Assessment Report Form by umv48187


Assessment Report Form document sample

More Info
									Date Received

                 Semester Assessment Report Form: Spring and Summer 2007 Data
                      Graduate Certificate in Marriage and Family Therapy

Directions: Please complete a form for each of the programs within your department. This
form was designed to provide a format for assessment reporting and should not be used to limit
the amount of information provided. Each box that is attached to each of the sections is designed
to adjust to varying lengths. If you have any questions, please contact Dr. Bea Babbitt at x51506
or via email at:

1. Program Information:
         Program Master of Science in Marriage and Family Therapy
      Department Marriage and Family Therapy
          College College of Urban Affairs
         Program Stephen Fife
   Semester Data Spring and Summer 2007
           Report Stephen Fife
    Submitted by
     Phone/email 895-3117
  Date Submitted October 31, 2007

2. According to the Assessment Plan for this program, what were the planned assessments to be
conducted during the Spring 2007 and Summer 2007 semesters? You may want to copy and
paste from this program’s assessment plan.

    Which outcomes for            How did you measure theWhat results did you expect? If the
    this program were             outcomes?              students performed well what would
    measured?                                            their performance look like, i.e.
                                                         percentages, means, or comparisons to
                                                         a national standard?
    ___4_outcomes out of a total of __5__ outcomes evaluated this semester.
    2. Demonstrate           a) Grades from              We expected an combined grade point
    theoretical and applied MFT 764 , MFT 765, MFT average of 3.00 (“B”).
    knowledge of marriage 773, MFT 776, MFT 777
    and family therapy
    theories.                b) Course evaluations†      We expected a combined course
                                                         evaluation average of 4.00 (“above
    3.      Demonstrate an a) Grades from                We expected an combined grade point

    COU 764 and other listed courses with strike outs were not offered Spring 2006.
    Based on question regarding an increase of knowledge/skill in the subject area.
 ability to form helping    MFT 701, MFT 773, MFT        average of 3.00 (“B”).
 relationships in           776
 accordance with            b) Course evaluations        We expected a combined course
 principles of sound                                     evaluation average of 4.00 (“above
 counseling practice.                                    average”)
 4.       Demonstrate the   a) Grades from               We expected an combined grade point
 ability to deliver         MFT 701, MFT 771, MFT        average of 3.00 (“B”).
 professional services      773, MFT 776
 within the guidelines of                                We expected a combined course
 the ethical and            b) Course evaluations        evaluation average of 4.00 (“above
 professional practice.                                  average”)
 5.       Demonstrate the   Grades from all courses      We expected an combined grade point
 ability to communicate                                  average of 3.00 (“B”).
 orally and/or in writing
 and interact effectively   b) Course evaluations        We expected a combined course
 with other helping                                      evaluation average of 4.00 (“above
 professionals.                                          average”)

3. Results. What are the results of the planned assessments listed above? Describe below or
attach to the form.

 2. Demonstrate theoretical and       Combined Course Average Grade Point: 3.87
 applied knowledge of marriage
 and family therapy theories.         Combined Course Evaluation Average Score: 4. 26

 3.      Demonstrate an ability to    Combined Course Average Grade Point: 3.89
 form helping relationships in
 accordance with principles of        Combined Course Evaluation Average Score: 4.34
 sound counseling practice.
 4.      Demonstrate the ability      Combined Course Average Grade Point: 3.90
 to deliver professional services
 within the guidelines of the         Combined Course Evaluation Average Score: 4.64
 ethical and professional practice.
 5.      Demonstrate the ability      Combined Course Average Grade Point: 3.84
 to communicate orally and/or in
 writing and interact effectively     Combined Course Evaluation Average Score: 3.99
 with other helping professionals.

4. Conclusions and Discoveries. What conclusions or discoveries were made from these
results? Describe below or attach to the form.

Conclusions and Discoveries
Although the data were incomplete for several of the Educational Outcomes reported on above,
overall, the results are positive and the program is progressing as expected.

      All combined grade point averages were well over the 3.00 expected and required for the
       Master’s level. Combined GPAs ranged in score from 3.775 to 4.00, with course sizes
       ranging from five to fifteen students in each course. It may be the case that students will
       drop a course rather than receive a poor grade, but there was only one withdrawal from all
       courses. Only one student received a grade of C (in MFT 701) out of all the courses.

      Combined scores for Q.6 on the end of semester course evaluations ranged from 3.99 to
       4.64, indicating that students reported increases in knowledge well above average in the
       subject areas. Our benchmark for this measure (which is based on students’ assessment of
       an increase of knowledge/skill in the subject area) is an average score of 4 “above
       average” in the overall measure of course evaluations question #6. There were five
       courses with an evaluation score under 4.00.
        MFT 701 = 3.73
        MFT 765 = 3.81
        MFT 771 = 2.7
        MFT 773.002-spring = 3.86
        MFT 773.001-summer) = 3.83
       MFT 701 (Introduction to MFT) is an introductory course that was comprised of many
       students who may have already taken other MFT or counseling courses. Thus, it may be
       that some of the material was redundant and overlapped with other courses. Also, students
       taking MFT 771 (Ethics in MFT) may have covered some of the material in other classes
       or in practicum. However, all are courses in which students should be gaining new
       knowledge and the theory and practice of marriage and family therapy.

Examining the data for the individual course level shows that there is a great deal of consistency
across all courses in terms of grade point and course evaluations. This is particularly important
for the certificate, where the students already have a graduate education in marriage and family
therapy, counseling, psychology, or a related field.

As the certificate is intended to ensure that the graduate has sufficient theoretical and applied
knowledge to conform to state board licensing requirements, the high marks for learning outcome
#2 are particularly pleasing.

5. Use of Results. What program changes are indicated? How will they be implemented? If
none, describe why changes were not needed.

While the assessment data indicate that the program is progressing well, the results helped
direct our attention to one area (Learning Outcome #5; course evaluation question) in which we
fell short of our benchmark and perhaps are not meeting the educational needs of the students.
In July 2006, our department split (formerly the Department of Marriage, Family, and
Community Counseling), with nearly half of the faculty going into Counseling Education and
the remaining forming the new Department of Marriage and Family Therapy effective in Fall
2006. With the changes to the department, we also refined our master’s degree program so that
it had a concentrated focus on the training of marriage and family therapists. In this refining
process, we incorporated feedback from the previous assessment reports and addressed
weaknesses in the program. As a small department (five full-time faculty), not every course is
offered every term. In fact, some courses are offered only in alternate years. To ensure that
students are able to progress through the program in a timely fashion and learn the material in
the most appropriate sequencing, we have examined and amended the scheduling of courses.
Specifically, we modified the order in which students take courses for the purpose of improving
the quality of student learning and professional development. We also standardized individual
course learning outcomes, to ensure that different instructors in different sections of the same
course will cover the same outcomes.

6. Dissemination of Results, Conclusions, and Discoveries. How and with whom were the
results shared?

We will be sharing our results with UNLV and other communities of interest via
dissemination on the Provost’s Assessment website. We will include a link on the
department webpage that directs interested parties to the assessment plan and results. We
have and will continue to encourage prospective students to examine this data when they
request application materials.

To top