Skip to main content Skip to main navigation Skip to footer content

Big Bend Community College 2021-2022 Assessment Report

Submitted by Sean Twohy
08/26/2022

Table of Contents

Page 2: Recaps

Page 4: Assessment Report Summaries

Page 10: Reflection and Response to Faculty Assessment Reports

Page 11: Assessment Committee Plans for 2022-2023

Recaps

Big Bend’s Assessment process is in the middle stages of completing a 7-year assessment cycle. The focus of the assessment during this time is to create a stable and predictable assessment process. We are guarding against big changes to the assessment process and working toward creating clarity and comfort for faculty using the process.

Assessment Report Process Recap: Work has been done by the committee to think in long term, the way in which the 7-year plan is done. The process for assessment will be as follows:

  1. In 2019-2020, IO1 was assessed. In 2020-2021, IO2 was assessed. In the 2021-2022 year, IO3 was assessed. In the 2022-2023, faculty will focus on completing program-level assessments, or will follow up, or close the loop, on assessments that needed additional attention. College-wide assessment of Institutional Assessments will resume in 2024-2025.
  2. Beginning this year, there will be a two-year grace period (2022-2023, 2023-2024), wherein programs and departments will focus on assessing courses and outcomes that they did not complete during the previous three years. They may also focus on closing the loop on assessments that were initiated in the previous three years.
  3. Beginning in the 2024-2025 year, the 7-year assessment cycle will continue as follows:
    1. Year one: Assess IO1
    2. Year two: Follow-up to assessment of IO1 OR assess specific Program Outcomes
    3. Year three: Assess IO2
    4. Year four: Follow-up to Assessment of IO2 or Assess specific Program Outcomes
    5. Year five: Assess IO3
    6. Year six: Follow-up to assessment of IO3 OR Assess Specific Program Outcomes
    7. Year seven: Focus on any Program-specific Outcomes that have not been met in years one through six
  4. If you do not have any courses with the designated IO for the year being assessed, you may substitute Program-level Outcomes during that year. For example, if the English Department does not have any courses with IO2, they may choose to focus on an alternative program outcome.

Assessment Videos Recap: The committee continues to commit to its focus in making assessment simple and available, through Assessment videos that allow faculty to access basic expectations and processes for the year. These videos can be found on BBCC’s website, under “Instruction and Assessment”. While things begin to transition back from the online standard during Covid, the videos continue to be a useful tool in allowing faculty to refresh their understanding of the assessment process during the quarter or quarters they are doing the assessment.

Assessing for Improvement Recap: The committee continues to focus on its commitment to making assessment a tool for improving courses, student experience, achievement of learning objectives, and campus-wide expectations through focusing on assessing for improvement—as opposed to assessing for competency. This focus means that assessment reports should not generally be used confirm that outcomes are being met—but to explore ways in which we can improve the process of meeting those outcomes.

A Process for Additional Guidance: The Assessment Committee came up with a process for guiding faculty through the assessment process, focused on sending out quarterly reminders to faculty—based on the 7-Year plans each department or program has submitted. This process went through a test-run in spring and will be fully implemented this year.

Assessment Reports Summary

The Assessment Committee received 43 assessment reports, which correlated with the 7-Year Plans of programs across campus. These reports outlined the plan, results, and analysis of assessments designed to measure student learning outcomes and improve instructional programs. Some of the results of those plans are as follows:

General Assessment Reports

While an attempt to connect assessments to larger campus-wide goals is part of the college’s strategy, individual programs and departments still must meet the needs of their 7-Year Plan. In this way, a number of assessment reports do not fit into the college’s 2021-2022 focus on Human Relations/Workplace Skills (IO3). There were 19 total Assessment Reports that focused on program, course, and institutional outcomes outside of IO3.

Three assessments focused on the Academic Program (and Institutional) Outcome 1: Communication. In Lib 101 (a new course the library offers), the focus of the assessment was on the outcome of students learning about academic integrity and plagiarism. Although the intent of the assessment was not explicitly connected, this assessment ties into a recent statewide concern and policy shift regarding plagiarism. New requirements for faculty regarding the processing of plagiarism will hopefully become more and more unnecessary—as students become increasingly aware of what plagiarism is and how to avoid it. In College Success Skills 102, assessment focused on an exit survey which sought to understand the value of the course from a student perspective. The instructor found that students were increasingly needing more instruction and discussion regarding mental health, racial violence, and relationships. The instructor plans to revise the MCO to more accurately reflect the needs of students today. In English 99, the instructors removed late penalties on assignments and found an increase in student success. The faculty attributed this increase in success to the increase of opportunity given to students whose schedules may have otherwise prevented success. The faculty are going to try and continue to push the boundaries of creating classrooms which work to provide equitable education for all.

