ethics Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, lln ............................................... 71

Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 72

Knowledge of Global Issues Evidence Source 1, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 73

Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1g ................................................ 74 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1h ................................................ 75 Evidence Source 3, Consortium for the Study of Writing in College, 3g .................................... 76 Evidence Source 4, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 77

Diversity and Inclusiveness Evidence Source 1, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1e ................................................ 78 Evidence Source 2, National Survey of Student Engagement, 11L ............................................. 79 Evidence Source 3, National Survey of Student Engagement, 6e ................................................ 80 Evidence Source 4, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1u ................................................ 81 Evidence Source 5, National Survey of Student Engagement, 1v ................................................ 82 Evidence Source 6, Combined Alumni Survey ............................................................................ 83

Appendix A: Instruments Used to Assess General Education........................................................ 84

ETS Proficiency Profile Proficiency Level Definitions ................................................................................................. 84-85 Writing ......................................................................................................................................... 85 Mathematics ................................................................................................................................. 85 Reading ......................................................................................................................................... 86 Critical Thinking .......................................................................................................................... 86

Composition Portfolio ..................................................................................................................... 86

National Survey of Student Engagement ...................................................................................... 87

Consortium for the Study of Writing in College .......................................................................... 87

Combined Alumni Survey .............................................................................................................. 87

Appendix B: Performance, Current and Prior Years by Outcome and College ........................... 88

General Education Core Goals by SAAC Achievement Topics, Prior Years General Education, Core Goal 1 .............................................................................................. 88-89 General Education, Core Goal 2 .................................................................................................... 90 General Education, Core Goal 3 .............................................................................................. 91-93 General Education, Core Goal 4 .............................................................................................. 93-95

General Education Assessment Report, Spring 2010 3 Submitted by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Student Achievement Assessment Committee Prepared by: The University of Colorado – Colorado Springs, Assessment Office

The Student Achievement Assessment Committee (SAAC) is tasked with proposing and guiding

general education assessment activities, submitting their proposals and reports to the Educational Policy and

University Standards Committee (EPUS) of the Faculty Assembly for approval, and transmitting the report to

the colleges for consideration. This report contains the most recently collected data from the UCCS General

Education Assessment project. It has been ten years since the baseline data was originally collected. Therefore,

in the interest of taking a fresh look at ourselves as we head towards our reaccreditation visit in the 2016-2017

academic year, we are not including previously reported data in the body of the report. We have included the

historical ‘areas of concern’ matrix in Appendix B (pg. 88) for your reference. Additionally, you can locate

prior year general education assessment reports on the assessment website at www.uccs.edu/assess.

Data collected from direct and indirect measures are included in this report. The direct measurement

instruments are the ETS Proficiency Profile (PP) and the UCCS Writing Department Writing Portfolio. The

indirect measures are The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), The Consortium for the Study of

Writing in College (CSWC) and The Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate (Alumni). We have also re-

vamped the presentation of the results to make them more visually accessible and easily interpretable.

The Proficiency Profile (previously known as The Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress)

and The National Survey of Student Engagement have been administered as part of the campus wide general

education assessment process since the inception of the project. The Combined Alumni Survey –

Undergraduate is a redesigned combination of the graduate and undergraduate alumni surveys. The questions

and response options that were used to address the sub-goals remain the same. For more detailed information

about the instruments including the sampling process associated with each instrument, please refer to Appendix

A (pg. 84), in this report or contact the Assessment Office.

The majority of this information was collected at the college level. Thus, a comparison of student

achievement among UCCS undergraduate colleges in the core goal areas of general education is constructed for

review by each undergraduate college. This report contains a number of positive findings where students are

meeting or exceeding the general education achievement targets at the college and/or university levels. For

example, the Proficiency Profile results indicate that our students are meeting the campus achievement target

for math. Unfortunately, there are also areas where student achievement is deficient at the college and/or

university levels. For example, the Proficiency Profile Reading/Critical Thinking results indicate that our

students are not performing as well as similar students nationally.

It is hoped that the findings will be informative and useful to the colleges and the university as we plan

for the future and continue to strive to provide a productive learning environment for our students. As the

General Education Curriculum Committee is currently meeting to review and revise the campus core goals, we

will of course be reviewing and revising the assessment process to identify and add instruments to appropriately

measure our student achievement.

The measurement goal for each general education objective includes an estimated standard error +/-

6%. This is the average standard error found in the Proficiency Profile test questions and the National Survey of

Student Engagement response items. College data must fall within a 6% margin of the measurement goal to

meet expectations. A college may want to pay particular attention to those areas where their scores fall below

the 6% margin.

Findings for each of the student learning achievement outcomes that are associated with each General

Education Core Goal are presented in the body of the report. Each learning achievement outcome topic is

followed by findings from direct and indirect measurement instruments that we have used to provide evidence

of student learning achievement related to that specific core goal and achievement outcome. The data reflected

in these pages are made available for the colleges use in assessing and addressing their student achievement

where applicable.


Core Goals Mapping by Measurement Instrument

In the tables below and on the following page the core goals and related student learning outcome

topics are cross-referenced with the direct and indirect instruments that are used to measure student

achievement.

Instruments:

ETS Proficiency Profile (PP), Direct

UCCS Writing Portfolio, Direct

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), Indirect

Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (CSWC), Indirect

The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey – Alumni, Indirect

General Education, Core Goal 1: Students will be able to read, write, listen, and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes

Direct Measures Indirect Measures

Proficiency Profile

UCCS Writing Portfolio

Misc: NSSE CSWC (new)

UCCS Alumni

1a. Reading √ √ 1b. Critical and Analytic Thinking √

2b, 2d 2c

1c. Writing √ √

3d 1a, 1d

1d. Oral Communication Oral Comm.

Skills Rubric - to be designed

1b, 11d √

General Education, Core Goal 2: Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience in other fields. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes


Proficiency Profile



UCCS Alumni

2a. Depth

2e, 7a,

11b 2g √

2b. Breadth √ 11a

2c. Breadth – Students who began at UCCS versus transfer students

√

General Education, Core Goal 3: Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes


Proficiency Profile



UCCS Alumni

3a. Technology

1L, 11g √

3b. Information Literacy

Planned; to design and include topic specific questions on testing instruments for Spring 2011 MAPP administration

√

3c. Presentations Oral Comm Rubric 2h, 2i √

3d. Research 7d 2d, 2f √

3e. Self-guided Learning 11j √

3f. Quantitative Abilities √ 11f

3g. Learning Activities

Capstone projects?

1d, 2c,11m,

6d 4b

General Education, Core Goal 4: Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society – locally, nationally, and globally. Instruments Learning Achievement Outcomes


Proficiency Profile



UCCS Alumni

4a. Community Service/Volunteer Work

1k, 7b,

11o

4b. Personal Values and Ethics

Planned; to design and include topic specific questions on testing instruments for Spring 2011 MAPP administration

11n

4c. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues

√

4d. Knowledge of Global Issues

√

4e. Working Collaboratively 1g, 1h 3g √

4f. Diversity/Inclusiveness

1e, 11L, 6e, 1u,

1v √

4g. Sustainability


General Education Core Goal’s with SAAC General Education Achievement Topics The measurement goal for each general education objective includes an estimated standard error 6%.

This is the average standard error found in Proficiency Profile test questions and the National Survey of Student

Engagement response items. College data must fall within a 6% margin of the measurement goal to meet

expectations. 1 Each of the four tables on pages 7 - 13, indicate the core goals and related student learning

outcomes, as well as the instrument and variables used to address that topic. The column running down the

right side of each table indicates the colleges performing below the minimal acceptable range for that variable.

A college with scores below the 6% margin for the most recent data is listed in this right hand column and

should consider this as an area of concern. The page number in parenthesis with each variable indicates the

location of a chart and further information related to the achievement target and college level performance. The

percentage amount to the right of each college indicates how far below the achievement target each college is.

Goal 1: Students will be able to read, write, listen and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought. 1a. Reading - Students will demonstrate the ability to read, such that they can evaluate and analyze arguments, can handle interpretation, inductive generalizations or causal explanations.

Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range

Instrument: PP, direct – Reading (pg. 14) None Below Minimum Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey/ Undergrad, indirect

Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your reading skills education at UCCS? (pg. 17)

EAS -11%

1b. Critical & Analytic Thinking - Students will demonstrate critical, analytic and creative thinking skills.


Instrument: PP, direct – Reading/Critical Thinking (pg. 18) None Below Minimum

Instrument: NSSE, indirect – During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized:

2b. Q. analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as examining a particular case or situation in depth and considering its components? (pg. 19)

None Below Minimum

2d. Q. making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing the soundness of their conclusions? (pg. 20)

COB EAS LAS

-9% -21% -7%

Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 2c. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: analyze or evaluate something you read, researched, or observed? (pg. 21)

COB EAS

-20% -13%

1 2007 General Education Assessment Report, (Student Achievement Assessment Committee)

Goal 1, continued

1c. Writing - Students will demonstrate the ability to write, including proper mechanics, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.


Instrument: PP, direct - Writing (pg. 22) Beth-El COB

-13% -12%

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 3d. Q. During the current school year, about how many papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages have you written? (pg. 23)

Beth-El COB

-25% -10%

Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 1a. Q. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments have you: brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment. (pg. 24)

Beth-El COB EAS LAS

-3% -1% -23% -3%

1d. Q. received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final assignment. (pg. 25)

Beth-El EAS LAS

-16% -24% -12%

Instrument: Writing Portfolio (pg. 26) None Below Minimum

1d. Oral Communication - Students will be able to speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought.


NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE Instrument: Rubric, to be designed. To be administered in senior level courses with oral presentation requirements across colleges.

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1b. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you made a class presentation? (pg. 31)

Beth-El LAS EAS

-9% -22% -13%

11d. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in speaking clearly and effectively. (pg. 32)

Beth-El EAS LAS

-15% -16% -8%

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in oral communication skills? (pg. 33)

EAS -14%


Goal 2: Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience in other fields.

2a. Depth - Students will experience a good understanding in their major. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range

NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. UCCS prepared me well for my field of specialization. (pg. 36)

LAS -7%

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11b. Q. To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills? (pg. 37)

EAS LAS

-9% -23%

7a. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do any of the following; practicum, internship, field experience, clinical assignment or co-op assignment, before you graduate from UCCS? (pg. 38)

None Below Minimum

2e. Q. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations? (pg. 39)

None Below Minimum

Instrument: CSWC – indirect 2g. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you write in the style and form of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology, etc.) (pg. 40)

None Below Minimum

2b. Breadth - Students will demonstrate a breadth of knowledge across disciplines. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range

Instrument: PP, direct – Humanities, Social Science, Natural Science and Overall (pg. 41-42)

None Below Minimum

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11a. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring a broad general education? (pg. 43)

Beth-El EAS LAS

-12% -19% -11%

2c. Breadth - Students who began as first-time freshman at UCCS will demonstrate a greater breadth of knowledge across disciplines than transfer students.


