General Education Assessment Communication Skills Competency

Assessment at AC Assessment Methods: Planning and Evaluation Tracking (PET) General Education Assessment Assessment Overview Resource: General Education Methodology Outcomes Assessment Information and Training At Amarillo College, we assess student learning through the PET forms and through General Education Assessment. We will only discuss General Education assessment today, which uses existing, embedded assignments that are submitted by instructors for assessment purposes. If you would like to know the entire general education assessment background from course selection to how the report findings are used, we have that information detailed in our General Education Methodology. If you would like to read more about the overall assessment process, you can visit the AC Outcomes Assessment Information and Training page.

2011-2012 Competencies and Rubrics (Based on UEAC Core Objectives) New Areas Communication Skills Critical Thinking Skills Empirical and Quantitative Skills Teamwork Future Areas Personal Responsibility Social Responsibility

Committee Purpose Evaluate Student Attainment of Competencies Pinpoint Student Strengths, Weaknesses, and Areas for Improvement Pinpoint Points of Interest Found in Artifacts Evaluate the Evaluation Process Competency Information and Rubrics General Process Evaluation Each competency has a built-in benchmark indicating what academic-course taking students who have earned 30 or more credit hours at Amarillo College should be able to accomplish We need to pinpoint student strengths and weaknesses and analyze artifact findings in order to achieve constant improvement The competency information and rubric was primarily created by the Instructional Sub-Committee based on the new THECB Undergraduate Education Advisory Committee (UEAC) rubrics and other institutional rubrics and information provided by the Office of Assessment and Development and AC has set a methodology in place for how we collect and assess rubrics. However, in addition to evaluating the students, we appreciate your participation in the evaluation process.

Communication Skills Committee Members (From 2011 General Education Competency Member List) Don Abel Co-chair and Instructional Assessment Committee Jim Taylor Co-chair Priscilla Hunt Theresa Jiwa Khristi McKelvy Each committee is made up of 5 members. On each committee, two people serve as the co-chairs. The co-chairs can answer any questions related to assessment and the co-chairs are the only members who have the authoritative power to “throw out” artifacts that do not have clear directions and/or cannot be assessed (the reason why any committee member cannot opt to not assess artifacts is that even weaker artifacts typically need to be assessed in order for areas of improvement to be identified). The co-chairs must agree to discard an artifact set and must decide which artifacts will replace the discarded artifacts. The co-chairs will also be responsible for collecting and compiling the committee results and must be in agreement on the final product before submitting the results and findings to the Assessments Coordinator. At least one member on each committee will also serve on the Instructional Assessment Committee; this is important because it is the Instructional Assessment committee that creates and revises rubrics and acts as a voice to the institution.

Committee Expectations Make a game plan for artifact assessment Check to assure 100 chosen artifacts can be assessed Develop internal deadlines for when the artifacts will be assessed and/or set up meeting times to assess the artifacts Complete entire artifact evaluation by May 1st Will you assess artifacts individually or as a team? When teams assess artifacts, there is typically only one resulting group score for each artifact. When individuals assess artifacts, each team member rates each artifact and a co-chair or co-chairs compile and average the results. Will you use the excel spreadsheet you were provided? Verify that the artifacts on the J drive can be assessed (read the assignment and glance at the artifacts to make sure they can be assessed using the definitions and rubric tool that you are provided).

Competency Overview 2 in 1 Rubric: Involves Written and Oral Communication Broad statements Diverse group of assignments submitted for assessment We collect artifacts one year in advance so the work that was submitted last year was from instructors who intended for the work to fulfill the old communication competency. When we changed competencies, we went through the work and attempted to find artifacts that would work for the new competency statement. To have one rubric that works for a variety of written and oral communication pieces, the statements were written in a broad manner and a special “Vocal Delivery” and “Nonverbal” category was added for oral communication artifacts.

Concept Definitions Focus The extent to which the content of the essay/presentation corresponds to the thesis statement. In other words, good focus means that the thesis statement drives the whole document. Each section, then, focuses on presenting and arguing the thesis statement with logical reasoning, supportive evidence, and correct documentation. NOTES: Look for the main idea, subject, overview, intent, etc. Can be implied (e.g. narrative essays, poetry, etc.) Assure the student avoids tangents When you assess poetry artifacts and/or non-conventional writing assignments, you may not see a conventional thesis statement. Instead, you need to assess whether or not the student clearly identifies the topic and supports that topic.

Concept Definitions Organization Relates to the order in which ideas are presented in support of the thesis statement. The introduction, body, and conclusion are developed in a logical, sequential order with clear transitions, and evidence is organized within each section. An artifact with good development includes supportive reasoning and evidence that build on each other as the document unfolds. Notes: Assure the organization makes sense The rubric gives a 5 rating to work that has a “creative pattern of development.” A creative development pattern may not be linear (e.g. beginning “in medias res”) “in medias res” = in the middle of things

Concept Definitions Assignment’s Requirements Relate to what the instructor has set forth in the assignment. A communications artifact can be delivered well in all aspects and not respond to the assignment.

Concept Definitions Style The way in which words and sentences are put together. It involves word choice, sentence structure, and tone appropriate for the rhetorical situation. Different styles can be effective in different genres; however, any style in academic communication should demonstrate control of sentence-level errors such as grammar problems, misspellings, improper use of punctuation, etc. Note: What constitutes the “flair for style” outlined by the rubric can be left to your discretion.

Concept Definitions Vocal Delivery Includes elements such as volume, variety, fluency, rate, pronunciation, articulation, and vocal pauses. Notes: What constitutes “artful in the use of delivery and style” outlined by the rubric can be left to your discretion. The rubric’s reference to “extemporaneously” speaking is more of a reference to preparedness and vocal delivery than “impromptu” speeches.

Concept Definitions Nonverbal Communication Includes aspects such as eye contact, gestures, movement, vitality, facial expressions, and proper use of lectern and visual aids where appropriate.

Points of Consideration Evaluation of the Students and not Instructors Please do not grade students based on the perceived level of difficulty for the assignment (e.g. a “why students should go to college” essay should not immediately be viewed as having less merit than a “the importance of biomechanical engineering in today’s society” essay). When you make your comments, you are welcome to give insight on ways that student skills could be better assessed by the faculty (e.g. we need to make sure students are citing their sources), but if you recognize work as being from a particular class, please do not make comments like “Kristin 1301 needs to get her act together and teach students to make proper citations”).

Submission Checklist All artifacts scored Student strengths identified Student weaknesses identified Process approval suggestions provided Ideas for improvement/interesting findings identified

Questions Co-chairs Assessments Coordinator Don Abel (ddabel@actx.edu; 371-52981) Jim Taylor (jwtaylor@actx.edu) Assessments Coordinator Kristin McDonald-Willey (kmw@actx.edu; 371-5420) If you have questions, you can contact one of your co-chairs. If you are unable to reach your co-chair or if your co-chairs have questions, please contact me.