UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PLAN Department of Family Sciences Masters of Science

Transcription

1 UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY PROGRAM ASSESSMENT PLAN Department of Family Sciences Masters of Science 1. Introduction [identify college, unit, and degree programs] 1.1. Unit Mission Statement The Vision of the Department of Family Sciences at the University of Kentucky is to be a leader in improving the quality of life of individuals and families in Kentucky, the region, and the nation through rigorous academic programs, state-of-the-art research, community-driven extension, and engagement opportunities Direct and indirect assessments are collected and reported on using a two-year cycle (see curriculum and artifact map) 2. Assessment Oversight, Resources 2.1. College Learning Outcomes Assessment Coordinator 2.2. The department chair oversees all assessment that occurs within the program with assignments made to various faculty to coordinate the assessment for each program within the department The Director of Graduate studies will begin to coordinate the assessment plan for the MS and PhD program in the assessment cycle. 3. Program-Level Learning Outcomes 3.1. Outcome 1: Individual and Family Development: Apply and analyze individual and family development across the life course and family life cycle Outcome 2: Diversity: Evaluate the differences and similarities that exist within the diverse families of the United States and the world Outcome 3: Research: Demonstrate an understanding of the concepts and techniques of research design, sampling, data collection, measurement, and analysis Outcome 4: Outreach: Critically evaluate and apply family studies and human development theories and research to clinical and non-clinical work with individuals and families Outcome 5: Ethics: Demonstrate ethical and professional practices and skills in work with individuals, families, and communities across cultures and in a variety of settings Outcome 6: Resources/Finances: Demonstrate skill in application of personal and family finance principles, resource management, and the application of these concepts to individuals and families across the life course. Updated December 5, 2014 by the Office of University Assessment, University of Kentucky

2 4. Curriculum Map Outcome 1: Individual and Outcome 2: Family Diversity: Development: Evaluate the Apply and analyze differences and individual and similarities that family exist within the development diverse families across the life of the United course and family States and the life cycle. world. OUTCOMES: MS in Family Studies Outcome 3: Research: Demonstrate an understanding of the concepts and techniques of research design, sampling, data collection, measurement, and analysis. Outcome 4: Outreach: Critically evaluate and apply family studies and human development theories and research to clinical and non-clinical work with individuals and families. Outcome 5: Ethics: Demonstrate ethical and professional practices and skills in work with individuals, families, and communities across cultures and in a variety of settings. Outcome 6: Resources/Finances: Demonstrate skill in application of personal and family finance principles, resource management, and the application of these concepts to individuals and families across the life course. FAM 601 R I E FAM 652 I I E FAM 654 E FAM 668 I E FAM 690 E I I = Outcome is Introduced R = Outcome is Reinforced E = Outcome is Emphasized 5. Assessment Methods and Measures (Formative and Summative recommended) 5.1. All assessment methods used for the MS program involve direct evaluation of student work aggregated at the course or program level. 6. Data Collection and Review 6.1. Even numbered outcomes will be collected on academic years ending in an even number. Odd numbered outcomes will be collected on academic years ending in an odd number. Thus, the assessment cycle will collect and report on SLO 1, 3, & 5. See the Artifact Map in the appendix for further detail on artifacts, benchmarks, and report cycle. 7. Assessment Cycle and Data Analysis 7.1 Assessment Cycle Even numbered outcomes are assessed on years where the spring term is an even number. Odd number outcomes are assessed on odd numbered spring terms. Therefore, all SLOs are assessed on an every other year basis A detailed report for each program in the department is distributed to the entire faculty each fall by the end of September. The report is discussed in the October faculty meeting. Updated December 5, 2014 by the Office of University Assessment, University of Kentucky