Instrument: PP – Scaled Score (pg. 44) None Below Minimum

Goal 3: Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge. 3a. Technology - Students will demonstrate technological skills and knowledge in the use of tech devices/methods such as; learning management systems, blogs, chat groups or podcasts



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1L. Q. During the current school year, about how often did you use an electronic medium (listserv, chat group, internet, im, etc.) to discuss or complete an assignment? (pg. 46)

Beth-El EAS LAS

-10% -23% -13%

11g. Q. To what extent has UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in using computing and information technology? (pg.47)

LAS -11%

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in computer skills. (pg. 48)

EAS -9%

3b. Information Literacy - Students will demonstrate the ability to locate, evaluate, select and use appropriately necessary information.



Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in information gathering skills (library, reference). (pg. 49)

None Below Minimum

3c. Presentations - Students will be able to communicate through the use of visual rhetoric.


Instrument: CSCW, indirect 2i. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as PowerPoint, etc.)? (pg. 50)

Beth-El EAS LAS

-19% -7% -12%

2h. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your written assignment? (pg. 51)

Beth-El LAS

-25% -14%

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your education in graphic communication (using charts and graphs to present information). (pg. 52)

None Below Minimum

3d. Research - Students will demonstrate research skills and knowledge relevant to their field/discipline.



Instrument: CSWC: indirect 2d. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.? (pg. 53)

Beth-El LAS

-17% - 9%

2f. Q. explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data? (pg. 54) Beth-El LAS

-9% -12%

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7d. Q. Have you worked on a research project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements or do you plan to do so before you graduate from UCCS? (pg. 55)

COB -12%


Goal 3 – outcome 3d, continued Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect

Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in scientific reasoning skills? (pg. 56)

COB -17%

3e. Self Guided Learning - Students will demonstrate the ability to learn on their own and desire to become life-long learners.



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11j. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on your own? (pg. 57)

COB EAS LAS

-18% -24% -12%

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your UCCS education in motivating you to pursue knowledge. (pg. 58)

COB EAS

-9% -24%

3f. Quantitative Abilities - Students will demonstrate skills and knowledge in analyzing and completing quantitative problems.


Instrument: PP, direct – Mathematics (pg. 59) None Below Minimum

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11f. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative problems?(pg. 60)

LAS -9%

3g. Learning Activities - Students will demonstrate the ability to engage in learning activities.


Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1d. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources? (pg. 61)

EAS -12%

2c. Q. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex interpretations and relationships? (pg. 62)

COB -12%

11m. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in solving complex real-world problems? (pg. 63)

Beth-El COB LAS

-8% -13% -19%

6d. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue? (pg. 64) EAS -10%

Instrument: CSWC, indirect 4b. Q. Have you or do you plan to submit work you wrote or co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work, etc.)? (pg. 65)

None Below Minimum

Goal 4: Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society - locally, nationally, and globally. 4a. Community Involvement - Students will develop an understanding of the value of community involvement and participate in community service/volunteer work as part of a course or group exercise or on their own.



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7b. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do community service or volunteer work prior to graduating from UCCS? (pg. 68)

EAS -19%

1k. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you participated in a community-based project (e.g. service learning) as part of a regular course? (pg. 69)

COB EAS LAS

-9% -13% -11%

11o. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in contributing to the welfare of your community? (pg. 70)

COB EAS LAS

-25% -21% -21%

4b. Values and Ethics - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of their personal code of values and ethics.



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11n. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in developing a personal code of values and ethics? (pg. 71)

COB EAS LAS

-14% -26% -22%

4c. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of local, state, and domestic issues.



Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate your gain in knowledge of social/domestic issues while attending UCCS? (pg. 72)

Beth-El COB EAS

-15% -8% -36%

4d. Knowledge of Global Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of global issues.


Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate your gain in knowledge of international issues while attending UCCS? (pg. 73)

Beth-El EAS

-32% -32%

4e. Working Collaboratively - Students will demonstrate the ability to work effectively with others, including individuals from different backgrounds.



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1g. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with other students on projects during class? (pg. 74)

LAS -12%

1h. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments? (pg. 75)

LAS -15%

Instrument: CSCW, indirect 3g. Q. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments has your instructor asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project? (pg. 76)

Beth-El LAS

-18% -12%


Goal 4 - outcome 4e, continued

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in working with others.

(pg. 77) None Below Minimum

4f. Diversity/Inclusiveness - Students will demonstrate an awareness of and understanding of people/groups that are different from them.



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1e. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussions or writing assignments? (pg. 78)

EAS -44%

11L. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds? (pg. 79)

Beth-El COB EAS LAS

-13% -28% -34% -7%

6e. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective? (pg. 80)

EAS -18%

1u. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own? (pg. 81)

Beth-El -7%

1v. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values?(pg. 82)

None Below Minimum

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your education at UCCS in multi-cultural awareness (sensitivity to others unlike you). (pg. 83)

COB EAS

-12% -43%

4g. Sustainability - Students will demonstrate an awareness and understanding of the value of sustainability.


NO MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE



Assessment of General Education: Goal 1

Students will be able to read, write, listen, and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical,

and creative thought.

READING Sub-Goal 1a. Students will demonstrate the ability to read, such that they can evaluate and analyze arguments,

can handle interpretation, inductive generalizations or causal explanations.

In this section, direct and indirect results related to students reading ability are presented. Direct measures are

taken from the Proficiency Profile. Indirect measures are taken from the UCCS Combined Alumni Survey -

Undergraduate.

Reading Skill Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile

Level 1 Reading: At Level 1, a student recognizes and comprehends discrete pieces of information (e.g., a

single detail, information presented in a single sentence), as well as relationships or connections explicitly

stated in a passage and understands words and phrases in context.2 For more details, please refer to Appendix A.

Most Recent Administration: 2009 – Spring, JR/SR and Fall, Freshman

Chart 1. PP Reading Skill by Proficiency Level 1 or Above, by Percent

National data is reflective of student’s performance for comparable Carnegie Classification institutions from Jan ’03 – July ‘07 Source of data: UCCS Assessment Office

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 72% (+/- 6%) of students reading at Level 1 or above. The

minimal acceptable percentage of student reading at Level 1 or above is 66%. The blue dotted line running

across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement

level.

Note: The target sample size for the upper-class administration was 300. We achieved a total of 225 tests

completed, resulting in a response rate of 75%. Although the goal was to test 100% senior level students, 31%

of the sample ended up being junior level students. In spite of this, as a group, UCCS seniors outperformed the

National senior group.

2 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001)

87

80

68

67

76

56

72

52

7

8

15

18

12

27

17

25

7

12

17

15

13

17

11

23

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=61, JR/SR

EAS, n=50, JR/SR

COB, n=81, JR/SR

Beth‐El, n=33, JR/SR

UCCS, n=225, JR/SR

UCCS, n=210, FR

Nat'l SR

Nat'l FR

Proficient Marginal Reading Not Proficient


Reading Skill Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Results (replaces

Undergraduate Combined Alumni Survey)

Most Recent Administration: 2008, n= 277, 27% response rate

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “How would you rate the overall quality of your

reading skills education at UCCS?”

Chart 2. Alumni Rate Overall Quality of Their Reading Skills Education, by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4 and Excellent = 5

Table 1. Mean for University and Colleges

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed a rating of “good/excellent” from 66% (+/- 6%) of our alumni,

with a minimum acceptable percentage of 60%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to

bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

36

9

18

22

29

34

46

42

39

37

26

36

33

36

29

4

5

3

4

2

10

3

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=173

EAS, n=11

COB, n=57

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=277

Excellent Good Fair Poor Very Poor

Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS

x̄ 3.78 3.68 3.55 4.02 3.92

CRITICAL THINKING

Sub-Goal 1b. Students will demonstrate critical, analytic and creative thinking skills. Direct and indirect results are presented in this section. Direct measures are taken from the Proficiency Profile.

Indirect results are taken from the National Survey of Student Engagement.

Critical Thinking Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile

Level 3 – Critical Thinking: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 reading skills successfully, students

at Level 3 can evaluate and analyze arguments and, within an academic field, handle interpretation, inductive

generalizations, or causal explanations. 3 For more details, please refer to Appendix A.

Note: Level 3 skills are differentiated within these areas as follows: Humanities: Evaluate views and interpretations Social Sciences: Evaluate claims, disputes, and inductive generalizations Natural Sciences: Evaluate explanatory hypotheses and draw conclusion


Chart 3. PP Critical Thinking - Reading, Level 3, by Percent


Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 12% (+/- 6%) of our students performing at Level 3, with a

minimal acceptable percentage of 6%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,

indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

Note: Reading and critical thinking are treated within the PP test and results as a single dimension because of

the close relationship between the two. Critical thinking may be considered as a higher level reading process.4

3 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001) 4 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001)

23

16

6

9

13

1

6

2

64

64

62

58

63

55

66

50

14

20

32

33

25

44

28

48

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=61, JR/SR

EAS, n=50, JR/SR

COB, n=81, JR/SR


UCCS JR/SR

UCCS FR

Natl, SR

Natl, FR

Proficient Level 3 – Critical Thinking Proficient Level 1‐2 Not Proficient/Marginal


Critical Thinking Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2b

Most Recent Administration: 2008, Spring - Freshman, n = 342 (response rate 23%) and Senior, n = 428

(response rate 31%)

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your

coursework emphasized analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as examining a

particular case or situation in depth and considering its components?”

Chart 4. NSSE “Coursework emphasized analyzing the basic elements of an idea,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little =1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4

Table 2. Mean for University, Colleges and Public Master’s

Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS,

SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.29 3.23 3.24 3.47 3.36 3.06 3.11 3.27* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 85% (+/- 6%) of our students experiencing coursework that

emphasizes analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory “quite a bit/very much.” The

minimal acceptable percentage at “quite a bit/very much” is 79%. The blue dotted line running across the bars,

from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

Note: College breakouts indicated in the NSSE charts and tables in this report represent only those respondents

that identified their major. The Public Master’s category includes UCCS and all comparable Carnegie

Classifications institutions that participated in this administration cycle.

54

49

42

46

48

31

43

35

40

33

42

38

41

46

42

44

6

12

15

17

10

21

14

19

6

2

0.5

1

2

1

2

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=214, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=412, SR

UCCS, n=308, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR

Very Much Quite a Bit Some Very Little

Critical Thinking Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2d

Most Recent Administration: 2008, Spring - Freshman, n = 342 (response rate 23%) and Senior, n = 428

(response rate 31%)

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your

coursework emphasized making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as

examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing the soundness of their conclusions?”

Chart 5. NSSE “Coursework emphasized making judgments,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit =3and Very Much = 4

Table 3. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s


SR

UCCS, FR

NSSE Pub Mstr’s FR

NSSE Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.26 2.83 2.61 2.99 2.94 2.75 2.94*** 3.05* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of our students engaging in coursework that

emphasizes making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods “quite a bit/very much.”

The minimal acceptable percent is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,


38

27

32

45

35

20

35

28

30

27

34

38

33

44

40

42

26

24

19

15

25

28

21

25

6

21

15

2

8

9

4

5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213 SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=410, SR

UCCS, n=309, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



Critical Thinking Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges - NSSE,

CSWC 2c

Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 – Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your

writing assignments did you analyze or evaluate something you read, researched or observed?”