Four assessments focused on the Academic Program (and Institutional) Outcome 2: Mathematical Reasoning. Two of these assessments were related to the Agricultural Program, and focused on the ability for students to use mathematical concepts within assignments in the course. The instructor found that students needed refreshers and repetition regarding the mathematical expectations and they plan on including this explicit instruction in the future. The other two math assessments came from the Physics Department, which similarly looked at the ability for students to use math in the classroom and, similarly found that students needed explicit instruction in math. The instructor plans on using explicit instruction and trying to do a proficiency test.

Six assessments focused on the Academic Transfer Program outcome 4: Students will be able to recognize or articulate personal/interpersonal aspects of, or connections between, diverse cultural, social, or political contexts. In the Music Department, the faculty found that students needed more instruction that might lead to a greater understanding of folk and classical musical origins and traditions. In the Communication Department, the instructor focused on scaffolding assignments to increase student success. In Political Science, the instructors focused on student engagement regarding lessons focused on constitutions. The instructors suggested that more might be done to encourage students to engage in their own education—an issue that continues to be a problem in the post-Covid educational world. In the Art Department, the Art 218 instructor found that they needed to focus more on understanding the historical context of art—rather than the formal techniques and aspects of making, design, and media.

Five assessments focused on the Academic Transfer Program outcome five: Students will be able to solve problems by gathering, interpreting, combining, and/or applying information from multiple sources. In English 261, the instructor used “crowd-sourcing” to involve students in directing the learning of themselves and their peers. This included having students teach their peers about some aspect of the reading or related content. While the instructor found the experience to be positive, there did seem to be some desire to increase the number of students who completed the assignments related to the crowd-sourcing. In Art 221 (Watercolor), the instructor changed an assignment to require additional techniques to student work. The instructor found that very few students completed this requirement and the instructor is working to decide what changes need to made in order to achieve higher student engagement in experimental techniques. In Econ 201, the instructor found that students had trouble identifying profitability maximization. They are going to add additional instruction in this area. The Counseling Department continued an assessment began last year, focused on improving academic performance through advanced advising. The department found advanced advising techniques to be of critical importance and, while their sample size was not very large, see the data as directly demonstrating the need for early warning, counseling services, and administrative support to student correspondence. In Psych 100, the instructor looked at the integrating of multiple sources used throughout the quarter on a single assignment and found that most students seemed to demonstrate success in this outcome. The instructor will continue to be hyper-intentional about meeting this outcome.

Nursing231 was the only course to look at a program outcome outside of IO3 and the Academic Transfer Program, and looked at Nursing Program Outcome 7: Assume responsibility and accountability in the practice of registered nursing as defined by the professional standards and codes of nursing. The instructor created an online presentation assignment. This assignment focused on student-led research, evidence-based practice, and technology integration. Students did very well on the assignment and the faculty will continue to find innovative ways to meet this outcome.

Of the 19 Assessments which focused on program-level assessments, 18 of them focused on one of the five program outcomes listed for the Academic Transfer program. The biggest reason for this is that nearly all of the Workforce programs assessed Institutional Outcome 3—as it is an outcome in every Workforce program. This shows that the larger institutional goal of having programs coordinate their assessments, in as much as possible, is coming to fruition. The fact that these program and course assessments fall outside of the Institutional Assessment for the year is completely in-line with the flexibility built into the Assessment model and reflects the way in which the college is determined to create an assessment process which accounts for institutional goals but leaves room for individual needs.

Institutional Outcome 3 Assessment Reports

The broad institutional goal for assessment is to have Institutional Outcomes assessed campus-wide, simultaneously. This will allow for the college and faculty to collectively root out issues and concerns regarding those Institutional Outcomes, as well as to allow faculty to hold cross-departmental conversations about ways in which we can address those issues and concerns. While the Assessment Committee encourages faculty to participate in “Prepackaged Assessment Activities”, we recognize that it is not always in the best interest of specific departments, programs, or courses to participate in the exact activity the college is promoting. In this way, some of the faculty that focus on Institutional Outcome 3 (Human Relations/Workplace Skills), did so without focusing as narrowly on the Prepackaged Activity. There were 12 Assessment Reports which focused on IO3 but did not seem to focus directly on the Prepackaged Plan. Within IO3, there are four key areas that faculty may have reflected within their assessment: teamwork, ethics, safety awareness, and workplace skills.