3 Learning Outcome Masters of Science Outcome 1:Individual and Family Development: Apply and analyze individual and family development across the life course and family life cycle. Outcome 2:Diversity: Evaluate the differences and similarities that exist within the diverse families of the United States and the world. Outcome 3:Research: Demonstrate an understanding of the concepts and techniques of research design, sampling, data collection, measurement, and analysis. Outcome 4:Outreach: Critically evaluate and apply family studies and human development theories and research to clinical and nonclinical work with individuals and families. Outcome 5:Ethics: Demonstrate ethical and professional practices and skills in work with individuals, families, and communities across cultures and in a variety of settings. Outcome 6:Resources/Finances: Demonstrate skill in application of personal and family finance principles, resource management, and the application of these concepts to individuals and families across the life course Data Analysis Process/Procedures The analysis process is a multi-step process involving the entire faculty body. Initially, the faculty created ad hoc groups to set SLOs, identify artifacts and benchmarks appropriate to each SLO and program in the department. Artifacts collected within courses are assessed by those instructors using established rubrics (see appendix). The instructors then send the results for their courses to the assessment coordinator responsible for that program. These data are compiled into a report written by the assessment coordinator including recommendations for changes in the assessment plan (e.g., change in artifacts, rubrics, etc) and any implications regarding the program (e.g., core requirements, standardization of assignments across sections, curriculum structure). This report is then reviewed by the entire faculty during the fall semester. It is at the faculty meeting that any recommendations from the report are discussed, and where appropriate, policies/curriculum/assessment process are voted on. It is important to note that the entire faculty reviews the MS, CFT, Ph.D. program reports, as well as the undergraduate program report Assessment reports are annually submitted to the College of Agriculture and UK s Office of Assessment as required by UK policy and SACS accreditation standards. It is anticipated that the assessment reports and attending changes made to the department will be a critical component in future self-studies and strategic planning. 8. Teaching Effectiveness Family Sciences values its students and excellence in teaching. Faculty are to submit a teaching portfolio to the department chair every 1-2 years based on their tenure status. This portfolio is to include TCE reports, teaching philosophy statement, and other teaching activities. This portfolio is reviewed by the department chair and appropriate deans in the School of HES and C.A.F.E. as a critical part of the faculty performance evaluation process. 9. What are the plans to evaluate students post-graduate success? Updated December 5, 2014 by the Office of University Assessment, University of Kentucky

4 No formal plan is in place currently to evaluate students post-graduation success. Informally, students frequently contact their former advisors to give updates on their progress. 10. Appendices Updated December 5, 2014 by the Office of University Assessment, University of Kentucky

5 OUTCOMES: MS in Family Studies Outcome 1: Individual and Family Development: Apply and analyze individual and family development across the life course and family life cycle. Outcome 2: Diversity: Evaluate the differences and similarities that exist within the diverse families of the United States and the world. Thesis Defense Oral thesis defense rubric is completed by every member of the student's advisory Outcome 3: committee who anonymously Research: fills out the rubric after the Demonstrate an understanding student has presented their of the concepts and techniques work and responded to of research design, sampling, questions. The data collection, measurement, DGS/Assessment coordinator and analysis. then collects the data. Report Cycle: Every other year on "odd" spring terms, e.g., Benchmark: Pending. Outcome 4: Outreach: Critically evaluate and apply family studies and human development theories and research to clinical and nonclinical work with individuals and families. Outcome 5: Ethics: Demonstrate ethical and professional practices and skills in work with individuals, families, and communities across cultures and in a variety of settings. FAM 652 Final Paper (Taught Every Fall) Paper evaluated by the instructor who compiles the data, and makes suggestions for program improvement to the DGS/Assessment Coordiantor. Report Cycle: Every other year on "odd" spring terms, e.g., Benchmark: 90% class Paper is evaluated by the instructor who compiles the data, and makes suggestions for program improvement to the DGS/Assessment Coordiantor. Report Cycle: Every other year on "even" spring terms, e.g., Benchmark: 90% class Artifact/Report Cycle/Benchmark FAM 654 Final Project (Taught every Fall) Paper evaluated by the instructor who compiles the data, and makes suggestions for program improvement to the DGS/Assessment Coordiantor. Report Cycle: Every other year on "even" spring terms, e.g., Benchmark: 90% class FAM 668 Final Project (Taught Every Spring) FAM 690 Final Project/Proposal (Taught Every Spring) Project / Proposal Paper evaluated by the instructor who compiles the data, and makes suggestions for program improvement to the DGS/Assessment Coordiantor. Report Cycle: Every other year on "odd" spring terms, e.g., Benchmark: 90% class Project / Proposal Paper evaluated by the instructor who compiles the data, and makes suggestions for program improvement to the DGS/Assessment Coordiantor. Report Cycle: Every other year on "odd" spring terms, e.g., Benchmark: 90% class Outcome 6: Resources/Finances: Demonstrate skill in application of personal and family finance principles, resource management, and the application of these concepts to individuals and families across the life course. Project Paper evaluated by the instructor who compiles the data, and makes suggestions for program improvement to the DGS/Assessment Coordiantor. Report Cycle: Every other year on "even" spring terms, e.g., Benchmark: 90% class