Chart 6. CSWC “Analyze or evaluate something you read, researched or observed,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few = 2, Some = 3, Most = 4 and All = 5

Table 4. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR

x̄ 3.58 3.61 3.59 3.62 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 60% of students indicating that they analyzed or evaluated

something they read, researched or observed, for “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable

percentage is 56%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement

target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

Note: UCCS is participating in the Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges in collaboration with the

NSSE. These questions were administered in conjunction with the Spring 2008 NSSE.

14

15

13

16

19

18

10

18

44

45

50

44

39

24

39

52

32

28

27

24

32

33

13

21

8

8

7

12

7

18

29

9

2

3

3

3

4

7

10

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=224, FR

UCCS, n=338, SR

Beth‐El, n=54, SR

COB, n=45, SR

EAS, n=31, SR

LAS, n=200, SR

All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments Few Assignments No Assignments

WRITING Sub-goal 1c: Students will demonstrate the ability to write, including proper mechanics, grammar, punctuation

and sentence structure.

Writing Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile

Level 1 Writing: At Level 1, a student can recognize agreement among basic grammatical elements (e.g., nouns,

verbs, pronouns, conjunctions); recognize appropriate transition words; recognize incorrect word choice; order

sentences in a paragraph; order elements in an outline.5


Chart 7. PP Proficiency in Writing Level One or Above, by Percent


Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 71% of our students writing at Level 1 or above. The

minimum acceptable percentage is 65%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,


Note: Nationally and for UCCS, 56% of entering freshman have level 1 or above writing skills. It would seem

reasonable to expect that our Spring 2009 JR/SR results would be comparable to national senior level results

(71% demonstrate writing skills at Level 1 or above). However, UCCS results are well below national levels,

with 66% of the Spring 2009 students demonstrating writing skills at Level 1 or above. This indicates that, with

the exception of the EAS majors, UCCS students are not making the same gains in their most basic writing

skills, as comparable students nationally, during their academic experience at UCCS.

5 The Academic Profile, Score Report and Interpretative Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 2001)

67

76

62

58

66

56

71

56

28

16

25

30

24

31

21

29

5

8

14

12

10

13

8

15

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=61, JR/SR

EAS, n=50, JR/SR

COB, n=81, JR/SR


UCCS, n=225, JR/SR

UCCS, n=210, FR

Nat'l SR

Nat'l FR

Proficient Level 1 Writing or Above Marginal Writing Not Proficient Writing


Writing Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 3d Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current year, about how many papers or

reports between 5 and 19 pages have you completed?

Chart 8. NSSE “Papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages,” by Percent

Source of Data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: None = 1, 1 to 4 = 2, 5 to 10 = 3, 11 to 20 = 4 and >20 writing assignments = 5



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.21 2.38 2.61 2.73 2.58 2.34 2.26 2.55 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed the university performance, with 46% (+/- 6%) of students

writing at least five to ten papers “between 5 and 19 pages” in length during their most recent academic year.

The minimum acceptable percent is 40%. To illustrate, 21% of Beth-El students indicated that they wrote at

least five papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages and 36% of College of Business students indicated that they

wrote at least five papers or reports between 5and 19 pages. These are both currently below the minimal

acceptable percentage of 40%. Whereas, 42% of EAS students indicated that they wrote at least five papers or

reports between 5 and 19 pages. Thus, EAS is above the minimal acceptable percentage but not quite at the

achievement target. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement


6

12

2

4

5

1

4

2

13

15

6

2

12

5

11

6

38

15

28

15

29

32

30

24

33

36

57

69

44

50

45

53

10

21

8

10

10

12

10

15

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, SR

EAS, SR

COB, SR

Beth‐EL, SR

UCCS SR

UCCS FR

NSSE PubMstr's SR

NSSE PubMstr's FR

> 20 writing assignments 11 to 20 5 to 10 1 to 4 None

Writing Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges - NSSE, CSWC 1a Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, for how many of your

writing assignments have you brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop

your ideas before your started drafting your assignment?”

Chart 9. CSWC “Brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.)” by Percent



x̄ 3.13 3.43 3.52 3.35*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 50% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they brainstormed

before drafting an assignment for “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is 46%.

The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the

minimal acceptable achievement level.

19

17

22

14

13

26

7

14

36

33

29

26

30

19

16

29

28

27

27

29

33

19

36

29

13

17

15

21

15

21

32

21

4

7

7

10

9

15

10

8

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=228, FR

UCCS, n=343, SR

Beth‐El, n=54, SR

COB, n=47, SR

EAS, n=31, SR

LAS, n=225, SR

All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments

Few Assignments No Assignments


Writing Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges - NSSE, CSWC 1d Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, for how many of your

assignments have you received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final

assignment?”

Chart 10. CSWC “Received feedback from your instructor,” by Percent



x̄ 2.47 3.19 3.36* 2.85*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 31% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they received

feedback from the instructor prior to turning in final assignment for “most/all” assignments. The minimal

acceptable percentage is 25%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the

achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

17

9

17

4

2

9

5

32

22

25

16

13

30

7

14

29

30

30

26

19

17

36

29

14

24

17

28

30

21

36

29

8

15

11

25

36

23

23

24

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=228, FR

UCCS, n=342, SR

Beth‐El, n=53, SR

COB, n=47, SR

EAS, n=31, SR

LAS, n=203, SR

All Assignments Most Assignments Some Assignments Few Assignments No Assignments

Writing Evidence Source 5, Instrument: Writing Competency Portfolio Table 8. Writing Center First-year Freshman Portfolio Results by Percent 2007-2008 Writing Portfolio Summary

College Native FY*/Transfer* Grand Total

Competent Comp-high

Comp-low NA Needs work

Beth-El 100 95% 3% 2% 0% 0%

Native FY Freshman 33 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Transfer 67 93% 4% 3% 0% 0%

EAS 51 88% 8% 4% 0% 0%


Transfer 17 76% 18% 6% 0% 0%

COB 96 86% 2% 10% 1% 0%


Transfer 67 87% 1% 10% 1% 0%

LAS 467 87% 8% 4% 0% 1%


Transfer 353 87% 8% 4% 0% 1%

SPA 1 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Transfer 1 100% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Grand Total 715 88% 7% 5% 0% 0%


Transfer 505 87% 7% 5% 0% 1% August 2007 through August 2008. Native FY refers to candidates for degree that began their academic career with UCCS as freshman. Transfers include all registration types except first-time freshmen. 2008-2009 Writing Portfolio Summary

College Native FY/Transfer Grand Total

Competent Comp-high

Needs work

Grand Total

Beth-El 137 99% 1% 1% 100% Native FY Freshman 47 98% 0% 2% 100% Transfer 91 99% 1% 0% 100% EAS 59 100% 0% 0% 100% Native FY Freshman 29 100% 0% 0% 100% Transfer 30 100% 0% 0% 100% COB 126 98% 0% 2% 100% Native FY Freshman 43 100% 0% 0% 100% Transfer 83 98% 0% 2% 100% LAS 606 95% 2% 3% 100% Native FY Freshman 193 96% 1% 3% 100% Transfer 413 94% 3% 3% 100% SPA 7 71% 0% 29% 100% Native FY Freshman 2 50% 0% 50% 100% Transfer 5 80% 0% 20% 100% Grand Total 936 96% 2% 2% 100% Native FY Freshman 314 97% 0% 3% 100% Transfer 622 95% 2% 2% 100% August 2008 through August 2009. Native FY refers to candidates for degree that began their academic career with UCCS as freshman. Transfers include all registration types except first-time freshmen.

Note: The writing portfolio is supposed to be submitted by students for review during their junior year. Plans

are in place to enforce submission deadlines with the new enrollment system. Ultimately, this will enable a

more effective and compelling evaluation and intervention process.


Consortium for the Study of Writing in College

Various items from the NSSE-CSWC tables have been highlighted in the General Education Assessment

Report. Please see Appendix for more details related to the CSWC project.

NSSE 2009 Mean Comparisons a6

Consortium for the Study of Writing in College University of Colorado at Colorado Springs

Table 9. CSWC-NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium

UCCS

UCCS compared with

CSWC

Class Mean Mean Sig b Effect size c

1. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments have you done each of the following?

1a. Brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment

FY 3.43 3.52 -.08

SR 3.13 3.36 *** -.19

1b. Talked with your instructor to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment

FY 2.93 3.03 -.09

SR 2.66 2.86 ** -.18

1c. Talked with a classmate, friend, or family member to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment

FY 3.27 3.31 -.04

SR 3.07 3.20 * -.12

1d. Received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final assignment

FY 3.19 3.36 * -.15

SR 2.47 2.85 *** -.32

1e. Received feedback from a classmate, friend, or family member about a draft before turning in your final assignment

FY 3.22 3.23 -.01

SR 2.78 2.89 -.09

1f. Visited a campus-based writing or tutoring center to get help with your writing assignment before turning it in

FY 2.12 2.03 .07

SR 1.78 1.69 .09

1g. Used an on-line tutoring service to get help with your writing assignment before turning it in

FY 1.74 1.67 .07

SR 1.40 1.44 -.04

1h. Proofread your final draft for errors before turning it in

FY 4.32 4.28 .05

SR 4.47 4.35 * .11 Scale: 1 = No assignments, 2 = Few assignments, 3 = Some assignments, 4 = Most assignments, 5 = All Assignments

6 The National Survey for Student Engagement – Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (Indiana University for Postsecondary Research, 2008)

Table 10. CSWC-NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium7

UCCS

UCCS compared with

CSWC


2. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you:

2a. Narrate or describe one of your own experiences

FY 2.38 2.75 *** -.36

SR 2.16 2.51 *** -.33

2b. Summarize something you read, such as articles, books, or on-line publications

FY 3.13 3.24 -.12

SR 3.01 3.18 ** -.17

2c. Analyze or evaluate something you read, researched, or observed

FY 3.61 3.59 .03

SR 3.58 3.62 -.04

2d. Describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.

FY 2.53 2.84 *** -.27

SR 2.57 2.91 *** -.28

2e. Argue a position using evidence and reasoning

FY 3.30 3.35 -.05

SR 3.03 3.12 -.08 2f. Explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data

FY 2.22 2.36 -.12

SR 2.34 2.50 * -.14

2g. Write in the style and format of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology, etc.)

FY 2.84 2.77 .06

SR 3.43 3.20 ** .18

2h. Include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your written assignment

FY 2.23 2.40 * -.16

SR 2.59 2.80 ** -.19

2i. Create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as PowerPoint, etc.)

FY 2.48 2.43 .04

SR 2.76 2.90 * -.12

Scale: 1 = No assignments, 2 = Few assignments, 3 = Some assignments, 4 = Most assignments, 5 = All Assignments 7 The National Survey for Student Engagement – Consortium for the Study of Writing in College (Indiana University for Postsecondary Research, 2008)


Table 11. CSWC-NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium8

UCCS

UCCS compared with

CSWC


3. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments has your instructor done each of the following?

