COASTAL
Institutional Effectiveness Report
Summary
2004-2005
Office of Institutional
Research and Assessment
Christine Mee
Director, Institutional
Research and Assessment
Mary Gunn
Assessment Coordinator
Phone: (843) 349-2091
Fax: (843) 349-2876
Web Address: http://www.coastal.edu/effect
Date: June 30, 2005
INSTITUTIONAL SUMMARY REPORT FOR 2005
1. Library
Resources
Kimbel Library’s Strategic
Planning process identifies benchmarks and methods (e.g., surveys, best
practices, and peer comparisons) by which library services and resources are
assessed. The increase in access to and
use of electronic resources has delivered more library materials to students in
a faster and easier-to-use manner.
Library instruction is improving library literacy, shown by pre- and
post-test results. Annual library
surveys serve as valuable tools to identify areas for improvement in resources
and services.
A timeline of library
collection evaluation by subject area is followed annually and based on the
development of new academic programs, on professional, state, or national
accreditation cycles, and on faculty, student, and librarian interests,
expressed through surveys and other information. The evaluation process involves measuring
Kimbel Library collections against at least three peer libraries. Comparisons include overall enrollment,
number of majors, collection size, and other criteria. Best Practices of the Association of College
and Research Libraries (ACRL) are also applied.
Funding is requested to augment collections in which the amount,
currency, format, or breadth/depth of subject material is lacking. Faculty are involved in decisions regarding
withdrawing materials and selecting new materials.
Journal collections are
evaluated based on consortial buying agreements (PASCAL and Carolina
Consortium) and other electronic purchases that include full-text, thereby
often eliminating the need for paper subscriptions. Kimbel Library conducts a journal use study
each year to determine the level of use by Library patrons which assists in
determining print and microfilm journal cancellations. Based on assessment results, Kimbel Library
added 12,000 full text titles in 12 databases through PASCAL and 1,454 titles
in new subscriptions through Springer, Wiley, Kluwer, and Brill cooperative
purchasing. In addition, through
consortial agreements with PASCAL and Carolina Consortium, collaborative
purchasing of electronic resources has significantly increased student access
to more electronic journals and indexes for assignments, and has resulted in
substantial cost savings compared to Kimbel Library purchasing them
individually.
Kimbel Library surveys
(online and print) are conducted annually to gather information concerning
students’ perceptions about the importance of and satisfaction with library
resources and services. Access to
electronic resources is important and useful to Coastal students. Respondents consistently identify the need
for more materials, in print and electronic formats, although they also
indicate that they are satisfied with the collection meeting their curricular
needs. Based on surveys results,
librarians developed a full-color library brochure for patrons that explains
the Library’s services and resources.
The competence and
helpfulness of library staff in providing services to patrons is consistently
reaffirmed by survey results. The
average number of questions answered between fall 2001 and fall 2004 was 986
per week, extrapolated from statistics kept during the semester at the
information and circulation desks. Over
the past three years, reference questions have averaged between 30,000 and
35,000 per year. Based on these
statistics and survey responses, the Library extended professional staffing
hours at the information desk and the Library’s weekly hours of operation from
87 hours to 91 hours during fall and spring semesters.
Nearly all Library Survey,
Spring 2005, respondents indicated that they checked out library
materials. Circulation statistics show
that student checkouts have increased by 26% since 2004. Students at higher education centers at
Students and faculty
expressed interest, via surveys, in having reserve course materials available
electronically. To facilitate 24/7
access to library reserves without a student ID card, Kimbel Library
collaborated with the
Student surveys indicated
satisfaction with website design and functionality. Given its increased use, the website format
was re-designed to further improve ease of navigation. Online library forms were re-designed for
ease of use. In response to students’
request for more electronic journals (full-text), the library increased the
number of electronic resources available, changed indexes and e-resources from
static HTML to dynamic database-driven web pages, and increased access points
to online databases.
