Minutes from Social Sciences Task Force Meeting of March 1, 2002

 

The Social Sciences Task Force met Friday, March 1, 2002, from  2:00 PM to 4:00 PM at Rio Grande Campus in Room 125. The following faculty were in attendance: Mary Beth Booth, Sherry Heiden, Geof Andron,  Jack Bucco, Clint Davis, Lizzie Pintar, Don Jonsson, Richard Croxdale and Jim Sondgeroth.

  1. The minutes from the February 8, 2002 Task Force meeting were reviewed and accepted.
  2. The agenda for the meeting was accepted. It was:
    3. Agenda
    Item 1: Approve minutes of Feb. 8th meeting.
     
    Item 2: Consider changing the course description for the GIS courses. The instructor of the course, Mary Beth Booth, sent this to me when she requested that this item be put on the task force agenda:
     
    "I would like to add a line to the GIS course description. One  of the comments on my evaluation for GIS was that the course description did not say that it was a computer-oriented course. I think that this is a legitimate complaint. So I would like to propose a new course description at the next meeting. I will bring the old and proposed description.... "
     
    Item 3: Consider changes in the approved list of texts for geography:   
                a. Consider approving the use of USA Today in the Cultural, Physical, and World and Regional Geography classes if an instructor desires to use this resource to motivate learning in these classes. 
                b.  Consider adding Goode's World atlas to the approved list for both Physical geo and cultural geo.
     
     
    Item 4: Consider adding Colander to the economics approved textbook list.
     
    Item 5: We will consider the evaluation and  "documentation of your unit's assessment plans, results, and improvement plans"  for this year and previous academic years.
     

     

  3. Every one at the meeting agreed that the course description to be entered into the college catalog for GEOG 1410 should be changed to read as follows:

    4.                 GIS (Geographic Information Systems) is a computer-based tool that uses spatial (geographic) data to analyze and solve real-world           problems. This course is designed to introduce the student to the basic principles and techniques of GIS.  The lab material will emphasize GIS data  collection, entry, storage, analysis, and output using ArcGIS.

  4. The task force approved the use of USA Today in the Cultural, Physical, and World and Regional Geography courses.
  5. The task force approved adding Goode's World Atlas to the approved textbook list for Physical and Cultural Geography.
  6. The task force approved adding Colander's introductory text as splits to the micro and macroeconomic approved textbook lists.
  7. The following Unit Level Effectiveness outcomes and plans for action were approved:
    1. ANTHROPOLOGY

      ANTHROPOLOGY:

      Assessment Plan

      Outcome #: 1

      Outcome title: Anthropology

      Intended outcome: Students who have completed an anthropology course will possess knowledge of basic concepts of anthropology and understand how the discipline of anthropology related to everday life.

      Assessment criteria: Anthropology instructors teaching all sections will, during the Fall semester, distribute a four question assessment that will be distributed during the last 2 weeks of the semester. The task force hopes that, although all instructors will be instructed to administer the assessment forms, at least 70% of the sections offered will participate. In addition, the task force also hopes that at least 70% of the students will answer the questions correctly.

      Methodology: The assessment forms will be administered in class, and will not be take-home exercises. they will be done aonymously. Students will also be told that the assessment form will not count toward their final grade, but that the college’s accreditation depends on their participation and correct answers.

       

      Summary And Analysis Of Data

      Results: The results from 184 forms were included in the final analysis (corresponding to 9 sections taught by 6 instructors).

      1- Partial results by subdiscipline show the following:

      Introduction to Cultural Anthropology: 60% of the responses for Question 1 were considered appropriate, whereas more than 90% of the responses for Questions 2 – 4 were considered correct / valid / accurate.

      Introduction to Physical Anthropology: 63% of the responses for Question 1 were considered appropriate, whereas more than 90% of the responses for Questions 2 – 4 were considered correct / valid / accurate.

      Introduction to Archaeology: over 87% of all questions were answered correctly.

      2- General results for Anthropology:

      Question 1: 63% correct

      Question 2: 91% correct

      Question 3: 92% correct

      Question 4: 95% correct

      Improvement actions:

      1- 66% of the instructors participated in the assessment. This did not meet our goal. Instructors will be encouraged to participate.