3a. Provided clear instructions describing what he or she wanted you to do

FY 3.89 3.93 -.04

SR 3.74 3.91 *** -.20

3b. Explained in advance what he or she wanted you to learn

FY 3.64 3.71 -.08

SR 3.44 3.70 *** -.26

3c. Explained in advance the criteria he or she would use to grade your assignment

FY 3.92 3.86 .07

SR 3.71 3.86 * -.15

3d. Provided a sample of a completed assignment written by the instructor or a student

FY 2.88 2.91 -.03

SR 2.42 2.68 *** -.22

3e. Asked you to do short pieces of writing that he or she did not grade

FY 2.41 2.71 *** -.25

SR 1.87 2.19 *** -.28

3f. Asked you to give feedback to a classmate about a draft or outline the classmate had written

FY 3.17 3.03 .12

SR 1.98 2.22 *** -.21

3g. Asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project

FY 2.55 2.66 -.10

SR 2.48 2.69 *** -.19

3h. Asked you to address a real or imagined audience such as your classmates, a politician, non-experts, etc.

FY 2.99 2.82 * .14

SR 2.38 2.52 * -.11

Scale: 1 = No assignments, 2 = Few assignments, 3 = Some assignments, 4 = Most assignments, 5 = All Assignments


Table 12. CSWC - NSSE Mean Comparisons for Consortium9

UCCS

UCCS compared with

CSWC


4a. Prepare a portfolio that collects written work from more than one class FY .06 .14 *** -.22

SR .36 .19 *** .43

4b. Submit work you wrote or co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work, etc.) FY .05 .05 .00

SR .08 .09 -.03

Scale: 1 = Have not decided, 2 = Do not plan to do, 3 = Plan to do, 4 = Done



ORAL COMMUNICATION

Sub-Goal 1d: Students will be able to speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative

thought.

Oral Communication Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1b

Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have

you made a class presentation?”

Chart 11. NSSE “How often have you made a class presentations,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4 Table 13. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s

Beth-El COB EAS LAS

UCCS,

SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.67 3.25 2.52 2.63 2.72 2.23 2.34** 2.85** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 64% (+/- 6%) of seniors experiencing opportunities to make

class presentations “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable percentage of seniors indicating “often/very

often” by college or for the university is 58%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,


Note: Although UCCS seniors indicated a 25% increase from freshman to senior ratings of making class

presentations “often/very often,” and the National Public institutions demonstrate a 26% increase freshman to

senior year ratings, the National Public seniors (64%) indicate that they experience more opportunities than

UCCS seniors (57%) to make class presentations.

18

18

52

15

22

7

10

27

33

24

27

40

35

25

28

37

43

49

15

44

36

54

28

31

6

9

6

2

7

15

12

6

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=51, SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=428, SR

UCCS, n=340, FR

PubMstr's FR

PubMstr's SR

Very Often Often Sometimes Never

Oral Communication Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS

contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in speaking clearly and effectively?”

Chart 12. NSSE “Development in speaking clearly and effectively,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.71 3.06 2.67 2.91 2.87 2.73 2.92*** 3.04*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 73% of seniors indicating that UCCS contributed “very

much/quite a bit” to their knowledge, skills and development in speaking clearly. The minimal acceptable

percent responding “very much/quite a bit” is 67%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to


32

24

36

25

30

21

36

30

33

33

42

33

34

41

37

39

31

27

15

29

28

29

21

24

5

15

8

13

8

9

5

7

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, 53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=386, SR

UCCS, n=289, FR

NSSE PubMstr's SR

NSSE PubMstr's FR



Oral Communication Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Results

(replaces Undergraduate Alumni Survey)

Most Recent Administration: 2008, n=277, 27% Response Rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “How would you rate the overall quality of your oral

communication skills at UCCS?”

Chart 13. Alumni Rate Overall Quality of Their Oral Communication Skills Education, by Percent



Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed a rating of “good/excellent” from 69% (+/- 6%) of our alumni,

with a minimum acceptable percent of 63%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,


28

16

17

23

36

55

70

56

46

29

18

14

17

24

5

27

6

5

2

6

2

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=173

EAS, n=11

COB, n=57

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=277



x̄ 3.72 4.02 3.27 3.84 3.84



Core Curriculum for General Education: Goal 2

Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience

in other fields.

DEPTH Sub-Goal 2a. Objective: Students will develop a deep knowledge of and understanding of their field of

specialization.

Indirect results related to students depth of understanding of their majors and breadth of experience across

disciplines are presented in this section. Measures are taken from the UCCS Combined Alumni Survey, the

National Survey of Student Engagement and from the Consortium for the Study of Writing in Colleges.

Depth Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Results. Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “UCCS prepared me well for my field of

specialization.”

Chart 14. Alumni Rate Preparation for Field of Specialization, by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Office of Institutional Research Legend: Strongly Disagree = 1, Disagree = 2, Neutral = 3, Agree = 4 and Strongly Agree = 5


Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 62% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating “agree/strongly agree” that

the specific knowledge, skills and expertise they acquired at UCCS has been useful in their present occupation.

The minimal acceptable percentage indicating “agree/strongly agree” is 56%. The blue dotted line running


level.

19

9

21

39

22

36

82

44

36

40

29

9

28

17

26

12

5

6

9

4

2

3

3

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=172

EAS, n=11

COB, n=57

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=276

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree


x̄ 4.03 3.77 4.00 3.55 3.67


Depth Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11b Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at this institution

contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring job or work-related knowledge

and skills?”

Chart 15. NSSE “Acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills,” by Percent


Table 17. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE – Public Master’s


SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.25 3.13 2.91 2.58 2.79 2.66 2.81*** 3.11*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at

UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring

job or work-related knowledge and skills. The minimal acceptable percentage of respondents indicating “quite a

bit/very much” is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the

achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

22

33

42

56

31

17

41

27

30

33

38

15

29

42

34

37

32

24

13

27

26

31

19

27

16

9

8

2

13

10

6

10

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=212, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=385, SR

UCCS, n=289, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Depth Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 7a

Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you done or do you plan to do any of the

following; practicum, internship, field experience, clinical assignment or co-op assignment, before you graduate

from UCCS?

Chart 16. NSSE “Practicum, internships, field experience,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Do Not Plan to Do, Have Not Decided & Plan to Do = 0, Done = 1

Table 18. Mean for University and College for the Variable “Done”


SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ .73 .38 .45 .33 .38 .05 .07 .49*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 49% (+/- 6%) of respondents indicating “done” for NSSE 7a.

The minimal acceptable percentage indicating “done” for “practicum, internship, field experience, clinical

assignment or co-op assignment” is 43%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,


33

46

38

73

38

35

49

7

23

39

19

19

26

40

26

73

16

9

32

2

12

16

9

15

28

6

11

6

23

9

16

5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=402, SR

UCCS, n=297, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR

Done Plan to Do Have Not Decided Do Not Plan to Do


Depth Evidence Source 4, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2e Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your

coursework emphasized applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations?”

Chart 17. NSSE “Applying theories or concepts to practical problems,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3, and Very Much = 4



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.54 3.21 3.21 3.21 3.22 3.02 3.05 3.25 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 82% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating their coursework

emphasized applying theories or concepts “quite a bit/very much.” The minimum acceptable percentage is

76%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the


44

55

40

58

34

45

34

46

37

21

43

38

38

37

40

36

16

15

15

4

24

15

22

16

3

9

2

4

4

4

3

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS,n=214, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=308, FR

UCCS, n=411, SR

PubMstr’s FR

PubMstr’s SR


Depth Evidence Source 5, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE, CSWC 2g

Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your

writing assignments did you write in the style and form of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology,

etc.)”

Chart 18. CSWC “Write in the style and form of a specific field” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: No Assignments = 1, Few Assignments = 2, Some Assignments = 3, Most Assignments = 4 and All Assignments = 5


x̄ 3.43 2.84 2.77 3.20** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 46% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they wrote in the

style and format for a specific field for “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is



9

18

15

31

57

22

26

30

21

28

18

23

13

18

29

26

30

24

25

18

21

18

10

18

20

15

20

15

6

16

23

15

20

15

22

13

4

27

13

12

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=224, FR

UCCS, n=333, SR

Beth‐El, n=53, SR

COB, n=45, SR

EAS, n=31, SR

LAS, n=196, SR




BREADTH Sub-Goal 2b. Students will demonstrate a breadth of knowledge across disciplines Breadth Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Humanities Most Recent Administration: Spring 2009, Seniors/Fall 2009, Freshman

Chart 19. PP Student Mean Scores for Breadth of Knowledge in Humanities

Source of Data: UCCS Assessment Office Possible Score for Each Category: 100-130

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed mean score of 115.8 (+/- 6%). Minimum acceptable score is

108.9. The blue dotted line running across the columns, from left to right, indicates the achievement target and

the minimal acceptable achievement level.

Breadth Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Social Sciences Chart 20. PP Student Mean Scores for Breadth of Knowledge in Social Science





100.0

105.0

110.0

115.0

120.0

125.0

130.0

UCCS, n=210, FR

Nat'l FR COB, n=81, JR/SR

EAS, n=50, JR/SR

LAS, n=61, JR/SR

Beth‐El, N=33, JR/SR

UCCS, n=225, JR/SR

Nat'l, SR

113.3 113.0 114.9 116.8 117.3114.2 115.8 115.8

100.0

105.0

110.0

115.0

120.0

125.0

130.0

UCCS, n=210, FR


EAS, n=50, JR/SR

LAS, n=61, JR/SR


UCCS, n=225, JR/SR

Nat'l, SR

112.1 111.7 113.2116.0 117.2

114.2 115.1 114.5

Breadth Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Natural Sciences Chart 21. PP Student Mean Scores for Breadth of Knowledge in Natural Sciences





Breadth Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Proficiency Profile; Scaled Score Chart 22. PP Scaled Score Mean for “Overall Breadth of Knowledge”


Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed a mean score of 447.9 (+/- 6%). The minimum acceptable

score is 421.0. The blue dotted line running across the columns, from left to right, indicates the achievement


100.0

105.0

110.0

115.0

120.0

125.0

130.0

UCCS, n=210, FR


EAS, n=50, JR/SR

LAS, n=61, JR/SR


UCCS, n=225, JR/SR

Nat'l, SR

114.0 113.3115.7

117.7 117.4 117.4 116.6 115.9

400.0410.0420.0430.0440.0450.0460.0470.0480.0490.0500.0

UCCS, n=210, FR


EAS, n=50, JR/SR

LAS, n=61, JR/SR


UCCS, n=225, JR/SR

Nat'l, SR

438.7 437.9445.3

456.7 453.5 449.5 449.8 447.9


Breadth Evidence Source 5, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11a Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS

contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring a broad general education?”

Chart 23. NSSE “Development in acquiring a broad general education,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3 and Very Much = 4 Table 21. Mean for University, Colleges and Public Master’s


SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.81 3.08 2.67 3.05 2.99 2.94 3.16*** 3.26*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 83% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at

UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to their development in acquiring a broad general education.

Minimum acceptable percent is 77%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom,


37

15

36

17

33

26

45

38

35

49

43

54

39

48

38

44

22

24

13

23

21

21

14

16

5

12

8

6

6

5

3

3

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=212, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=385, SR

UCCS, n=286, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Breadth, Sub-Goal 2c. Native Students will demonstrate a greater breadth of knowledge across disciplines

than transfer Students.