6 FAM 652: Readings in Family Theory and Research Position Paper Assignment Due: Friday, November 2 11:00PM Position Paper (30% of overall class grade) Purpose: To demonstrate the ability to conceptualize an argument grounded in theory and supported by empirical evidence, and to communicate that argument through professional writing. Assignment: Write a position paper on a family-related topic (approved by Jason) where there is genuine controversy or uncertainty with regard to the origin, preferred outcome, or implications of the issue. Your analysis must be grounded within a well-developed theoretical framework, must present a balanced assessment of multiple perspectives on the issue, and the position you ultimately argue in favor of must be supported by empirical evidence. The paper must be written and formatted in compliance with APA Publication Manual (6 th ed.) guidelines and you must support your claims by citing at least 10 (probably more) different scholarly research journal articles. The paper should include 8-10 pages of text, not including the reference list and title page. Additional Comments: Submit via the course website before the start of class on November 5 th. It takes thinking time and countless revisions to develop a good paper. Accordingly, to earn a good grade on this assignment you will need to start early, seek out constructive critiques and guidance from the writing center ( and your peers, and revise, revise, revise! Grading Criteria Component Superior (9-10) Excellent (7-8) Good (5-6) Fair (3-4) Poor (1-2) Literature review (30%) Approaches superior description but falls A genuine attempt to meet the superior description is Borders on poor description but somewhat short of clear and successful on occasionally exhibits a that standard in one some level, but the outcome modicum of effort or more ways. still falls well short of that worthy of recognition standard in multiple ways. yet still well below expectations. Theory (25%) Clarity and quality of writing (20%) APA format (15%) Critical thinking and analytical approach (10%) Literature review provides a thorough and balanced overview of relevant high-quality research, but also goes beyond the mere reporting of previous research by integrating results across studies to form original scholarship that is grounded in and logically emerges from the extant literature. Theory of choice is appropriate for the topic, clearly and accurately described with references to original or primary sources, and theoretical lens is fully and appropriately integrated throughout the paper. The organization and flow of ideas are easy to follow and transition phrases are used to lead the reader s attention from one idea or paragraph to another. Content within sections and paragraphs is consistent with headings and topic sentences, which are used to effectively structure the paper and guide readers. Sentences and paragraphs are sophisticated yet clear and succinct. A clear thesis or purpose statement can be found early in the paper. Each key point is clearly developed and discussed with logical reasoning and supporting evidence. Appropriate introductions, summaries, and conclusions are provided for the paper as a whole, as well as for distinct subsections within the paper. APA format is fully and appropriately applied throughout the paper, from title page to reference list, including but not limited to page headers, section headings, in-text citations, and APA-specific grammar and punctuation rules. Paper offers a balanced and critical critique for and against each of multiple perspectives on the topic of choice that is rooted in clear logic or high-quality empirical evidence and avoids conceptual missteps or biased interpretations. Literature review reads like an annotated bibliography that merely regurgitates information already readily accessible in the literature with little integration across studies, relies on research of dubious quality, or omits substantial relevant content. Theory of choice is inappropriate for the topic, not clearly and accurately described, relies on secondary references or none at all, or fails to integrate theoretical lens throughout the paper. Organization is difficult to follow, unnecessary redundancy, transitions are rough, sentences and arguments are vague or ambiguous, multiple grammatical and mechanical errors, thesis or purpose statement is missing or not directly relevant to content of paper, key points are underdeveloped, missing or inadequate introductions or conclusions. Multiple violations of APA format that demonstrate a lack of attention to detail or ignorance of APA rules and guidelines. Paper fails to demonstrate adequate scholarship. For example, the paper may exhibit poor critical thinking skills, present imbalanced or biased arguments, take a position not clearly grounded in logic or empirical evidence, or make other conceptual missteps.

