Student Learning Outcomes

We embrace a common set of student learning outcomes and we are accountable for sustained measurement of these outcomes

Tarleton State University: Ethical & Social Responsibility

System Statement:

The Texas A&M University System delivers a common set/embraces a common view of important outcomes and is accountable for sustained measurement.

Institutional Effectiveness:

For all TAMU System universities, the rationale for assessing student learning outcomes (SLOs) originates primarily from efforts to maintain institutional effectiveness, which is defined as a process of identifying outcomes, assessing the extent to which they are achieved, and providing evidence of improvement based on their analysis.

Ethical & Social Responsibility Learning Outcome:

Upon completion of their degree program, students will be able to demonstrate an understanding of and use ethical reasoning for responsible personal and professional decision-making in a culturally and ethnically diverse world.

Generic Descriptions of Campus Assessment Results:

EXEMPLARY
All criteria met and results exceed expectations with little room for improvement.

PROFICIENT
Most criteria met and results indicate mastery of objective with some room for improvement.

SUFFICIENT
Acceptable number of criteria met and results meet expectations with room for improvement.

EMERGING
Some criteria met and results indicate need for improvement.

INSUFFICIENT
Few criteria met; results indicate need for significant improvement or no/insufficient results reported to measure performance of objective.

UNIVERSITY

Tarleton

ASSESSMENT

Assessment of Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility was done on a program by program basis using a combination of embedded objective questions, written assignments, presentations internship evaluations, portfolios, and other direct measures of student work. Subjective assessment methods were evaluated by two or more faculty members using program developed standardized rubrics or, in the case of internship reports, by a qualified outside evaluator.


Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility is also assessed in TSU’s General Education courses as part of TSU's General Education academic assessment processes.


Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility is also assessed indirectly using a national standardized survey instrument: the National Survey of Student Engagement.

RESULTS: 2018

This outcome was measured in the following three subareas of TSU's Undergraduate Learning Outcomes:

2.2.1 UG - Practice Environmental Stewardship

84% of academic program assessments of subarea 2.2.1 met their targets.


2.2.3 UG - Practice Ethical Decision Making

88% of academic program assessments of subarea 2.2.3 met their targets.


2.2.4 UG - Demonstrate Leadership Qualities

85% of academic program assessments of subarea 2.2.4 met their targets.



Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility is also assessed in TSU’s core courses as part of TSU’s General Education academic assessment process through the following student learning outcome:

1.4.1 GE – Students will demonstrate an understanding of ethical standards as applied to decision making.
100% of academic core course assessments of subarea 1.4.1 met their targets.



The 2017 administration of the National Survey of Student Engagement included the question how often does the student's experience with the institution "develop or clarify a personal code of values or ethics". Responses were gathered based on a four point scale ranging from “1 Never” to “4 Very Often”

In 2017 the mean for first year students was 2.6. For seniors the mean was 2.7.

ANALYSIS

For subarea 2.2.1, four programs have an assessment measure directly related to this area and all four reported data for their measures. This is an increase over the one program which had assessment measures related to this area in 2015.


For subarea 2.2.3 thirteen programs reported assessment data in 2014-15 and twenty-two programs overall have assessment measures related to this area. This is an increase over the sixteen programs which had assessment measures related to this area in 2015.


For subarea 2.2.4, eight programs have assessment measures directly related to this area and all eight reported data for their measures. This is an increase over the five program which had assessment measures related to this area in 2015.


The assessment results show steady success over time in all the three subareas. The third subarea shows a significant increase over previous years. A comparison of the currently reported assessment data to the data last reported demonstrates some areas of improvement:

2.2.1:
84% in 2017-2018
100% in 2014-2015

2.2.3:
88% in 2017-2018
83% in 2014-2015

2.2.4:
85% in 2017-2018
20% in 2014-2015


The overall data shows that the core course assessment results are consistent with the program results.

For subarea 1.4.1, eight core courses have assessment measures directly related to this area and all eight reported data for their measures. In 2015 this association was just being established and no data was reported.


The results from the National Survey of Student Engagement instrument for the question how often does the student's experience with the institution "develop or clarify a personal code of values or ethics show a fairly consistent trend.

In 2017 the combined mean for the question was 2.6. In 2015 it was 2.8.

This indicates there is still room for improvement in this area. This is particularly true as the results do not indicate a significant improvement between first year students and seniors. In 2017 the mean for first year students was 2.6. For seniors the mean was 2.7. In 2015 the mean for both seniors and first year students was 2.8.


Taken collectively, all of these findings would indicate that this is an Emerging area for Tarleton. Our efforts to increase the number of programs and courses that are assessing and developing student learning in these areas is reflected in the widespread increases in the number of programs with associated measures in these areas.

ACTION

1) Disseminate and discuss data results with faculty and administration;

2.) Provide ongoing faculty development for implementation and assessment of Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility in both academic programs and student activity experiences;

3.) Monitor the development and availability of courses and experiences to ensure students have opportunities to build their Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility knowledge, values, and skills; and

4.) Monitor assessment reporting cycles to ensure that all academic programs and student activity programs assessing Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility are reporting data and linking their findings to the related TSU Undergraduate Learning Outcomes and encourage programs to explore opportunities to more centrally embed these student learning outcomes into their curriculum.