Breadth Evidence Source 6, Instrument: Proficiency Profile, Scaled Score Most Recent Administration: Spring, 2009/Fall, 2009

Table 22. PP Scaled Score Mean for Native Compared to Transfer Students

Native Students Transfer Students

UCCS SR 446.8 453.0 Source of Data: UCCS Assessment Office Possible Score 400 – 500

Achievement Target: Native students must exceed a score of 453 (+/- 6%). The minimum acceptable score is 425.8. Please Note: Native FY refers to candidates for degree that began their academic career with UCCS as freshman. Transfers include all registration types except first-time freshmen.




Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge.

TECHNOLOGY

Sub-Goal 3a. Students will demonstrate technological skills and knowledge in the use of technological

devices/methods such as; learning management systems, blogs/chat groups, podcasts.

Indirect results related to students technology knowledge and skills are presented in this section. Indirect

measures are taken from the National Survey of Student Engagement and The UCCS Combined Alumni

Survey.

Technology Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1L Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often did

you use an electronic medium (listserv, chat group, internet, im, etc.) to discuss or complete an assignment?”

Chart 24: NSSE “Listserv, chat group, internet, instant message, etc.,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3, Very Often = 4



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.6 2.79 2.24 2.57 2.56 2.47 2.61* 2.87*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 62% (+/- 6%) of our students indicating that they use

electronic mediums to discuss or complete an assignment “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable



28

24

34

35

28

20

35

25

21

15

30

17

22

29

27

28

33

21

17

21

28

29

27

31

19

39

19

27

22

22

11

17

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=214, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=418, SR

UCCS, n=324, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



Technology Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11g Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has UCCS contributed to your

knowledge, skills, and personal development in using computing and information technology?”

Chart 25. NSSE “Using computing and information technology,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a Bit = 3,and Very Much = 4



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.23 3.36 3.42 2.95 3.24 3.08 2.97 3.21 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 81% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that UCCS contributed to

their knowledge, skills and personal development with computing and information technology “quite a bit/very

much.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 75%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to


31

55

53

50

46

38

46

33

39

36

32

25

34

35

35

38

24

6

13

23

17

24

16

23

6

3

2

2

3

4

3

6

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=386, SR

UCCS, n=288, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Technology Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in

computer skills.”

Chart 27. Alumni Rate the Quality of UCCS Education in Computer Skills, by Percent



Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 63% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their

UCCS education in computer skills was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 57%. The

blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal

acceptable achievement level.

22

18

26

22

23

39

36

46

36

40

28

36

21

33

27

10

9

4

6

8

2

4

3

2

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=174

EAS, n=11

COB, n=57

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=278


Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS x̄ 3.69 3.88 3.64 3.7 3.73


INFORMATION LITERACY Sub-Goal 3b. Students will demonstrate the ability to locate, evaluate, select and use appropriately necessary

information.

Indirect results related to students information literacy skills are presented in this section. Indirect measures are

taken from The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey. Direct measurement instruments are being reviewed and

considered for use in measuring this topic.

Information Gathering Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in

information gathering skills (library, reference).

Chart 27. Alumni Rate the Quality of UCCS Education in Information Gathering, by Percent




UCCS education in information gathering was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 63%.



34

18

24

28

31

36

46

45

42

38

22

27

21

25

22

7

9

10

3

7

2

3

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=174

EAS, n=11

COB, n=58

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=279



PRESENTATIONS

Sub-Goal 3c. Students will be able to communicate through the use of visual aids (PowerPoint, drawings,

tables, photos, screen shots)

Indirect results related to student’s skills in the use of visual aids are presented in this section. Indirect

measures are taken from The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey and The Consortium for the Study of Writing in

College.

Presentations Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE,

CSWC 2i

Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your

writing assignments did you create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as

PowerPoint, etc.)?”

Chart 28. CSWC “Create the project with multimedia,” by Percent



x̄ 2.76 2.48 2.43 2.90* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 30% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they created writing

assignments with multi-media, for “most/all” assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is 24%. The



5

7

6

6

22

10

3

12

23

11

19

11

46

13

15

30

36

31

33

49

15

30

36

28

20

30

27

30

9

37

30

25

14

22

15

9

9

10

16

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=222, FR

UCCS, n=333, SR

Beth‐El, n=53, SR

COB, n=46, SR

EAS, n=30, SR

LAS, n=196, SR




Presentations Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE,

CSWC 2h


writing assignments did you include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your

written assignment?”

Chart 29. CSWC “Include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content,” by Percent


Table 28. Mean for University and CSWC UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR x̄ 2.59 2.43 2.40* 2.80** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 29% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they included

drawings, tables, photos, or other visual content in “most/all” of their assignments. The minimal acceptable



Note: Although CSWC seniors (x̄ = 2.80) indicated that they used visual content in their writing assignments

significantly (p<.001) more frequently than UCCS seniors (x̄ = 2.59), this translates into “few/some”

assignments for the University, highlighting that we are somewhat behind the movement in the use of multi-

media.

4

7

6

6

22

26

1

13

21

10

20

4

39

42

14

29

33

18

24

30

15

19

24

28

22

32

27

26

20

13

32

26

16

34

24

40

4

29

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=221, FR

UCCS, n=335, SR

Beth‐El, n=53, SR

COB, n=46, SR

EAS, n=31, SR

LAS, n=197, SR



Presentations Evidence Source 3, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your education in graphic

communication (using charts and graphs to present information).

Chart 30. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Using Charts and Graphs, by Percent




UCCS education in using charts and graphs was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is



17

25

11

16

28

9

37

39

32

40

46

28

31

38

12

9

7

11

11

3

36

3

6

4

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=173

EAS, n=11

COB, n=57

Beth‐El, n=35

UCCS, n=276




RESEARCH

Sub-Goal 3d. Students will demonstrate research skills and knowledge relevant to their field/discipline. Indirect results related to students research skills and knowledge are presented in this section. Indirect measures

are taken from The Alumni Survey and the CSWC. Frequent use of the items evaluated on the following pages

could be considered integral components for an institution interested in achieving research university status. At

the very least, these findings are important in disciplines where students need to make data-driven arguments.

Research Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE, CSWC 2d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, in how many of your

writing assignments did you describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work,

a survey project, etc.”

Chart 31. CSWC “Describe your methods or findings related to data you collected,” by Percent



x̄ 2.57 2.53 2.84*** 2.91*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 34% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they describe

methods or findings related to data in writing for “most/all” assignments. The minimal acceptable percentage is



8

9

7

5

2

11

10

5

22

25

17

18

23

24

32

12

33

30

26

27

38

20

26

26

21

20

19

27

19

26

10

32

16

16

30

23

19

20

23

24

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=226, FR

UCCS, n=339, SR

Beth‐El, n=53, SR

COB, n=46, SR

EAS, n=31, SR

LAS, n=201, SR



Research Evidence Source 2, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE, CSWC 2f


writing assignments did you explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data.”

Chart 33. CSWC “Explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data,” by Percent



x̄ 2.34 2.22 2.36 2.50* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 21% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they explained the

meaning of numerical or statistical data in writing for “most/all” assignments. The minimal acceptable



4

5

5

5

2

15

16

2

13

16

9

11

10

15

26

7

27

29

26

27

39

33

29

23

26

25

24

26

27

26

19

28

30

25

36

30

23

11

10

41

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=223, FR

UCCS, n=333, SR

Beth‐El, n=52, SR

COB, n=46, SR

EAS, n=31, SR

LAS, n=196, SR




Research Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 7d


Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you or do you plan to work on a research

project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements prior to graduation from UCCS?”

Chart 33. NSSE “Work on research project with faculty member,” by Percent


Table 32. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s for variable “Done”


SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ .19 .38 .21 .17 .15 .04 .05 .16 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 16% (+/- 6%) of seniors having worked on a research project

with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements prior to graduation. The minimum acceptable



17

21

4

19

15

4

16

5

12

12

6

2

10

27

13

31

53

42

70

75

57

27

51

24

18

24

21

4

18

42

20

39

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=401, SR

UCCS, n=297, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Research Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey – Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “How would you rate the overall quality of your

education at UCCS in scientific reasoning skills?”

Chart 34. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Scientific Reasoning Skills, by Percent




UCCS education in scientific reasoning skills “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 62%.



25

55

13

28

24

43

36

38

61

44

22

9

36

8

22

9

14

9

1

3

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=173

EAS, n=11

COB, n=56

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=276




SELF-GUIDED LEARNING Sub-Goal 3e. Students will demonstrate the ability to learn on their own and the desire to become life-long

learners.

Indirect results related to student’s inspiration to become life-long learners are presented in this section.

Indirect results are taken from the National Survey on Student Engagement and The UCCS Combined Alumni

Survey.

Self-Guided Learning Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11j Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS

contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on your own?”

Chart 35. NSSE “Learning effectively on your own,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office 1 = very little, 2 = some, 3 = quite a bit, 4 = very much



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.94 2.75 2.48 2.80 2.76 2.84 2.99** 3.05*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that UCCS contributed

“quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on their

own.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to


28

12

28

31

26

20

36

31

35

39

29

40

34

46

39

42

26

33

33

17

29

31

20

22

11

15

10

10

11

3

6

5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=210, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=51 SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=375, SR

UCCS, n=284, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Self-guided Learning Evidence Source 2, Instrument: The UCCS Combined Alumni Survey -

Undergraduate

Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in

motivating you to pursue knowledge?”

Chart 36. Alumni Rate Quality of Education in Motivating You to Pursue Knowledge, by Percent




UCCS education in being motivated to pursue knowledge as “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable



46

18

29

42

41

35

36

40

47

37

14

46

24

8

17

6

5

5

2

3

0.5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=174

EAS, n=11

COB, n=58

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=279




QUANTITATIVE ABILITIES Sub-Goal 3f. Students will demonstrate competency in their skills and knowledge in analyzing and completing

quantitative problems.

Direct and indirect results related to student’s mathematics ability are presented in this section. Direct measures

are taken from the Proficiency Profile. Indirect measures are taken from the National Survey of Student

Engagement.

Quantitative Abilities Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Proficiency Profile

Level 1 – Mathematics: A student at Level 1 demonstrates basic number sense and skills in arithmetic

operations and relationships and in elementary geometry and measurement. A student at this level can read and

interpret information from simple graphs or charts, solve simple equations or evaluate expressions, and solve

simple and routine word problems.

Most Recent Administration: 2009 – Spring, JR/SR and Fall, Freshman Chart 37. PP Mathematics Proficiency Level 1 or Above, by Percent

National Results are reflective of student’s performance for comparable Carnegie Classification institutions from Jan ’03 – July ‘07 Source of data: UCCS Assessment Office

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 58% (+/- 6%) of students performing at Math Proficiency

Level 1 or above. The minimum acceptable percentage is 52%. The blue dotted line running across the bars,


67

86

63

58

68

55

47

58

18

10

26

30

19

22

29

26

15

4

11

12

13

23

24

16

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=61, JR/SR

EAS, n=50, JR/SR

COB, n=81, JR/SR


UCCS, n=225, JR/SR

UCCS, n=210, FR

Nat'l FR

Nat'l SR

Proficient ‐Mathematics, Level 1 or Above Marginal ‐Mathematics

Not Proficient ‐Mathematics

Quantitative Abilities Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11f Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS

contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative problems?”