      2- Questions 1 and 2 (on the form used) were invariably the same, it showed that students thought that the particular subdiscipline within Anthropology was what Anthropology is all about. In order for students to be able to discriminate clearly between the particular subdiscipline within Anthropology and Anthropology in general (Questions 1 and 2 in the form used), the task force will encourage instructors to include key concepts in the syllabus which students should have a proper command of by the end of the semester. The key concepts will include the particular subdiscipline and Anthropology in general. In addition, instructors will be encouraged to include these key concepts in all the Study Guides handed to students prior to any and all exams taken in that course.

      3- Questions 3 and 4 had a high percentage of correct answers because a great lee way was given for correct answers; questions such as: "Has your understanding of X changed since the beginning of the semester?" and "How do you think this class related to your everyday life?" got responses that although valid, seemed to be a quick way out of a more lengthy answer. Most instructors felt that these questions should be rephrased in order to obtain a more proper answer. Therefore, a list of 4 new questions has been proposed (see attached page).

    2. ECONOMICS

      Statement of Unit Purpose

      Unit Purpose: The purpose of the economics department at Austin Community College is to (1) improve the students ability to think critically, (2) to support business programs that list economics as a prerequisite, to (3) broaden students world view, to (4) help students understand the economic world that they live in by mastering basic theories and concepts of economics, and (5) to help economics majors be successful and competitive at four year institutions.

      Area/Unit

      Unit: Economics

      Year: 2001-2002

      Assessment Plan

      Outcome 1

      Title: Principles of Macroeconomics (Econ 2301)

      Intended Outcome: Students who have completed macroeconomics will

      possess a knowledge of basic core concepts of macroeconomics.

      Assessment Criteria: Instructors of all macroeconomics sections during the fall 2001 semester will be asked to include four multiple choice questions in their final exams. The task force expects (goal) that at least 70% of the sections will participate with 70% correct responses (goal) to the inserted questions.

       

      Methodology: All instructors will be asked to include the questions as part of their regular final exams for fall 2001.

      Summary and Data Analysis

      Results For the fall 2001 semester, again all of the full-time instructors

      (6) and 80% (8 out of 10) of the adjuncts participated in the

      assessment. The results (% correct on the four questions) for fall 2001, with spring 2001 in parentheses are as follows:

      1. 93.34 (94.9)

      2. 84.53 (90.3)

      3. 72.88 (71.8)

      4. 58.24 (62.1)

      Total = 77.25 (79.7)

      Improvements Actions The results for the Principles of Macroeconomics appear to be mixed with respect to meeting our stated goals. First, the participation rates appear to be much improved from spring 2001 (87.5% overall verses 60.8%) with 100% of the full time and 80% of the adjuncts participating. And the overall % correct is within the goals of the department. However, the responses to some questions appears to be marginal with questions 3 (71.8%) and 4 (62.1%). Three barely meets the stated goal (70% correct) and four fails to achieve satisfactory results. Since these are core concepts, that all students must master, there appears to be some room for improvement regarding the teaching of Monetary Policy. The assessment questions are provided in this report at the end. Suggestions include department learning objectives regarding all four questions to be shared by each instructor with their students before the assessment test is administered, as well as renewed vigor with respect to teaching Monetary Policy in both theory and practice. Additionally, Instructors whose students responded correct 80% or better to the two problematical questions will be asked for suggestions as to the source of their success.

       

      Economics

      Statement of Unit Purpose

      Unit Purpose: The purpose of the economics department at Austin Community College is to (1) improve the students

      ability to think critically, (2) to support business programs that list economics as a prerequisite, to (3) broaden students world view, to (4) help students understand the economic world that they live in by mastering basic theories and concepts of economics, and (5) to help economics majors be successful and competitive at four year institutions.

      Area/Unit

      Unit: Economics

      Year: 2001-2002

      Assessment Plan

      Outcome 2

      Title: Principles of Microeconomics (Econ 2302)

      Intended Outcome: Students who have completed microeconomics will

      possess a knowledge of basic core concepts of microeconomics.