7 Oral Presentation Scoring Rubric Please check one: Thesis defense Date Department of Family Sciences Qualifying exam Dissertation defense Dear colleague, We are very grateful for your efforts and commitment in mentoring and guiding our students. The purpose of this rubric is to provide the Department of Family Sciences information regarding the impact of our teaching. While this form may help in your evaluation of the student s presentation, no cutoff score or other benchmark has been set to determine a pass or fail vote on your part. Your honest evaluation of their presentation on this form will be aggregated with other rubrics from other student presentations in order to assess departmental learning outcomes. We realize that not all committee members are from our department. We especially appreciate your contribution in behalf of our students. At times, your valuable expertise may be outside of the family sciences field. If you do not think it is appropriate for you to respond to different components of the rubric, please circle abstain at the far right side of the applicable category. Once again, thank you for your work and support of our students. Sincerely, Family Sciences Committee Member Instructions: Please fill this form out basing your responses on their presentation: 1) This form is to be filled out after the student s defense/exam. 2) Please excuse the student prior to filling out the rubric. 3) Please fill it out independently. 4) If you do not think you are in a position to evaluate a rubric component, please circle abstain for that component. 5) Give this form to the committee chair so they may return it to the DGS. Thank You! If you would like to fill this form out electronically, you can use your phone or tablet and scan the following: The committee chair can give you the password.

8 Oral Presentation Scoring Rubric Please check one: Thesis defense Date Department of Family Sciences Qualifying exam Dissertation defense Conceptualization: Conceptualize a research problem, design a related research project, and complete the research according to the design. No logical connections are present between research question, methods, analysis, or discussion. Components of research are somewhat connected. The research question/hypothesis is partially formed. The project described is cohesive from the literature review through methods, analysis, discussion, and implications. Research question/hypothesis is fully formed. Theory: Critically evaluate and apply theories in Family Sciences. *Comparing/contrasting different theories as they relate to the research question may not be part of the written thesis, but can be part of the final defense. The research presented was not informed by theory. No clear theoretical rational was presented or clearly communicated. The research presented was theoretically informed. Choice of theory was somewhat justified. Theory chosen was not clearly communicated. The research presented was theoretically informed. Choice of theory was justified by comparing/contrasting possible alternative theories.* Theory chosen was clearly communicated. Research Methodology: Demonstrate an understanding of the concepts and techniques of research design, sampling, data collection, data analytic techniques, and program evaluation. The presenter did not show a clear understanding of methodology, or analysis. Methods are not tied to research question. The presenter showed some understanding of the methods and analysis. Methods and analysis are modestly connected to research question. The presenter showed a clear understanding of methods and analysis used. Methods and analysis are logically connected to the research question. Research Ethics: Demonstrate ethical and professional practices and skills of research. Presenter demonstrated a basic understanding of research ethics. Presenter cannot articulate issues related to ethical conduct of research. Discussion of Results: Presenter demonstrated knowledge of research ethics. Research was conducted appropriately. Demonstrated commitment to the research process in order to complete a program requirement. Presenter demonstrated a strong consideration of ethical decision making and respect of those involved in the research process. Demonstrated professionalism in conducting and reporting research. Demonstrated commitment to the research process beyond completing a program requirement. Demonstrated little connection to supporting research. Conclusions drawn from the study understate or overstate results. Implications are not directly tied to study. Future directions are not logical extensions of the study. Demonstrated moderate connection to supporting research. Conclusions drawn from the study are consistent with methodology and analysis. Implications are thinly described. Future directions have some foundation in the current study. Demonstrated clear connection of the results with the supporting research. Conclusions drawn from the study are consistent with methodology and analysis. Implications are thoroughly discussed. Future directions are logical extensions and clearly communicated. Abstain Abstain Abstain Abstain Abstain