Chart 38. NSSE “Personal development in analyzing quantitative problems,” by Percent




SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.13 3.23 3.45 2.87 3.02 2.81 2.93* 3.08 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 75% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that UCCS contributed

“quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative

problems. The minimum acceptable percentage is 69%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top

to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

27

49

43

47

34

23

38

29

39

49

38

26

38

42

37

42

28

2

17

21

23

28

20

24

6

2

6

5

7

4

6

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=209, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=379, SR

UCCS, n=288, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



LEARNING ACTIVITIES Indirect measures related to students learning activities are presented in this section. Measures are taken from

the National Survey for Student Engagement and the Consortium for the Study of Writing in College.

Learning Activities Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have

you worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources?”

Chart 39. NSSE “Integrating ideas or information from various sources,” by Percent




SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.50 3.34 3.09 3.39 3.34 3.04 3.13 3.36 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 87% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they worked on

papers/projects requiring the integration of ideas or information from various sources “often/very often.” The



55

39

49

56

50

32

35

50

32

36

40

38

36

43

44

37

11

18

8

6

12

21

19

12

2

6

4

2

4

2

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=428, SR

UCCS, n=341, FR

PubMstr's FR

PubMstr's SR


Learning Activities Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 2c

Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, how much has your

coursework emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex

interpretations and relationships?”

Chart 40. NSSE “Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences,” by Percent



Beth-El COB EAS LAS UCCS, SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 3.35 2.89 2.97 3.13 3.06 2.79 2.90* 3.08 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 76% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their coursework

emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences “quite a bit/very much.” The



38

36

30

50

36

20

35

26

40

36

34

35

38

46

41

42

20

15

30

15

22

28

21

27

2

12

6

4

7

3

5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=212, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=409, SR

UCCS, n=306, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



Learning Activities Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11m

Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS

contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in solving complex real-world problems?”

Chart 41. NSSE “Solving complex real-world problems,” by Percent




SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.81 2.58 2.94 2.39 2.55 2.50 2.71*** 2.80*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 63% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at

UCCS contributed to their skills in solving complex real-world problems “quite a bit/very much.” The



15

30

21

36

21

16

27

23

29

36

29

19

30

35

36

37

36

30

37

34

33

33

27

30

20

3

14

11

16

16

10

10

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=211, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=52, SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=378, SR

UCCS, n=284, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Learning Activities Evidence Source 4, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 6d Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, about how often have

you examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue?”

Chart 42. NSSE “Examined strengths and weakness of your own views,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3 and Very Often = 4



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.90 2.77 2.45 2.83 2.78 2.57 2.60 2.72 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 58% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating they examined the

strengths and weakness of their own views “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 52%.



28

12

32

29

27

17

22

18

35

36

25

38

33

37

36

34

30

36

32

27

32

34

34

37

7

15

11

6

8

13

8

10

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=402, SR

UCCS, n=299, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



Learning Activities Evidence Source 5, Instrument: Consortium for the Study of Writing in College – NSSE,

CSWC 4b

Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you or do you plan to submit work you wrote or

co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work,

etc.)

Chart 43. CSWC “Plan to submit work you wrote or co-wrote” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office

Table 41. Mean for University and CSWC for the Variable “Done” UCCS, SR UCCS, FR CSWC FR CSWC SR

x̄ .08 .05 .05 .09 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 9% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that they have submitted

work they wrote or co-wrote. The minimal acceptable percentage is 3%. The blue dotted line running across the

bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

5

9

5

8

9

7

10

9

24

15

22

14

9

14

16

15

38

21

34

15

13

5

7

19

33

55

40

63

69

75

68

57

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC, FR

CSWC, SR

UCCS, n=221, FR

UCCS, n=337, SR

Beth‐El, n=58, SR

COB, n=55, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

LAS, n=225, SR

Done Plan To Do Have Not Decided Do Not Plan To Do




Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society- locally, nationally, and globally.

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Sub-Goal 4a. Students will develop an understanding of the value of community involvement and participate in

community service/volunteer work individually, with a group, or as part of a course.

Indirect results related to student’s community involvement are presented in this section. Indirect measures are

taken from the National Survey of Student Engagement.

Community Involvement Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 7b Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Have you done or do you plan to do community

service or volunteer work prior to graduating from UCCS?”

Chart 44. NSSE “Have done or plan to do community service or volunteer work,” by Percent


Table 42. Mean for University, Colleges and NSSE Public Master’s for Variable “Done”


SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ .75 .52 .36 .54 .53 .35 .36 .55 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain or exceed 55% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating “done” for community

service or volunteer work. The minimum acceptable percentage is 49%. The blue dotted line running across

the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

54

36

52

75

53

35

55

36

15

15

10

8

15

40

17

42

10

24

10

2

22

9

16

7

21

24

29

15

11

16

11

15

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=212, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=52, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=399, SR

UCCS, n=299, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



Community Involvement Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1k Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428


you participated in a community-based project (e.g. service learning) as part of a regular course?”

Chart 45. NSSE “Participated in a community-based project,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Little = 1, Some = 2, Quite a bit = 3, and Very Much = 4



SR

UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.52 1.36 1.38 1.42 1.54 1.45 1.56** 1.73*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 19% (+/- 6%) of students participating in a community-based

project as part of a regular course. Minimum acceptable percentage is 13%. The blue dotted line running


level.

3

3

2

27

5

2

7

4

5

3

8

23

8

8

12

9

22

22

15

25

22

21

29

25

70

72

76

25

65

68

52

62

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=214, SR

EAS, n=32, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=417, SR

UCCS, n=323, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Community Involvement Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11o Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428


contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in contributing to the welfare of your

community?”

Chart 46. NSSE “Development in contributing to the welfare of your community,” by Percent




UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.5 1.77 1.82 2.10 2.08 2.27 2.47*** 2.49*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)


UCCS contributed to their knowledge and skills in contributing to the welfare of their community “quite a

bit/very much.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 42%. The blue dotted line running across the bars,


12

8

23

12

9

21

18

15

27

15

25

17

30

27

29

44

27

23

31

36

38

32

33

29

46

54

21

34

22

20

19

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=209, SR

EAS, n=53, SR

COB, n=33, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=377, SR

UCCS, n=284, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



VALUES AND ETHICS

Sub-Goal 4b. Students will develop an awareness and understanding of their personal code of values and

ethics.

Values and Ethics Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11n Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428 Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “To what extent has your experience at UCCS

contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in developing a personal code of values and

ethics?”

Chart 47. NSSE “Developing a personal code of values and ethics,” by Percent




UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.67 2.25 2.24 2.30 2.35 2.46 2.74*** 2.75*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 59% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that their experience at

UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to the development of their personal code of values and ethics. The



19

21

12

27

19

16

29

26

18

12

33

29

21

35

30

34

38

36

25

27

34

29

26

27

24

30

31

17

25

20

14

12

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=211, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=52, SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=379, SR

UCCS, n=284, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


KNOWLEDGE OF LOCAL AND DOMESTIC ISSUES Sub-Goal 4c. Students will develop an awareness and understanding of local, state, and domestic issues. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Evaluate the degree of personal development or gain

which resulted from your attendance at UCCS in knowledge of social/domestic issues”

Chart 48. Alumni Evaluate Development or Gain in Knowledge of Social/Domestic Issues, by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: 1 = No Gain, 2 = Some, 3 = Average, 4 = Above Average, 5 = High Average


Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 54% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that their attendance at

UCCS informed their knowledge of social/domestic issues to an “above average/higher average.” The



23

9

9

17

19

38

9

37

22

35

24

46

39

47

31

9

36

12

6

10

6

2

8

5

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS n = 173

EAS, n = 11

COB, n = 57

Beth‐El, n = 36

UCCS, n = 277

Higher Average Above Average Average Some No Gain



KNOWLEDGE OF GLOBAL ISSUES Sub-Goal 4d. Students will develop an awareness and understanding of global issues. Knowledge of Global Issues Evidence Source 1, Instrument: Combined Alumni - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate your gain in personal development related

to knowledge of international issues that resulted from your attendance at UCCS.”

Chart 49. Alumni Rate Development in Awareness of International Social and Political Issues, by Percent



Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 41% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that they experienced

“above average/higher average” development in their knowledge of international issues resulting from their

attendance at UCCS. The minimum acceptable percentage is 35%. The blue dotted line running across the

bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal acceptable achievement level.

17

9

7

3

13

31

40

6

28

27

27

33

42

30

20

55

21

28

23

5

9

22

7

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS n = 173

EAS, n = 11

COB, n = 58

Beth‐El, n = 36

UCCS, n = 278

Higher Average Above Average Average Some No Gain


WORKING COLLABORATIVELY

Sub-Goal 4e. Students will demonstrate the ability to work effectively with others, including individuals from

different backgrounds.

Indirect measures related to student’s ability to work in collaborative situations are presented in this section.

Measures are taken from the National Survey on Student Engagement, The Consortium for the Study of Writing

in College and the Undergraduate Alumni Survey.

Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1g



you worked with other students on projects during class?”

Chart 50. NSSE “Worked with other students on projects during class,” by Percent




UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.47 3.00 2.48 2.36 2.50 2.51 2.49 2.62** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed) Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 52% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they worked with

other students on projects during class “often/very often.” The minimum acceptable percentage is 46%. The


acceptable achievement level

10

15

38

9

16

10

13

19

30

30

30

38

30

40

34

33

45

42

26

45

42

41

42

38

15

12

6

9

12

9

11

10

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=427, SR

UCCS, n=340, FR

PubMstr's FR

PubMstr's SR



Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1h



you worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments?”

Chart 51. NSSE “Worked with classmates outside of class,” by Percent




UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.77 3.17 2.76 2.39 2.61 2.30 2.37 2.71* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 56% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they worked on

projects, “often/very often” outside of the classroom with classmates. The minimal acceptable percentage is



13

24

45

19

21

12

12

23

28

36

28

45

29

26

29

33

45

30

25

30

38

42

43

34

15

9

2

6

11

20

16

9

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=214, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=430, SR

UCCS, n=342, FR

PubMstr's FR

PubMstr's SR


Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 3, Instrument: The Consortium for the Study of Writing in

College, CSWC 3g

Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate

Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “During the current school year, for how many of your

writing assignments has your instructor asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project?”

Chart 52. CSWC “Write with classmates to complete a group project,” by Percent



x̄ 2.48 2.55 2.66 2.69*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 24% (+/- 6%) of students indicating that for “most/all”

writing assignments their instructor asked them to write with classmates. The minimal acceptable percentage is



6

6

8

3

13

3

2

16

18

12

17

6

57

19

10

32

34

30

28

57

13

32

23

28

23

28

29

24

11

23

36

18

18

22

23

13

7

23

29

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

CSWC FR

CSWC SR

UCCS, n=219, FR

UCCS, n=337, SR

Beth‐El, n=54, SR

COB, n=46, SR

EAS, n=30, SR

LAS, n=197, SR




Working Collaboratively Evidence Source 4, Instrument: Combined Alumni - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in

working with others.”

Chart 53. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Working With Others, by Percent



Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 77% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating “good/excellent” to

quality of UCCS education in working with others. The minimum acceptable percentage is 71%. The blue

dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and the minimal


35

36

37

39

33

38

55

54

53

44

22

9

4

6

15

5

5

4

3

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=174

EAS, n=11

COB, n=57

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=278



DIVERSITY/INCLUSIVENESS Sub-Goal 4f. Students will demonstrate an awareness of and understanding of people/groups that are different from them. Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 1, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1e Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428


you included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussions

or writing assignments?