Three assessments focused on teamwork: AMT251, AMT151, and ACCT202. In AMT, both assessments found value in using group work to encourage students to remain adaptive and multifaceted in approaches to completing a task. In ACCT, the instructor used group work to increase the participation in, and completion of, work. The instructor found that using group work did increase work completion and they will continue to utilize this method.

SOC101 focused on ethics, looking at how to conduct ethical research. The instructor found that the focus on ethics allowed students to grapple with difficult considerations in the discipline. This assessment shows considerable overlap with another instructor’s PSYC100 assessment on ethics in animal testing. While that instructor focused on a different outcome (Program Outcome 5: Gathering and Interpreting Sources), it is clear that the department is committed to students coming away with the ability to ask important questions in regard to ethical considerations.

Three programs had assessments focused on safety. IST100, which is a class focused explicitly on Health and Safety, looked at overall scores on the subject of safety and students did come away with a greater understanding of the laws and regulations surrounding safety. In CHEM110, the instructor required students to take selfies while doing at-home labs. The instructor found that 78% of students were wearing safety gear (goggles) correctly. The instructor tried to increase the number of students wearing safety gear correctly by using safety video instruction and having students submit multiple pictures (in case some just took a picture without safety goggles). However, the average did not really increase quarter to quarter. Nevertheless, the instructor will use the additional selfies taken each quarter to continue to provide feedback regarding safety. The Aviation program had five course assessments which focused on safety. However, as safety is an immediate and ever-present concern for this program, most of these safety outcomes are also cross-assessed with workplace-specific skills. For example, for AVF 143, course outcome #3 “Analyze simulated in-flight emergencies and take the required actions per the Private Pilot-Airplane Airman Certification Standards." is both a workplace skill and a safety consideration. Overall, students complete safety awareness tasks at a very level—as it is their job to do so. However, the program did find that, in AVF254, students did show some struggle in procedures related to “black hole” approaches and the use of oxygen at night. The instructor plans on updating the media tool regarding these things, as well as quizzing on them explicitly. The instructor hopes this will increase student engagement and lead to better completion of outcomes.

Aside from the seven Flight Program assessments which focused simultaneously on safety and workplace skills, five other program assessments focused exclusively on workplace skills. In the Early Childhood Education course ECED 170, instructors assessed student proficiency with a tool called the Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale. This is a common classroom tool used to determine whether the classroom meets a child’s particular needs, abilities, and interests. At the beginning of the quarter, only 36% of students had used the tool but, by the end of the quarter, 100% of the students had experience using the tool. In ECED120, the program additionally found that Covid had impacted their ability to have students apply what they learned at BBCC to kids in the classrooms and childcare centers in their area. The program is excited to get their students back in the classroom. In the BIM program, the instructor looked at the effectiveness of keyboard instruction and found that 95% of students were meeting standards needed to pass the course. Out of the students who did not show proficiency, attendance was the key issue. The faculty found that student engagement and simply showing up for class were the biggest hurdles to success. In NUR135, students were assessed in their ability to give a head-to-toe physical examination. Faulty found that 95% of students were able to successfully complete the task. In UMS107, student growth in knowledge went from 52% (in the pretest) to 80% (in the final exam). The instructor plans to add a weekly lecture component—focused on increasing material retention and student engagement.

Prepackaged IO3 Activity Assessment Reports

Each year, the Assessment Committee creates an activity, or focus, which can accomplish two goals. The first goal is to provide an assessment activity for those who may not have anything in mind, or who may not be in a position requiring the creation such activities (such as adjunct faculty). The second, and larger, goal is to create an activity which allows for cross-campus comprehension and awareness to occur. The focus of the 2021-2022 Prepackaged Assessment Activity was on Institutional Outcome 3. Specifically, the Assessment Committee challenged faculty to do activities related to one of the four following areas: self-motivation, teamwork, time management, or etiquette (although, nobody chose to assess etiquette). Each of these areas had a unique assessment activity which could be adopted by a faculty member and used in course assessment. The Assessment Committee encouraged faculty to compare student learning from before and after the activity. Of the total received Assessment Reports, 12 chose to do the Prepackaged IO3 activity.

