Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Dr. Christopher L. Markwood Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi January 23, 2014

Learning Outcomes Assessment Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi Core Curriculum Assessment Program Assessment Texas A&M University System Common Learning Objectives Assessment (EmpowerU) empoweru.tamus.edu

Texas A&M System Common Learning Objectives Communication Critical Thinking Globalization and Cultural Diversity Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility Discipline Specific Knowledge Integration of Broad Knowledge

TAMU System Student Learning Outcome—Communication Bold statement: The Texas A&M University System delivers a common set/embraces a common view of important outcomes and is accountable for sustained measurement. Institutional Effectiveness: For all TAMU System universities, the rationale for assessing student learning outcomes (SLOs) originates primarily from efforts to maintain institutional effectiveness, which is defined as a process of identifying outcomes, assessing the extent to which they are achieved, and providing evidence of improvement based on their analysis. COMMUNICATION LEARNING OUTCOME: Upon completion of their degree program, students will be able to express ideas clearly and coherently orally, in writing, and electronically to a diverse range of audiences and interact with others in large and small group settings. Generic Descriptions of Campus Assessment Results: EXEMPLARY – All criteria met and results exceed expectations with little room for improvement. PROFICIENT – Most criteria met and results indicate mastery of objective with some room for improvement. SUFFICIENT – Acceptable number of criteria met and results meet expectations with room for improvement. EMERGING – Some criteria met and results indicate need for improvement. INSUFFICIENT – Few criteria met; results indicate need for significant improvement or no/insufficient results reported to measure performance of objective. UniversityAssessment MethodResults: 2012AnalysisActionComments Institution 1Writing Assessment Project (WAP)— Institution developed instrument. Uses rubrics applied to direct assessment of student writing samples. Midway between Sufficient and Proficient (2.5 on our scale) On specific measures, strongest on "organization" and weakest on "conventions" (2.6 and 2.3, respectively, on our scale). Other categories are "development" and "style" (2.5 each). Written communication assessments are structured such that colleges and are assessed on a 3-year rotation, ensuring each unit is assessed at least every 3 years. 1). Collect information about ongoing, smaller-scale assessments at the college level for the years they are off-cycle. 2.) Ask colleges to define specific plans for improvement based on their unit's assessment results in order to increase the overall level of students' written communication skills. This assessment is for written communication only. Separate assessments occur for oral communication. We require two communication- intensive courses for graduation. One can be focused on oral communication; one must be writing-intensive. Institution 2Rubrics developed by faculty to assess written communication competence. Sufficient approaching Proficient (2.9) On specific measures, strongest on "organization" (3.7) and weakest on "writing standards" (2.1). Other categories are "purpose" (3.2) and "rhetorical awareness" (3.0). Findings are based on Institution’s Writing Intensive Program Committee's assessment of selections of terminal written products from a junior level writing class as well as assessment of written communication objectives in 10 varied courses across academic disciplines within the core curriculum. 1.) Communicate results to all faculty. Greater emphasis on writing mechanics in any written communication projects. 2.) Develop editing strategies and tips to be included on the Writing Intensive Program's website that would be available to all students. 3.) Develop a companion editing and proofreading module for use by the University Writing Center. 4.) Have Writing Center offer training to faculty on strategies to improve written communication skills, particularly mechanics. This assessment is for written communication only. Separate assessments occur for oral communication. We require the satisfactory completion of three Writing Intensive courses for the bachelor's degree.

Reporting Cycle Year 1: Communication & Critical Thinking Year 2: Discipline Specific Knowledge & Integration of Broad Knowledge Year 3: Globalization and Cultural Diversity & Ethical Decision Making & Social Responsibility

LEAP Texas Approx. 60 institutions have joined to date Using core curriculum to improve UG education Utilizing large-scale collaboration – Authentic Assessment High-Impact Practices