Student satisfaction with
finding library materials they need is due, in part, to interlibrary loan
services that processed nearly 3,000 requests from CCU faculty, staff, alumni,
and students in 2004-2005. A critical
factor in satisfaction is turnaround time from request to receipt of material
which was reduced in 2004 from 8 days to 7 days, on average. A further time saver was the implementation
of the patron delivery function on ILL software that posts interlibrary loan
articles onto the CCU server so that patrons can login with a password and
download articles from their computers.
The addition and upgrading of
computers in the library instruction classroom have improved students’
knowledge and use of online resources and search strategies. Every library instruction session utilizes
laptop technology. Library instructors
administer a pre- and post-test to two-thirds of all English 101 classes to
gauge student retention of library knowledge.
Test results show that students who participate in an instruction
session demonstrate greater recognition of library services, resources and
materials. Based on ACRL Best Practices
for Library Instruction (LI), Kimbel Library continues its efforts to teach
library instruction to as many English 101 and 102 students as possible: 1,224 students in 76 English 101 classes in
2004-2005 and 915 students in 66 English 102 classes in 2004-2005, and to
upper-level courses (774 students in 59 classes in 2004-2005). Librarians developed an online tutorial that
explains how to use Kimbel Library. For
freshmen and for distance learners, this is particularly useful for coursework
and research.
2.
Majors/Concentrations
·
Interim Report for Business
The primary tool for
assessing student knowledge is Educational Testing Service’s (ETS) Business
Major Field Test. It is administered as
part of the capstone Strategic Management course (CBAD 478). Test results of Coastal students are compared
with those of over 80,000 students at more than 400 schools. Coastal results summaries follow.
SUMMARY OF
ETS BUSINESS MAJOR FIELD TEST RESULTS IN PERCENTILES
|
Overall |
|
Overall
Mean Score |
|
|
2003-2004 (Summer, Fall,
Spring) (N=220) |
55th percentile |
151.9 |
153.45 |
|
Summer 2004, 30th
percentile, n=35 Fall 2004, 70th
percentile, n=56 Spring 2005, 65th
percentile, n=160 |
65th percentile, n=251 |
151.6 |
154.7 |
Percentile Scores by Students in their Major Areas
|
|
Summer 2004 |
Fall 2004 |
Spring
2005 |
|
Accounting |
no report (n < 5) |
no report (n < 5) |
95th percentile |
|
Finance |
50th percentile |
95th percentile |
95th percentile |
|
Management |
60th percentile |
75th percentile |
40th percentile |
|
Marketing |
25th percentile |
85th percentile |
95th percentile |
Based on ETS results, two
changes have been implemented to improve the quality of the program. First, the college approved a requirement
that business students must have at least a 2.25 cumulative GPA to continue in
the business program. The process that
supports this requirement identifies all business students with less than a
2.25 GPA, inserts formal letters into their student records, and individually
advises students regarding their academic status. Second, the Management, Marketing, and Law
department faculty have made changes to the management major curriculum that
will increase the performance of management majors. The faculty will continue to monitor test
results and review the curriculum.
An instrument for assessing
student satisfaction is the AACSB/EBI Undergraduate Business Exit Study that is
completed by senior business majors in the last semester prior to graduation.
The main purpose of this survey is to obtain student feedback on their
perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of the
·
Interim Report for Education
The college has focused on
the implementation of a data-driven, outcomes-based comprehensive assessment
and evaluation system for measuring and reporting student/candidate
performance. To accomplish this, the
college has been streamlining and aligning desired performance outcomes for
graduates with institutional, state, and national standards, and developing
assessment rubrics for identified “critical performances” expected of all
program graduates. The assessment and
evaluation system includes an analysis of candidate performance on
nationally-normed tests of general academic performance in PRAXIS I – Reading,
Writing, and Mathematics, and an analysis of candidate knowledge in teaching
specialization areas as measured by nationally-normed exams in PRAXIS II –
Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary (7 areas). Test results are included in Title II and in
this Institutional Effectiveness Report.
