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.
TAMU (incl. TAMUG & TAMUQ)
Students who attended the Abbott Family Leadership Conference (AFLC) took a post-conference survey.
Ninety-six percent (96%) of the MSC AFLC delegates indicated that they were able to recognize an ethical dilemma and apply rational decision-making in order to address it after participating in conference activities. One of the conference activities that focused on ethics was a pre-conference event conducted by Jim Olson who presented 12 ethical dilemmas from his book Fair Play: The Moral Dilemmas of Spying. He presented a scenario, had the students vote if it represented an ethical dilemma, and called on students to explain their response. Other conference activities that helped students recognize ethical dilemmas were from speaker presentations, small group discussions, and reflection sessions.
Future speakers will incorporate more information on ethical decision making and engage students in a discussion about the ethical dilemmas and decision making.
Summary report is available at: http://studentlifestudies.tamu.edu/sites/studentlifestudies.tamu.edu/files/results/full/267-full.pdf
TAMU (incl. TAMUG & TAMUQ)
Upper-level students in Mays Business School write a response to an ethical dilemma as a part of one their upper-level major classes. Class sets of these papers are collected and evaluated for the students' ability to identify issues, define the problem, apply an ethical decision-making framework or principle to the situation, articulate and support a decision, identify/predict short and long term consequences. For 2014-15 the assessment model adjusted slightly such that, for ethics assessment, reported results come from the criteria "situational analysis" and "argumentation."
85% of students scored above at a 2 or better out of 4 on the rubric designed to measure Situational Analysis, and 69% scored a 2 or better out of 4 in Argumentation. While the metric used to collect this data varies slightly from previous years and was not an exact comparison, these data show an improvement with the integration of a decision-making model.
Evaluation of student written responses to an ethics-related case showed that providing a framework for student thinking helped students do better. Core Business Knowledge (CBK) faculty are now being asked to use a decision-making model (developed in collaboration with faculty from each department in Mays) wherever appropriate in their courses. The model was introduced at a CBK faculty retreat on 8/25/15. Next steps will be to work to integrate the decision-making model into multiple CBK courses, so that students see the model repeatedly and have multiple opportunities to practice applying both the framework and the ethical principles embedded in it.
Results indicate that even minimal exposure to a decision-making framework and ethical principles will result in better performance by students on a task requiring them to analyze a situation and choose an ethical course of action.