Texas A&M University System Student Learning Outcome–Ethical & Social Responsibility
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.
TAMUK measures ethical decision making and social responsibility through (1) student perceptions as measured by the NSSE, and (2) student performance by program-level SLO measurements.
Assessment 1. NSSE data shows TAMUK in a positive light. Three NSSE prompts deal with the topic of ethical decision making and social responsibility. All measures show improvement from freshmen to seniors for TAMUK and in no case does TAMUK fall below scores of THECB peers. Notably, the one prompt dealing directly with a code of values and ethics shows a significantly higher score for TAMUK seniors than for the University's THECB peers. Assessment 2. In 2013-1014, 26 programs directly measured ethical decision making and social responsibility as a program-level student learning outcome. Some programs employ multiple measures. In about 3/4 of cases, students achieved the expected outcome as prescribed by the program faculty.
Personal responsibility and social responsibility are now core objectives for general education. We expect this emphasis to improve students' ethical reasoning for responsible decision-making. Moreover, individual degree programs continue to emphasize this learning outcome. At least two additional programs have scheduled program-level assessments.
A thorough assessment based on findings from the new general education curriculum is coming soon.