In addition, there is an
analysis of candidate performance on eight “critical performances” expected of
all graduates: Ability to plan
instruction and lesson content that is aligned with state curriculum standards;
ability to plan for classroom management; ability to plan assessment tools and
utilize assessment results to plan instruction; ability to implement effective
instruction, classroom management, and assessment strategies; ability to
utilize technology as a teaching and management tool, including the development
of an electronic portfolio; ability to demonstrate expected professional
dispositions; ability to demonstrate oral and written communications skills
expected of professional educators; and ability to assess the impact of their
teaching on PK-12 students through the Teacher Work Sample (TWS).
Student satisfaction with the
education program is ascertained through periodic surveys. Education graduates and employers indicated a
need for more preparation in the areas of classroom management and
assessment. In response, a new course in
classroom management and three new courses in assessment were implemented. A new “Improvement Plan” component of the
assessment and evaluation system focuses on assisting students who experience
difficulty with meeting program requirements.
Faculty help students develop strategies for improving performance and
monitor their success plans.
·
Interim Report for Art Studio
During 2004-2005, the Department of Visual Arts
formally began the preliminary process towards re-accreditation. Several initiatives were begun to address
unfinished items from the initial 2000 Self-Study assessment document. In 2000, visiting National Association of Schools
of Art and Design (NASAD) evaluators had several concerns with the department’s
curriculum. After discussing these
concerns with faculty during department meetings, two documents were written to
guide the assessment process. These and other reports will be submitted for
re-accreditation to NASAD during 2005-2006, with an on-site visit scheduled for
spring 2007.
To address curriculum concerns,
the department embarked on a preliminary process to improve the curriculum by
creating a better alignment between the curriculum and the department’s
mission, and to improve how students progress through the program by developing
new course sequencing for each emphasis to assist student progress through the
sophomore, junior and senior levels. In
addition, due to the open nature of 18 elective credits in studio work for the
B.A. in Studio Art, the degree was not structured to lead students toward the
desired objective of attaining in-depth studio competence in one or more
fields. In response, curriculum
worksheets for each emphasis were developed to clarify which courses can be
used as major, cognate, or elective credit.
To assess student learning
outcomes, the department uses portfolio reviews and open critiques in all
studio courses, and uses the student review process to determine if art majors
are successfully meeting the department’s educational objectives. During the sophomore year, students enroll in
ARTS 297, Sophomore Review. In this
course, students are required to submit portfolios of work completed during the
first two years of their art study to an art faculty committee. In an open critique forum, the committee
reviews portfolios and discusses with students any areas of their artistic
development that the committee identifies for improvement. During their senior year, Art Studio majors
must enroll in ARTS 497, The Artist As A Professional. In this course, students are exposed to the
many possibilities of careers in art and to additional educational
opportunities. Also, students experience
the professional demands of exhibiting their artwork by preparing Senior
Exhibits.
·
Interim Report for Computer Science
In
2003, the Department of Computer Science received accreditation for the
Theoretical Option from the Accreditation Board for Engineering Technology
(ABET) for the full six-year period.
Rarely do institutions applying for first-time accreditation receive the
full six-year accreditation. Assessment
strategies play an important role in the accreditation processes for ABET and
SAC accreditations, and the department uses formal and informal methods to
assess the program.
To
ensure quality, each student is required to receive a "C" or better
to move onto the next course in the computer science curriculum, ensuring that
the student is ready for the next step.
Computer science faculty routinely discuss the computer science curriculum
and the progress of students in program courses, identifying problems and
resolution strategies. Students provide
important curriculum feedback through their participation on dean and faculty
committees. Certain courses within the
curriculum provide opportunities for assessment. CSCI 490, Software Engineering II, requires
students to analyze, design, and implement an information system in a
“real-world” setting. The project is
delivered in a formal presentation to invited guests including the dean,
faculty, other students, and the client.
Project evaluation is done through peer evaluation, the instructor, and
the client including formal acceptance of the project at its delivery. This setting is often employed in group
projects associated with CSCI 425, Database, and CSCI 330, Software Engineering
I, using “real-world” or simulated projects.