The Prepackaged Self-Motivation Activity was as follows: Scaffold Assignments so that, at the beginning of the quarter you give points for everything (reading assignments, small stuff, etc.) but at the end of the quarter you only give points for big assignments (like exams and final essays). Hopefully this leads to practices in self-motivation. Collect data in weeks 1-5 and then data for weeks 5-10. No change in grades might imply students have hung on to self-motivation practices for success. Alternatively, compare grades to previous quarter (before change was made). Three assessments worked on self-motivation. The first two did not follow the prepackaged activity precisely. In BIOL211, the instructor looked at the correlation between attendance, outside obligations, and success in the course. The instructor found large gaps in achievement related to outside obligations and some correlation between student attendance and success. The instructor encourages students and advisors to seriously consider the amount of work that one person can do and to stop advisors from telling students they can do it all. In BIOL100, the instructor allowed students to turn in late work so long as the students emailed before the due date. The instructor found that the new policy did improve the ability for select students to pass the course who would not have otherwise been able to. While an increase in faculty workload occurred, it was not enough to warrant removing the new policy. This course was an online, asynchronous course, and did not require scaffolding in the way that other courses might. In BIOL221, the instructor followed the prepackaged activity by providing many points for readings at the beginning of the quarter and very little points by the end of the quarter. The goal was to see whether students would realize the benefits of the readings and choose to do them, regardless of immediate incentive. The instructor found that students did not complete reading which had no points associated with it. This conclusion matches the results of previous assessments the college did surrounding IO1: Communication. The instructor plans on making every assignment worth points—even if those points are a low percentage of the overall grade.

The Prepackaged Teamwork Activity was as follows: Provide Students with low stakes opportunities for group work—that lead up to a larger group project. Use these activities to practice group work norms and develop group work habits and confidence. Use a Likert Scale survey to measure student confidence and mood toward group activities as the quarter progresses. Comparisons could be made to group assignments at the beginning and ending of the quarter. While not all of the instructors that focused on teamwork followed this template exactly, there were eight assessments that seemed to be in the spirit of this activity. In ENGL235, the instructor used weekly low stakes group assignments to help improve individual weekly assignment grades and prepare students for a large final group project. The course was recently moved asynchronously online and the instructor required students to meet in groups of three to four. While the results for the final group project were inconclusive, the average grade for the course as a whole improved. Additionally, and more importantly, the student comments were overwhelmingly positive about the group work experience. Over 85% of students mentions that group work has been helpful in understanding the larger weekly assignments, networking, and creating an overall positive experience for the course. While the students were initially concerned about scheduling weekly meetings with their group, 21/23 students stated that the weekly group meetings did not create any significant hardships. In MGMT310, small groups of students were put through a simulation to run a company together, from the ground up. The instructor found that the group work helped teach the students to work together efficiently and allowed them to work together nimbly and professionally. In Math 131, 132, 146, and 254, overall course grades were compared to group work grades. Correlations were found between grades and group work in three of four courses. In AMT148, the instructor switched groups on each project. This policy required students to carry skills over between groups and allowed the instructor to see increased leadership qualities and peace-making abilities. The BAS-AM Program assessed courses with the program as a whole in mind. In SOC 320, the instructor asked students to identify, utilize, and reflect on their belongingness and strengths as a team leader and member—related to their place as a member of a cohort. The instructor found that 100% of students agreed that they felt a sense of belonging. The program plans to continue to support individual strengths while ensuring that students continue to compliment and support each other’s strengths. Similarly, MGMT 305, they similarly found value in the use of small groups. In CMST 210, the instructor had the students participate in a series of low-stakes group work. The instructor found the results encouraging as the “overall as students' grades, participation, and interpersonal skills improved over the quarter.” Additionally, developing relationships in the course was listed as one of the most important aspects of the course, by nearly every student. The only assessment that seemed to find little value in group work was in the Automotive Program. In AUT 212, the instructor assessed the value of small groups in terms of having students in pairs or trios. The instructor found that pairs of students worked better than groups of three and that students who generally slacked off would rise to the occasion if forced to work on their own. The instructor noted that specific tasks seemed to be better suited for group tasks. In groups of three, one student usually took the lead and the other students typically just watched and followed along.

The Prepackaged Time Management was as follows: Have students create a Gantt Chart or other Organizational Calendar which accounts for all tasks in their life for the quarter (including coursework and life obligations like jobs, social obligations, etc.). Compare grades or completion rates from a previous quarter to the quarter this activity is done. Only one instructor chose to work on time management. In BUS 289, the instructor had students create spreadsheets to account for tasks in their life (spreadsheets were used instead of Gantt charts). While no specific grade difference could be correlated to the inclusion of this information, the instructor does plan to include it in future classes—as students seemed surprised by the results of seeing their time management on paper. The instructor thinks this could be a useful activity for advising.

Academic Transfer Program Assessment Report

While each of the Professional/Technical (Workforce) programs complete assessment independently, the Academic Transfer Program must assess its program across a wide range of departments. One purpose of the Prepackaged Assessment Plan, and having faculty assess similar outcomes each year, is to find broad themes and connections between departments within the Academic Transfer Program.