Chart 54. NSSE “How often have you included diverse perspectives,” by Percent




UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.98 2.77 1.76 2.97 2.77 2.78 2.84 2.89* *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 65% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they “often/very

often” included diverse perspectives in class discussions or writing assignments. Minimum acceptable



30

6

23

26

25

23

25

30

43

15

45

49

39

39

39

35

23

27

19

23

25

31

30

29

5

52

13

2

11

7

6

6

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=212, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=47, SR

UCCS, n=428, SR

UCCS, n=340, FR

PubMstr's FR

PubMstr's SR



Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 2, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 11L Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428


contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in understanding people of other racial and

ethnic backgrounds?”

Chart 55. NSSE “Understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds,” by Percent




UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.40 2.12 1.88 2.59 2.42 2.37 2.74*** 2.70*** *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)


UCCS contributed “quite a bit/very much” to their knowledge, skills, and personal development in

understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds. The minimum acceptable percentage is 52%. The



20

12

12

13

17

13

26

25

31

12

18

32

27

32

32

35

33

27

41

34

35

35

30

29

14

49

29

17

20

21

13

11

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=209, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=51, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=376, SR

UCCS, n=281 FR

NSSE PubMstr’s SR

NSSE PubMstr’s FR


Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 3, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 6e Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428


you tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her

perspective?”

Chart 56. NSSE “Imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective,” by Percent




UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.94 2.79 2.45 2.99 2.88 2.76 2.80 2.88 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 66% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they tried to

understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective “often/very

often.” Minimum acceptable percentage is 60%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to


.

33

18

25

28

29

20

26

24

37

30

38

40

36

43

40

38

25

30

30

30

28

31

29

32

5

21

8

2

6

7

5

6

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=213, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=53, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=402, SR

UCCS, n=302, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 4, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1u Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428


you had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own?”

Chart 56. NSSE “Serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: 1 = never, 2 = sometimes, 3 = often, 4 = very often.



UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.56 2.42 2.67 2.68 2.59 2.56 2.61 2.69 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 55% (+/- 6%) of seniors indicating that they had

conversations “often/very often” with students of a different race or ethnicity. Minimum acceptable percentage

is 49%. The blue dotted line running across the bars, from top to bottom, indicates the achievement target and


25

27

19

21

23

22

27

25

27

33

30

27

27

29

28

27

38

18

25

40

36

31

33

32

9

21

26

13

14

18

13

16

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=214 SR

EAS, n=33 , SR

COB, n=53 , SR

Beth‐El, n=48 , SR

UCCS, n=411, SR

UCCS, n=313, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR


Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 5, Instrument: National Survey of Student Engagement, 1v Most Recent Findings: Spring, 2008 - Freshman, n = 342 and Senior, n = 428


you had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs,

political opinions, or personal values?”

Chart 57. NSSE “Serious conversations with students of different beliefs, opinions or values,” by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Never = 1, Sometimes = 2, Often = 3, Very Often = 4



UCCS, FR

Pub Mstr’s FR

Pub Mstr’s, SR

x̄ 2.88 2.56 2.85 2.76 2.73 2.75 2.68 2.73 *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 (2-tailed)

Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 57% (+/- 6%) of students indicating they engaged in serious

conversations “often/very often” with students who are very different from them. The minimum acceptable



28

33

25

31

28

29

27

26

28

33

27

29

28

28

30

29

36

18

27

35

34

30

33

33

8

15

21

4

10

12

11

12

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=214, SR

EAS, n=33, SR

COB, n=52, SR

Beth‐El, n=48, SR

UCCS, n=411, SR

UCCS, n=314, FR

PubMstr’s SR

PubMstr’s FR



Diversity/Inclusiveness Evidence Source 6, Instrument: Combined Alumni - Undergraduate Most Recent Findings: 2008, n = 277, 27% response rate Question from survey that findings are drawn from: “Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in

multi-cultural awareness.”

Chart 58. Alumni Rate Quality of UCCS Education in Multi-cultural Awareness, by Percent

Source of data: UCCS Institutional Research Office Legend: Very Poor = 1, Poor = 2, Fair = 3, Good = 4, and Excellent = 5


Achievement Target: Meet, maintain, or exceed 70% (+/- 6%) of alumni indicating that the quality of their

UCCS education in multi-cultural awareness was “good/excellent.” The minimum acceptable percentage is



36

9

18

39

32

39

18

40

39

38

20

55

30

14

22

6

18

11

6

7

2

3

1

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

LAS, n=174

EAS, n=11

COB, n=57

Beth‐El, n=36

UCCS, n=278



Appendix A: Instruments Used to Assess General Education

ETS Proficiency Profile formerly titled Measure of Academic Proficiency and Progress and prior to that,

Academic Profile

The Proficiency Profile focuses on the academic skills developed through general education courses

rather than on the knowledge acquired about the subjects taught in these courses. It does this by testing college-

level reading, college-level writing, critical thinking, and mathematics in the context of humanities, social

sciences, and natural sciences. The short form version of the Academic Profile has a reliability coefficient of

0.82 (Educational Testing Service, 1998). In addition, the Proficiency Profile is identified as having adequate

content and construct validity (Educational Testing Service, 1998).

Scores for the Proficiency Profile come in two forms, norm-referenced10 and criterion-referenced.11

Eight norm-referenced scores are reported, one for each of the areas mentioned above, plus a total score. These

scores are expressed as “scale scores.” The total score is on a scale of 400-500; the sub-scores are on a scale of

100-130. It is important to note that scores across test areas are not comparable. In other words, a score of 125

in critical thinking does not connote the same level of performance as a score of 125 on college-level reading;

the scores are independent. A more thorough description of Proficiency Profile norm-referenced scores is

available in a separate, but related, ETS Proficiency Profile report.

Three criterion-referenced proficiency level scores are reported for the groups tested in the areas of

writing, mathematics, and reading/critical thinking.12 One benefit of using the Proficiency Profile is the access

to national benchmark data that are well suited to use for student performance in general education within

strategic indicators of institutional effectiveness.

The campus’ chosen method for administering the Proficiency Profile has long been to identify

appropriate upper-division classes in each college with a high concentration of seniors. Faculty teaching these

classes are solicited to volunteer their class to have the test administered during class time, often because the

professor needed an alternate assignment for that period anyway. As a result, the resulting sample is clearly not

random, but also does not have the more obvious biases of some convenience sampling methods. The target

sample size for each college was 75.

Proficiency Level Definitions for ETS Academic Profile13

The Proficiency Profile reports three criterion-referenced proficiency level scores in the areas of writing,

mathematics, and reading/critical thinking. These scores are each presented on a table with nine cells. These

cells present percentages of students scoring at each of three levels of proficiency (not proficient, marginally

10 Norm-referenced scores have meaning only when compared with scores of other students or the same students at different points in time. Examples of other norm-referenced tests include: SAT, GRE, and ACT. 11 Criterion-referenced scores have intrinsic meaning in and of themselves. They are based on meeting certain criteria, such as proficiency levels. 12 Reading and critical thinking are treated as a single dimension because of the close relationship between the two. Critical thinking may be considered as a higher level reading process. 13 The Academic Profile User’s Guide (The Educational Testing Service, 1998)


proficient, and proficient) for each of the three levels. Specific definitions of what skills students have at each

level for each skill dimension have been established and are described on the following pages.

WRITING

Level 1 – WRITING A student at Level 1 recognizes agreement among basic elements (nouns, verbs,

pronouns) in the same clause or phrase. This student avoids gross errors in short or simple structures and can

logically select and order main ideas or divisions in a sustained paragraph using appropriate transition words.

Students at this level demonstrate a basic understanding of appropriate writing.

Level 2 – WRITING: In addition to performing successfully at Level 1, a student who is proficient at Level 2

recognizes appropriate agreement among basic elements when they are complicated by intervening words or

phrases, avoids errors in relatively long and complicated constructions, and is able to recast several simple

clauses using a single, more complex combination. Students performing at this intermediate level can recognize

and use the elements of good writing.

Level 3 – WRITING: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 skills successfully, a student at Level 3

can recognize logical statements and comparisons and is able to solve difficult or subtle writing problems, such

as appropriate use of parallelism. These students can make fine distinctions among closely related root words

and grammatical structures characteristic of a mature writing style.

MATHEMATICS

Level 1 – MATHEMATICS: A student at Level 1 demonstrates basic number sense and skills in arithmetic

operations and relationships and in elementary geometry and measurement. A student at this level can read and

interpret information from simple graphs or charts, solve simple equations or evaluate expressions, and solve

simple and routine word problems.

Level 2 – MATHEMATICS: In addition to performing successfully at Level 1, a student who is proficient at

Level 2 understands number systems, including order magnitude, and relationship of integers, fractions, and

decimals. A student at this level can solve moderately difficult equations and inequalities, evaluate complex

formulas, compare and apply information from more complex charts and graphs, and apply reasoning,

geometry, and measurement skills in solving moderately complex problems, including word problems.

Level 3 – MATHEMATICS: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 skills successfully, a student at

Level 3 can generalize and apply mathematical knowledge and skills in nonroutine situations, and demonstrates

real comprehension of exponents, variables, geometry, and measurement. A student at this level can solve

multistep and nonroutine problems involving a range of reasoning skills.

READING/CRITICAL THINKING14

Level 1 – READING: At Level 1, a student recognizes and comprehends discrete pieces of information (e.g., a

single detail, information presented in a single sentence), as well as relationships or connections explicitly

stated in a passage and understands words and phrases in context.

Level 2 – READING: In addition to performing successfully at Level 1, students who are proficient at Level 2

can gather information from different sections of a passage and recombine it. These students recognize

relationships that can be inferred but are not explicit; they can recognize summaries and alternative ways of

stating information, interpret figurative language, and recognize the point or purpose of a passage as a whole oz

significant portions of a passage.

Level 3 - CRITICAL THINKING: In addition to performing Level 1 and Level 2 skills successfully, students

at Level 3 can evaluate and analyze arguments and, within an academic field, handle interpretation, inductive

generalizations, or causal explanations.

Level 3 skills are differentiated within those areas as follows:

o Humanities: Evaluate views and interpretations

o Social Sciences: Evaluate claims, disputes, and inductive generalizations

o Natural Sciences: Evaluate explanatory hypotheses and draw conclusions

Composition Portfolio

The UCCS Writing Program supervises and administers the rising junior writing competency portfolio

as a general education assessment process. Transfer students and native students alike must submit a writing

portfolio within 30 hours of completion of their writing requirements as defined by their undergraduate degree

plans. The portfolio consists of two student-selected essays that demonstrate the student’s ability to

independently manage writing problems beyond those assigned and assess within their two, required, general

education writing courses. The two papers are generally analytical, argumentative or documented research

papers they have written for general education courses at UCCs, or courses required within their undergraduate

majors. Portfolio outcomes include: Needs Work (NW); Competent: and Highly Competent. The essays are

assessed for: focus, organization, development of ideas, integration of sources, language control and

conventions. The portfolio enables The Writing Program to assess whole-text competencies beyond the

sentence-level competencies currently assessed within the ETS Proficiency Profile.