Each
semester, student evaluations are required for each course that faculty
teach. The evaluation includes sections
for students to identify strengths and weaknesses in the course. Evaluation results are routed to the college
dean, department chair, and individual faculty member. In the past, each graduating senior met with their
advisor to prepare a graduation application.
During this process, the advisor and graduating senior analyzed the
student’s advisement sheet to ensure the fulfillment of all graduation
requirements, along with providing feedback on the curriculum and the student's
future plans. To continue this student
feedback process, a senior survey was developed and is included in the
graduation application packet. Results
of this senior survey are discussed in department meetings. In spring 2000, the department conducted a
web-based survey of all computer science alumni and had a 20% response
rate. Results were distributed to
faculty for discussion in department meetings.
The department is planning to conduct its next alumni survey in
spring 2006. During the 2000-2001
academic year, the department discussed the possibility of requiring graduating
seniors to take an exit exam. As a
result of these discussions, ETS's Major Field Test in Computer Science
is used to assess student progress and the computer science curriculum. All graduating seniors are tested. For the past three years, students in the
Theoretical Option have ranked above the national averages.
3.
Technologically-skilled Workforce
As a “comprehensive liberal
arts institution offering baccalaureate degrees in traditional liberal arts and
sciences, interdisciplinary studies, and professional schools,”
4. Web Address
of Title II Report: http://www.coastal.edu/effect/title2.html
5. Programs Eligible for Accreditation
The following is a list of
accrediting agencies and areas available to programs offered through
|
Accrediting
Agencies and Areas |
Accreditable
Programs |
Accredited
Programs |
|
Computing Science Accreditation Board |
X |
X |
|
National Association of Schools of Art and Design |
X |
X |
|
National Association of Schools of Theater |
X |
. |
|
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education |
X |
X |
|
American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business |
X |
X |
6. Students in Developmental Education
|
Number of first-time, full-time entering freshmen in
Fall 2003 |
Number of students in Item (1) who were enrolled in
one or more developmental courses in Summer or Fall 2003 |
Number of those students in each developmental
course who successfully completed the appropriate entry level course by the
end of Spring 2005 |
|
1,268 |
0 |
0 |
7. Student Involvement in Sponsored Research
The numbers included here
reflect graduate and upper division undergraduate students who participate in
sponsored research programs. Each higher
education institution that received research dollars generated by external
funding (sponsored research) should report the number of students who benefit
from these dollars. The Commission on
Higher Education will calculate the percentage using headcount enrollment data
from the Fall 2004 IPEDS Enrollment Forms.
|
|
Number of Students Participating in Sponsored
Research |
|
Upper Division Students |
13 |
|
Graduate Students |
2 |
All
public institutions must report student scores on professional examinations
with detailed information over time. The
information reported should include all examinees that completed the specific
exam during the period of April 1, 2004 through March 31, 2005, and should list
the entire name for each exam.
Name of Exam |
Date(s) Administered |
# of Examinees |
# of 1st Time Examinees |
# of 1st Time Examinees who Passed |
% 1st Time Examinees Passing |
|
TEACHING SECTOR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PRAXIS Series II: Principles of Learning & Teaching (K-6) |
4/2004 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
50% |
|
PRAXIS Series II: Principles of Learning
& Teaching (K-6) |
6/2004 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
50% |
|
PRAXIS Series II: Principles of Learning
& Teaching (K-6) |
9/2004 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
100% |
|
PRAXIS Series II: Principles of Learning
& Teaching (K-6) |
11/2004 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0% |
|
Subtotal |
|
8 |
8 |
4 |
50% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PRAXIS Series II: Principles of Learning
& Teaching (7-12) |
4/2004 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
100% |
|
PRAXIS Series II: Principles of Learning
& Teaching (7-12) |
6/2004 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
100% |
|
Subtotal |
|
2 |
2 |
2 |
100% |
|
|
|
|
|