      Assessment Criteria: Instructors of all microeconomics sections during the fall 2001 semester will be asked to include four multiple choice questions in their final exams. The task force expects (goal) that at least 70% of the sections will participate with 70% correct responses (goal) to the inserted questions.

       

      Methodology: All instructors will be asked to include the questions as part of their regular final exams for fall 2001.

       

      Summary and Data Analysis

      Results For the fall 2001 semester, all of the full-time instructors

      (6) and 70% of the adjuncts (7 out of 10) participated in

      the annual microeconomics assessment. The results for the

      four questions with the spring results on the same questions in parentheses are presented below:

      1. 80.25 % correct (80.3)

      2. 88.15 % correct (84.4)

      3. 85.86 % correct (69.7)

      4. 80.25 % correct (78.3)

      Total = 83.63 (78.2)

      Improvements Actions The economics department appears to be meeting all of our assessment goals in Principles of Microeconomics:

      1. The percentages for each question and the totals

      are meeting our stated goals

      2. The percentages of faculty participating (100% of the full time, 70% of the part-time, and 81.25% of the total faculty) also appear to be meeting our goals.

       

       

    3. GEOGRAPHY

      Geography:

      Statement of Unit Purpose

      Unit Purpose: The purpose of the Geography Department is to provide geography majors with a practical and theoretical basis that will prepare them for transfer and success in a baccalaureate degree granting institution and to provide general education that assists students to think critically and to apply the basic knowledge, skill and principles of geography to everyday life and their chosen careers.

       

      Assessment Plan

      Outcome #: 1

      Outcome Title: Geography

      Intended Outcome: Students who have completed a geography course will possess knowledge of basic concepts of geography and understand how the discipline of geography relates to everyday life.

      Assessment Criteria: Instructors of all geography sections during the fall semester will be asked to distribute the four-question assessment during the last two weeks of the semester. Though all instructors will be asked to administer these questions to their students, the task force hopes that at least one section from each of the four geography courses offered during the semester will be assessed. The task force also hopes that at least 70% of the students participating in the assessment will get each question correct.

      Methodology: Assessments will be administered in the fall semester. Instructors may give this assessment as a stand-alone instrument or include these questions as part of an exam. Instructors have discretion whether to award students points towards their grade for correctly answering the questions. Whether or not students receive credit for the completion of this assessment, instructors will be asked to stress the importance of thoughtful participation in this process. The assessment will be given in-class with no prior review or coaching from instructors.

       

      Summary and Analysis of Data

      Results: In order to assess the quality of its courses, the Geography department administered a four-question assessment to all of its students at the end of the fall semester, 2001. Three instructors (3 out of 5) tested a total of one hundred six (106) students in nine (9 out of 12) sections of geography. Three sections of World/Regional Geography were tested, one section of Introduction to Cultural Geography was tested, two sections of Introduction to Physical Geography were tested, and three sections of Introduction to GIS were tested. Results of the assessment are as follows: Question 1: 29 students (27.4%) responded correctly. Question 2: 90 students (84.9%) responded correctly. Question 3: 83 students (78.3%) responded correctly. Question 4: 79 students (74.5%) responded correctly. The total correct response rate for all four questions combined was 66.2%.

      Improvement Actions: First: 75% of the instructors participated in the assessment. At least one section of each course was tested. This met our stated goal. Second: Only on question one did fewer than 70% of the students respond correctly. The taskforce believes that the students were unable to distinguish between Geography as a discipline and its sub disciplines. The students were able to correctly define whichever sub discipline they were studying (question 2 – 84.9% correct response rate), but were unable to distinguish that sub discipline from Geography as a whole. The task force would like to see at least 70% of the students answer this question correctly. Instructors will be encouraged to make sure that their students have a clear ability to distinguish Geography from its sub disciplines. Also, many students misread Question 3 ("How has your understanding of whichever course changed since the beginning of the semester?"). Many students read the question as "Has your understanding of whichever course changed since the beginning of the semester?" and answered the question with a "yes" or "no". The taskforce recommends that the question be reworded to clarifying the meaning of the question. Instructors will be encouraged to continue to stress the applications of Geography to everyday life.



  8. The meeting ended at 4:00 pm