1. Campus Wide Assessment Project Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning Assessment Team: David Nelson – Faculty Lead, Math Division Janet Ash, Technology Division Brenda Bindschatel, Business Division Keith Clay, Science Division Sandy Johanson, Humanities Division

2. Goals of the Project 1.Peer review of the Learning Outcome Tracking System (LOTS) database 2.Campus-wide assessment of the QSR outcome

3. Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning 1.Evaluate and interpret quantitative and symbolic reasoning information/data 2.Recognize which quantitative or symbolic reasoning methods are appropriate for solving a given problem, and correctly implement those methods 3.Demonstrate the ability to estimate a solution to a presented problem 4.Translate data into various formats such as symbolic language, equations, graphs and formulas 5.Implement calculator/computer technology to solve problems 6.Demonstrate logical reasoning skills through formal and informal proofs.

4. LOTS Database Courses are rated by instructors or departments  Level 0: Not taught, practiced or assessed  Level 1: taught or practiced, but not assessed  Level 2: assessed by not taught  Level 3: taught and assessed

5. Peer Review of LOTS  Review CARS of all courses claiming Level 3 for any of the QSR competencies

6. Review of LOTS Database The student will demonstrate proficiency in the following areas:  Metric conversions, using dimensional analysis  Naming chemical elements, and identifying atomic numbers and mass  Writing chemical formulas and naming compounds  Calculating molar masses  Quantitative composition of compounds  Writing and balancing chemical equations  Periodic properties Individual instructors will chose two (three?) of the following proficiencies as the last unit of the class :  Mass relationships in a balanced equation  Atomic structure of the first eighteen elements  Gas laws  Chemical bonds  Properties of liquids CHEM 105: Marked QSR Competency 2 and Competency 5 at Level 3

7. Review of LOTS Database Students will learn:  The use of taxonomic keys to identify trees, and shrubs.  The use and comprehension of dendrology terminology.  Plant morphology  Identification of all required plants  How to establish grid plots NATRS 183 claims QSR 1, 2, and 4 Quantitative Reasoning: Students will measure physical, biological, and environmental parameters. Additional parameters and results will be obtained by calculations and graphing.

8. Review of LOTS Database  158 CARs claiming Level 3 were reviewed  QSR documentation in 14 CARs were deemed inadequate  LOC Chair and division rep met with lead instructors and either changed LOTS rating or changed course syllabus  13 of the 14 have been adjusted  Issue of authority and control needs to be decided

9. Campus Wide Assessment  Determine an appropriate assessment  Implement assessment with the aid of instructors  Analyze the data  Report to the community

10. Campus Wide QSR Assessment  Competencies 1, 2, 4 and 5  8 classes chosen randomly for each competency  Appropriate mix of day, night and distance courses  Appropriate mix full-time and adjunct instructors  Embedded assessment tool – created by the faculty  Scored according to the Community Rubric

11. Campus Wide QSR Assessment Challenges with the Data  Several instructors did not participate or did not provide data in time for the assessment – 11 of the 35 selected classes  Minimal data collected for QSR 5 - 2 of 10 classes provided pre and post assessment data, one provided post assessment data only  One day class was substituted for the initial selection of a night class (QSR 1)  Difficult to distinguish between Competent & Mastering when there was a single problem

12.  Positive shift towards mastering  Approximately 67.6% achieve competent or mastering on the post assessment

13. Evaluate and interpret quantitative and symbolic reasoning information 51.8% reach competent or mastering

14. Recognize which quantitative or symbolic reasoning methods are appropriate for solving a given problem and correctly implement those methods. 70.2% of students reached competent or mastering

15. Translate data into various formats such as symbolic language, equations, graphs and formulas 69.4% of students achieve competent or mastering

16. Implement calculator/computer technology to solve problems. 92.2% of students were able to reach competent or mastering level

17. Unusual Classes Math 97, B A 220 and BIO 100 show improvement, but not nearly as much as other courses. MATH 97, B A 220 - QSR Competency 1 BIO 100 - QSR Competency 4

18. Unusual Classes BA 110 and Chem 150 had a large number of competent/mastering students on the pre assessment. (Competency 4)

19. Full-Time and Adjunct Faculty

20. Day, Evening and Online Classes

21. Recommendations  Relatively few courses claim Competency 3 and Competency 6. Should we offer more? Do we expect mastering of all competencies?  Revise Competency 2, or use better assessment methods. Two different skills are listed.  Improve success rate of Competency 1  Increase communication between full-time, adjunct, day, evening and online instructors  Look at math prerequisites for courses with a minority of students reaching the competent or mastering level.

22. Recommendations for follow-up studies  Check degree requirements with CWOs. Can a student graduate without taking QSR classes?  Use appropriate assessments. – Comp. 2  Start earlier.  Contact instructors of classes selected for sample earlier/more frequently to get a better response rate.