The Texas A&M University System delivers a common set/embraces a common view of important outcomes and is accountable for sustained measurement.
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.
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.
All criteria met and results exceed expectations with little room for improvement.
Most criteria met and results indicate mastery of objective with some room for improvement.
Acceptable number of criteria met and results meet expectations with room for improvement.
Some criteria met and results indicate need for improvement.
Few criteria met; results indicate need for significant improvement or no/insufficient results reported to measure performance of objective.
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.
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
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.
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.