14 Reading and critical thinking are treated as a single dimension because of the close relationship between the two. Critical thinking may be considered as a higher level reading process.


National Survey of Student Engagement

The survey asks students about how and where they spend their time, the nature and quality of their

interactions with faculty members and peers, and what they have gained from their classes and other aspects of

their college experience. The response options are standard likert scale design. The survey is administered

nationally and allows for us to compare our student responses to similar institutions in our Carnegie

Classification. The NSSE uses random sampling, is administered via e-mail and will be administered next in

the spring of 2011.

Consortium for the Study of Writing in College

The Consortium for the Study of Writing in College is a partnership between the Council of Writing

Program Administrators (WPA) and the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). At the national, inter-

institutional level, the consortium investigates how students’ writing experiences are related to their overall

engagement, learning, and attainment. In 2008 and 2009, over 65,000 undergraduates at 157 schools have taken

the survey, providing a large and rich data source that is just beginning to yield answers about the ways that

writing contributes to learning, engagement, and general success of college students nationwide. The

Consortium also aids individual institutions and smaller groups of institutions conduct research that

complements NSSE data with local, institutional data. The CSWC uses the same methodology as the NSSE and

will be administered next in the spring of 2011.

Combined Alumni Survey

The Graduating Seniors survey has been discontinued by the Institutional Research Department. The

Baccalaureate Alumni Survey and Graduate Alumni Survey have been reconstructed into the Combined Alumni

Survey. The Combined Alumni Survey provides alumni with an opportunity to provide feedback about their

experiences at UCCS. In addition to asking basic demographic questions, the survey inquires into current career

status, requests ratings on the quality of education received at UCCS, and asks respondents to identify the level

of personal development in a variety of areas. Several questions in the surveys are designed to assess

citizenship and diversity. These questions were developed with the input of several campus experts in student

development concerning multicultural and global awareness.

Appendix B: Performance, current and prior years by outcome and college

The data in the matrix below indicates the ‘area of concern’ for the most recent administrations of the

instruments used to assess student achievement related to the indicated student learning outcomes in the 2010

column. The data in the 2007 columns ‘area of concern’ and ‘area for immediate attention’ is from the 2007

General Education Assessment Report. The 2007 ‘area of concern’ column lists colleges with scores that fell

below the minimal acceptable achievement target for the most recent administration only. The 2007 ‘area for

immediate attention’ column lists colleges with scores that have fallen below expectations for the most recent

data and one or more consecutive administrative cycles.

Goal 1: Students will be able to read, write, listen and speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought.

1a. Reading - Students will demonstrate the ability to read, such that they can evaluate and analyze arguments, can handle interpretation, inductive generalizations or causal explanations.


Area of Concern

Area for ImmediateAttention

2010 2007 2007 Instrument: PP, direct COB Instrument: Combined Alumni Survey/ Undergrad, indirect.

Q. “How would you rate the overall quality of your reading skills education at UCCS?”

EAS COB

1b. Critical & Analytic Thinking - Students will demonstrate critical, analytic and creative thinking skills.


Area of Concern Area for ImmediateAttention

2010 2007 2007

Instrument: PP, direct

Beth-El COB EAS LAS

Instrument: NSSE, indirect – During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized:

2b. Q. analyzing the basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory, such as examining a particular case or situation in depth and considering its components?

EAS

2d. Q. making judgments about the value of information, arguments, or methods, such as examining how others gathered and interpreted data and assessing the soundness of their conclusions?

COB EAS LAS

COB EAS

Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 2c. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: analyze or evaluate something you read, researched, or observed.

EAS COB


Goal 1, continued 1c. Writing - Students will demonstrate the ability to write, including proper mechanics, grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.



2010 2007 2007

Instrument: PP, direct Beth-El COB

COB

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 3d. Q During the current school year, about how many papers or reports between 5 and 19 pages have you written?

Beth-El COB

COB EAS

Instrument: CSWC, indirect – 1a. Q. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments have you: brainstormed (listed ideas, mapped concepts, prepared an outline, etc.) to develop your ideas before you started drafting your assignment.

Beth-El COB EAS LAS Not administered

prior to 2008 1d. received feedback from your instructor about a draft before turning in your final assignment.

Beth-El EAS LAS

Instrument: Writing Portfolio

1d. Oral Communication - Students will be able to speak in a manner that demonstrates critical, analytical, and creative thought.


Area of Concern


NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE Instrument: Rubric, to be designed. To be administered in senior level courses with oral presentation requirements across colleges.

2010 2007 2007

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1b. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you made a class presentation?

Beth-El EAS LAS

EAS LAS

11d. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in speaking clearly and effectively.

Beth-El EAS LAS

EAS

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in oral communication skills?

EAS

Goal 2: Students will achieve a depth of understanding in their majors and a breadth of experience in other fields.

2a. Depth - Students will experience a good understanding in their major. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range


NO DIRECT MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE 2010 2007 2007

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. UCCS prepared me well for my field of specialization.

LAS

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11b. Q. To what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring job or work-related knowledge and skills?

EAS LAS

7a. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do any of the following; practicum, internship, field experience, clinical assignment or co-op assignment, before you graduate from UCCS?

Instrument: CSWC – indirect 2g. Q. During the current school year, I how many of your writing assignments did you write in the style and form of a specific field (engineering, history, psychology, etc.)

Not administered Prior to 2008

2b. Breadth - Students will demonstrate a breadth of knowledge across disciplines. Colleges Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range


2010 2007 2007

Instrument: PP, direct COB

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11a. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in acquiring a broad general education?

Beth-El EAS LAS

2c. Breadth – Students who began as first-time freshman at UCCS will demonstrate a greater breadth of knowledge across disciplines than transfer students.

University Performing Below Minimal Acceptable Range


2010 2007 2007

Instrument: PP


Goal 3: Students will understand and apply the tools and methodologies used to obtain knowledge.

3a. Technology - Students will demonstrate technological skills and knowledge in the use of tech devices/methods such as; learning management systems, blogs, chat groups or podcasts


Area of Concern



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1L. Q. During the current school year, about how often did you use an electronic medium (listserv, chat group, internet, im, etc.) to discuss or complete an assignment?

Beth-El EAS LAS

11g. Q. To what extent has UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in using computing and information technology?

LAS Beth-El

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in computer skills.

EAS

3b. Information Literacy - Students will demonstrate the ability to locate, evaluate, select and use appropriately necessary information.


Area of Concern



Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in information gathering skills (library, reference).

3c. Presentations - Students will be able to communicate through the use of visual rhetoric.



Instrument: CSCW, indirect 2h. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: include drawings, tables, photos, screen shots, or other visual content into your written assignment

Beth-El EAS LAS Not administered

prior to 2008

2i. Q. create the project with multimedia (web page, poster, slide presentation such as PowerPoint, etc.)

Beth-El LAS

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your education in graphic communication (using charts and graphs to present information).

Goal 3, continued 3d. Research - Students will demonstrate research skills and knowledge relevant to their field/discipline.


Area of Concern



Instrument: CSWC: indirect 2d. Q. During the current school year, in how many of your writing assignments did you: describe your methods or findings related to data you collected in lab or field work, a survey project, etc.

Beth-El LAS Not administered

prior to 2008

2f. explain in writing the meaning of numerical or statistical data. Beth-EL LAS

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7d. Have you worked on a research project with a faculty member outside of course or program requirements or do you plan to do so before you graduate from UCCS?

COB

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. How would you rate the overall quality of your education at UCCS in scientific reasoning skills?

COB

3e. Self Guided Learning - Students will demonstrate the ability to learn on their own and desire to become life-long learners.


Area of Concern



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11j. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in learning effectively on your own?

COB EAS LAS

EAS

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your UCCS education in motivating you to pursue knowledge?

COB EAS

3f. Quantitative Abilities - Students will demonstrate skills and knowledge in analyzing and completing quantitative problems.




Instrument: PP, direct

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11f. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in analyzing quantitative problems?

LAS


Goal 3, continued 3g. Learning Activities - Students will demonstrate the ability to engage in learning activities.


Area of Concern


2010 2007 2007

Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1d. During the current school year, about how often have you worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas or information from various sources.

EAS

2c. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences into new, more complex interpretations and relationships?

COB COB EAS

2e. During the current school year, how much has your coursework emphasized applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new situations?

11m. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in solving complex real-world problems?

Beth-El COB LAS

COB

6d. During the current school year, about how often have you examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue? EAS

Instrument: CSWC, indirect 4b. Q. Have you or do you plan to submit work you wrote or co-wrote to a student or professional publication (magazine, journal, newspaper, collection of student work, etc.)

Not administered prior to 2008

Goal 4: Students will be prepared to participate as responsible members of a pluralistic society- locally, nationally, and globally.

4a. Community Involvement - Students will develop an understanding of the value of community involvement and participate in community service/volunteer work as part of a course or group exercise or on their own.


Area of Concern



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 7b. Q. Have you done or do you plan to do community service or volunteer work prior to graduating from UCCS?

COB EAS

1k. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you participated in a community-based project (e.g. service learning) as part of a regular course?

COB EAS LAS

11o. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in contributing to the welfare of your community?

COB EAS LAS

COB EAS

Goal 4, continued 4b. Values and Ethics - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of their personal code of values and ethics.


Area of Concern



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 11n. Q. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in developing a personal code of values and ethics?

COB EAS LAS

EAS LAS

4c. Knowledge of Local and Domestic Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of local, state, and domestic issues.


Area of Concern



Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. pg21. Please rate your gain in knowledge of social/domestic issues while attending UCCS?

Beth-El COB EAS

4d. Knowledge of Global Issues - Students will develop an awareness and understanding of global issues.


Area of Concern



Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. pg21. Please rate your gain in knowledge of international issues while attending UCCS?

Beth-El EAS

4e. Working Collaboratively - Students will demonstrate the ability to work effectively with others, including individuals from different backgrounds.


Area of Concern



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1g. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with other students on projects during class?

LAS

1h. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you worked with classmates outside of class to prepare class assignments?

LAS

Instrument: CSCW, indirect 3g. During the current school year, for how many of your writing assignments has your instructor asked you to write with classmates to complete a group project.

Beth-El LAS

Not administered prior to 2008


Goal 4 – Outcome 4g, continued

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Please rate the quality of your UCCS education in working with others.

4f. Diversity/Inclusiveness - Students will demonstrate an awareness of and understanding of people/groups that are different from them.


Area of Concern



Instrument: NSSE, indirect 1e. Q. During the current school year, about how often have you included diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussions or writing assignments?

EAS

11L. To what extent has your experience at UCCS contributed to your knowledge, skills, and personal development in understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds?

Beth-El COB EAS LAS

COB EAS

6e. During the current school year, about how often have you tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective?

EAS

1u. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own?

Beth-El

1v. During the current school year, about how often have you had serious conversations with students who are very different from you in terms of their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal values?

COB

Instrument: Combined Alumni, indirect Q. Rate the quality of your education at UCCS in multi-cultural awareness (sensitivity to others unlike you).

4g. Sustainability - Students will demonstrate an awareness and understanding of the value of sustainability.


NO MEASURE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE

uccs general education assessment report spring 2010 general... · general education assessment...

Documents