5) Continue to encourage program and core course faculty to examine the role that Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility has in their curriculum and to encourage them, where appropriate, to formally assess these learning outcomes

6) We are working to develop and embedded student learning assessment of Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility into our key co-curricular activities. This will expand our ability to use assessment data to make effective changes in our student learning environments.

UNIVERSITY

TSU

ASSESSMENT

Assessment of Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility was done on a program by program basis using a combination of embedded objective questions, written assignments, presentations, internship evaluations, portfolios, and other direct measures of student work. Subjective assessment methods were evaluated by two or more faculty members using program developed standardized rubrics or, in the case of internship reports, by a qualified outside evaluator.

Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility is also assessed in Tarleton’s General Education courses as part of Tarleton's General Education academic assessment processes.

Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility is also assessed indirectly using a national standardized survey instrument: the National Survey of Student Engagement.

RESULTS: 2015

This outcome was measured in the following three subareas of Tarleton's Undergraduate Learning Outcomes:

2.2.1 UG - Practice Environmental Stewardship
100% of academic program assessments of subarea 2.2.1 met their targets.

2.2.3 UG - Practice Ethical Decision Making
83% of academic program assessments of subarea 2.2.3 met their targets.

2.2.4 UG - Demonstrate Leadership Qualities
20% of academic program assessments of subarea 2.2.4 met their targets.

Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility is also assessed in core courses as part of Tarleton’s General Education academic assessment process through the following student learning outcome:
“Personal Responsibility - Students will connect choices, actions, and consequences in ethical decision-making.”
This is a new student learning outcome and we are in the process of gathering our first complete cycle of baseline data.

Recent administrations of the National Survey of Student Engagement included a question referencing how often the student's experience with the institution helped to "develop or clarify a personal code of values or ethics". This question is assessed on a four-point scale with 4 = very much, and 1 = very little. Results of the biennial assessment are displayed below.

Mean values are displayed as combined, FTIC, and Senior level students.
2015: 2.80 2.80 2.80
2013: 2.69 2.51 2.80
2011: 2.82 2.81 2.88
2009: 2.68 2.69 2.68
2007: 2.72 2.73 2.71

ANALYSIS

The overall data shows that a moderate number of programs are reporting assessment data in this area. For the key 2.2.3 subarea of "practice ethical decision making, " 13 programs reported assessment data in 2014-15 and 16 programs overall have assessment measures related to this area. The numbers are smaller for the two related subareas (2.2.1 "practice environmental stewardship" and 2.2.4 "demonstrate leadership qualities"). For subarea 2.2.1, only one program has an assessment measure directly related to this area. This program did report data in 2014-15. For subarea 2.2.4, five programs have assessment measures related to this area and three reported findings in 2014-15.

The assessment results show steady success over time in two of the three subareas. The third subarea shows a decline. However, two of the three subareas suffer from extremely small sample sizes (n is the number of measures with reported data in a given year as some programs have reported more than one measure). Also, many programs met their targets on one campus location but not all campus locations. For the purposes of this data, these measures were coded as not meeting their targets even though they met the targets on some campus locations. The percentage of academic program assessment that met their targets for the two cycles are:

2.2.1: 100% in 2014-2015 (n=2) and 100% in 2013-2014 (n=2)
2.2.3: 83% in 2014-2015 (n=18) and 72% in 2013-2014 (n=19)
2.2.4: 20% in 2014-2015 (n=5) and 73% in 2013-2014 (n=11)

The results from the National Survey of Student Engagement instrument for the question how often does the student's experience with the institution "develop or clarify a personal code of values or ethics" show a relatively flat combined trend line over the period, with a high of 2.82 and a low of 2.68. There has been inconsistent growth between the FTIC and the seniors, with increases shown in 2011 and 2013. Clearly, this is an area of needed improvement.

Taken collectively, all of these findings would indicate that this is an Emerging area for Tarleton.

ACTION

1) Disseminate and discuss data results with faculty and administration;

2.) Provide ongoing faculty development for implementation and assessment of Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility in both academic programs and student activity experiences;

3.) Monitor the development and availability of courses and experiences to ensure students have opportunities to build their Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility knowledge, values, and skills; and

4.) Monitor assessment reporting cycles to ensure that all academic programs and student activity programs assessing Ethical Decision Making and Social Responsibility are reporting data and linking their findings to the related Tarleton Undergraduate Learning Outcomes

5.) Encourage programs to explore opportunities to more centrally embedded these student learning outcomes into their curriculum.

Information by System Members
Texas A&M University
Prairie View A&M University
Tarleton State University
Texas A&M International University
Texas A&M University Corpus Christi
Texas A&M University Kingsville
West Texas A&M University
Texas A&M University Commerce
Texas A&M University Texarkana
Texas A&M University Central Texas
Texas A&M University San Antonio
Skip to toolbar