Academic Program Assessments for the 2021-2022 year showed concern for student engagement. While this year was focused on workplace skills, many of the assessment outcomes ended up not being about the intended focus of the assessment activity. There is a clear growing concern with student engagement which may need to be addressed at the institutional level. While engagement seemed to be a growing concern previously to Covid, there seems to be a pressing concern regarding getting students to show up and take part. However, these concerns must be simultaneously weighed against things like mental health, physical health, and time restraints. This is not an issue limited to the Academic Program and is being felt across campus. Interestingly, this issue may find some solution in the reports which focused on IO3 and group activities. Group activities seem to provide students with additional motivation to show up and work harder to complete tasks. There may be value in working on ways to increase group work in the classrooms across campus.

One thing that was clear was that faculty were willing to try and meet the needs of students in whatever way they thought would be most helpful. It is just not clear exactly what the most useful pathway is. As we move back into face-to-face instruction, faculty and the college administration will need to grapple with these new considerations.

Reflection and Response to Faculty Assessment Reports

Of the Assessments outside of IO3, a consistent theme came up regarding the lack of student engagement. However, within those assessments which focused on IO3, Group Work seems to present a clear and effective way to increase student engagement and provide a better experience for the entire course. This proved true whether the course was online and asynchronous or whether the class was in person. Group work, with one exception, improved overall grades, improved overall satisfaction in the course, and helped to facilitate the learning of important workplace skills. This may be a consideration for future work within the college.

Another concern was related to the retention of material across classrooms. This was a concern related to the previous assessment of IO1 (student ability to use citations outside of the English classroom), and it continues to be a concern for faculty. The skills students are learning in Math and English are not necessarily transferring over into their work in other classrooms.

Lastly, the Assessment reports reflected an overall willingness for faculty to try and meet the needs of students. While not all faculty agree on the pathway toward success, it is clear that they do care about the success itself. Faculty continue to work tirelessly to find solutions to an ever-changing educational landscape and do so quietly and efficiently.

Assessment Committee Plans for 2022/2023

In regard to the 2022-2023 Assessment plans, the college is focused on continuing to push the assessment process in place. The assessment process will stay the same, and the assessment team is working toward creating a repeatable and simple schedule for the assessment committee members to follow.

Sharing and Discussing the 2021-2022 Assessment Report: The report will be shared and discussed at Fall In-service. Additionally, the Assessment Committee will continue to discuss and look at the report to determine any additional steps that need to be taken.

Training for Assessment Committee Members: The Committee has worked to improve the expectations and process for committee members. Roles are slowly being outlined. We hope to make a video which outlines the motivation, expectations, and timeline for many of the assessment activities (prepackaged plan, Fall In-service, report writing, accessing reports on SharePoint, etc.). By clarifying the process of what is expected of the committee, it will help to give members the broader understanding needed to help their peers across campus.

Assessment Accountability: The Assessment Committee is going to spend time this year focusing on holding faculty accountable for their Assessment plans. This will include looking at the 7-year plans and sending faculty quarterly reminders to complete and submit reports for courses being taught that quarter.

Preparing for Two Years of Program/Departmental-Level Assessment Plans: For the past three years, the Assessment Committee has had faculty working on Institutional Outcomes for their assessment. The 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 school years will be used to allow programs to meet the rest of their Program-level Outcomes, should they need to. Because of this, the Assessment Committee needs to find new ways of helping faculty meet their Assessment goals and requirements in the future.

Define the Purpose of Assessment: Continuing to push the idea of assessment for improvement is important to the long-term success of assessment and its usefulness to the faculty. While faculty seem to understand the idea of assessing for improvement, many continue to do assessments which do not aim to do so. Moving forward, we will need to devise a way in which to get more people to actually do an assessment which aims to improve their course (by starting with a problem and doing an activity which attempts to address that problem), as opposed to doing an assessment activity which only attempts to confirm adherence to Course Outcomes or to only find a problem. The Assessment Committee is considering incentivizing exceptional Assessments.

Integrating Assessment and Program Audits: Assessment is campus-wide. However, the Professional/Technical/Workforce programs have traditionally had the additional burden of completing a yearly Program Audit. More recently, the Program Audit has become an expectation of divisions, departments, and programs on the Academic/Transfer side of the college. As the Program Audit and Assessment share many common goals, processes, and practical applications, finding ways to combine and connect the two processes will help to reduce redundancy and fortify the clarity of results.