Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Committee on Planning and Priorities (CPP) Paula A.Y. Maas Center for Institutional Effectiveness.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Committee on Planning and Priorities (CPP) Paula A.Y. Maas Center for Institutional Effectiveness."— Presentation transcript:

1 Committee on Planning and Priorities (CPP) Paula A.Y. Maas Center for Institutional Effectiveness

2  Spring and Fall Final Exam periods have very different schedules ◦ Reading days ◦ Exam days  Number of exams per day  Length of day  Some of the difference results from when the semester begins ◦ (based upon Martin Luther King Holiday)

3  CPP designed three surveys and invited participation after Spring 2008 final exams were over ◦ Students ◦ Faculty ◦ Staff  Each survey had different questions  Plenty of room for comments  Purpose of all was: “How effective was the final exam process in Spring 2008?”

4  Student and Faculty response rates were good  Student respondents closely matched enrolled TCNJ students for both class level and School of reported major.  More full-time faculty than adjuncts responded to the survey (compared to the numbers employed at TCNJ)  More faculty from the School of Science and less from Education and the Arts & Communication responded than would be expected.  34 staff members responded (but we only expected those staff who interacted with students, faculty or the exam process to respond).  Staff responses were merged into three groups for analysis purposes

5 Class Level RespondentsEnrolled Students NumberPercentNumberPercent Freshmen43426%158125% Sophomore49529%151524% Junior40924%155925% Senior34521%150924% Non-matriculant00%411% Total1683100%6205100% 1683 students responded – a 27% response rate

6 SchoolRespondentsEnrolled Students NumberPercentNumberPercent The Arts & Communication 1449%59910% Business26616%109818% Culture & Society45127%166427% Education21713%75412% Engineering1187%4317% Nursing, Health, & Exercise Science 1217%5609% Science35721%105217% Not Available / Other91%471% Total1683100%6205100%

7 141 faculty responded – a 40% response rate Faculty Appointment Survey RespondentsTCNJ NumberPercentNumberPercent Full-time10775.9%33545.7% Part-time53.5%212.9% Adjunct2920.6%37751.4% Total141733

8 141 faculty responded – a 40% response rate Faculty School Survey RespondentsTCNJ NumberPercentNumberPercent Arts & Communication (AM) 117.8%9813% Business (BN)139.2%578% Culture & Society (CS)4834.0%20027% Education (ED)85.7%17624% Engineering (EG)32.1%294% Nursing, Health, Ex.Sc. (NH) 85.7%588% Science (SS)4330.5%11516% Not Available75.0% Total141100%733100%

9 34 staff members responded – a 5% response rate* *but many staff would not be expected to respond, as their positions would not include familiarity with the final exam experience Department TypeNumber Percent of Respondents Academic926.5% Auxiliary720.6% Student Affairs/Support 1750.0%

10  Almost 60% of freshmen, sophomore and junior respondents indicated that the number of reading days did not meet their needs ◦ More students from the Schools of Engineering and Science felt this way.  A majority of faculty respondents (87%) indicated that they felt their students had adequate time to prepare for finals. ◦ Most who felt students did not were from the Schools of Culture & Society and Science.  Most staff (74%) felt that students used the reading days productively.  Almost all faculty (94%) are available to students during the reading period ◦ Some (13%) only electronically

11

12

13

14

15 Comment TypeNumberPercent Needed more reading days60187% Number of reading days for spring 08 was adequate 7010% Do not include weekends in reading days 8913% Problems with final exam scheduling 13019% No final exams/ papers on reading days 7110% Fall 07 final exam and reading days schedule better 436%

16  62% of freshmen, sophomores and juniors felt that the Spring 2008 exam schedule did not allow them to put forth their best effort. ◦ More than half the students from the School of the Arts and Communication (56%) felt it did.  Over half of the staff (67%) felt that students were given the time and conditions to be successful on exams. ◦ Those who didn’t noted the same issues as students, namely:  exam schedule was too “crunched” together;  exam times were “too early or too late”;  exams were scheduled for Monday evening - which students thought of as a reading day.

17

18

19  Almost all students (90%) indicated that their professors gave them the full two hours and 50 minutes allotted to complete their final exam. ◦ More than half the students (63%), across all levels, indicated that they did not need all the time. ◦ More students from the School of Engineering (54%) did use the full time  Most of the faculty (87%) felt that the time allotted for final exams was appropriate. ◦ Thirty five (25%) commented that the amount of time allotted for exams was too long, ◦ Four (3%) commented that there was not enough time.


Download ppt "Committee on Planning and Priorities (CPP) Paula A.Y. Maas Center for Institutional Effectiveness."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google