Shoreline Community College annual outcomes assessment report—2002-03

MEETING STATEMENTS

Communication 2/20/02 and 3/6/02 Meeting Statements

• 
  The purpose of this Interdisciplinary Gen Ed Outcomes Assessment project is to look at assessment of student learning in the classroom as part of the learning process. In other words, we are interested in looking at assignments that not only give information about how well students are performing the outcomes, but also to give students feedback that is instructional in nature, that helps them to improve their performance of the outcome. For this reason, the group recommends that the criteria for evaluation of an assignment always be handed out to students as part of the assignment.
  

• 
  An observation about rubrics: sometimes an evaluation of student work assumes that the work meets all criteria and earns full points and that points are deducted as a result of the evaluation. Other times, the work has to earn points as the evaluation of the work is carried out. In other words, sometimes it is enough that the assignment is completed with all elements present. At other times, the quality of the work is the focus of the evaluation. It is in this setting that rubrics are most valuable.
  

• 
  In big, project-based assignments, good student self-assessment assignment asks students to identify the biggest challenges and surprises, the advice students would give others undertaking the project, and similar large-scale or big-picture reflective questions.
  

• 
  The relationship between student and teacher is part of assessment: a) we get non-objective information that influences our assessment and b) we give feedback in informal ways that has the impact of more formal assessment.
  

• 
  Big, burning question: What is the relationship between assessment and grading?
  

Communication 3/20/02 Meeting Statements

• 
  Grading in Math is generally thought to be totally objective as opposed to grading in ESL, English and Speech, which is generally thought to be much more subjective. It is partly this idea that the criteria for good written and oral communication are subjectively determined that rubrics that make the criteria clearer to students are so important. In Math, what makes an answer correct is much more evident, so a rubric to explain why is not as needed.
  

• 
  Steve Bogart has his students complete larger math projects (“Big Homework”) in groups. For these assignments, he does clearly delineate the criteria for grading the project. This is not in the form of a rubric, but in a list of guidelines handed out at the start of the term which students are to keep and refer to throughout the quarter.
  

Communication 4/18/02 Meeting Statements

• 
  This group notices that there is no part of the Gen Ed Communication outcome that addresses working in groups of diverse others. Since the Multicultural Understanding outcome concentrates on gaining and applying particular knowledge about power, privilege, race, class and gender, perhaps it is important that the Communication outcome include an outcome about communication well with others who are different from ourselves.
  

• 
  Another observation this group makes about the Gen Ed Communication outcome is whether item I. is necessary. This statement reads: “Students will be able to listen to, understand, evaluate and respond to verbal and non-verbal messages.” It seems that every assignment that every instructor gives would address this outcome. Is it too broad to be useful?
  

• 
  We discussed a writing assignment for ESL 098 (Level 5—three courses from English 101) which has clear directions and grading criteria included—a good example. In the discussion, the differences between Developmental English and ESL arose, such as that the criteria or rubric for assessing student writing in these two programs may be different even though the levels are considered parallel.
  

• 
  Big question: Do we include points for effort or participation in the rubrics for big projects?
  

• 
  The work on this project has focused as much on shaping assignments as it has on assessing student achievement of the outcomes. If we faculty are to assess the Gen Ed Outcomes well in our classes, we need good assignments, ones that clearly call for student performances that demonstrate what we mean by the outcomes.
  

• 
  Some assignment sheets are the rubric for evaluation because they state clearly the criteria.
  

• 
  In looking at Betsey Barnett’s online discussion assignment, several communication issues arise:
  

• 
  How can her idea of “substantive” be more clearly spelled out?
  
• 
  How can the idea of “respect” be made clearer? What are the behaviors that demonstrate respect?
  
• 
  Are the conventions of online writing different than those for online chat? Are they different from off-line writing? Do they need to be spelled out in the assignment?
  

C-2. Communications: Mid-Project Assessment