SLO Sharing via Email Communication
(the following are the SLO-Sharing emails sent through the PIO office during 2010)
January 26, 2010
An assessment sharing moment:
Marilyn Frisch and her Child Development colleagues have been kind enough to share the rubric with which they will be assessing the student learning outcomes for Child Development 37B.  Marilyn would like to give credit to the Speech department for sharing their rubric during duty day.  When the Child Development department met the day after duty day, they found they could use the framework of the Speech rubric, plug-in their criteria, and tweak to any of their courses.  “Having a sample is so helpful,” Marilyn commented.  She hopes their department’s example will be helpful to others as well.  

Instructor Name: __________________________                         Semester: Spring 2010___ 
Course: CHDEV 37B        Schedule # _____________          Students Enrolled: ______
Student Learning Outcomes:
•	Upon completion of this course, students will be able to:
1.	Design, implement and evaluate an in-depth investigation with children using the project approach.
2.	Use multiple forms of documentation to illustrate the children’s process of investigation throughout project.
3.	Assess the needs of individual children to create appropriate strategies to support full inclusion.

For each assignment a value of 1-10 is given, as to the effectiveness of the student in each of these areas:
•	Growing A Project – SLO #1
•	Learning Encounter – SLO #1
•	Project Summary – SLO #1
•	Documentation  – SLO #2
•	Presentation – SLO #2
•	Full Inclusion Action Plan – SLO #3

0= No assignment turned in
1-2 = Skills Not Applied (below 59%)
3-4 = Below Basic Application of Skills (60-69%)
5-6 = Basic Application (70-79%)
7-8 = Skills Applied Somewhat Successfully (80-89%)
9-10= Proficiently Completed Skills (90-100%)

	Growing a Project 	Learning Encounters	Project Summary	Documentation 	Presentation	Full Inclusion Plan	
1							
2							
3							
4							
5							
6							
7							
8							
9							
10							
11							
12							
13							
14							
15							
16							
17							
18							
19							
20							

February 1, 2010
Last week the Child Development program shared their SLO assessment strategy.  Marilyn Frisch commented that the idea came from the Speech program.  Here is what Anna Martinez says about her program’s assessment plan and rubric:
Here is the rubric we have used for Speech 1.  What we have done (are doing) is rework the outcomes for each of our courses so that 1) each class that meets the Oral Communication requirement for GE has a set 3-4 outcomes that are the same, then 2) we add one specific-to-that-class outcome.  We then tweak the form so that it measures the specific-to-that-class outcome.  We are measuring the flagship assignment in each course (usually the last speech or project that is the "final" for the course).
For the 2-3 courses that do not meet the Oral Comm requirement, we are working on unique measurements for those.  We haven't quite gotten that far yet. 
Hope that helps.
Anna

February, 24, 2010
All,
David Meier has been kind enough to share with us his pre-test evaluations for ECON 1A and ECON 1B.  David says, “ I created an Entrance Appraisal for my Econ 1A and 1B courses based on the SLO's for each course.  The SLO's are "global" concepts that are incorporated into subject groupings taught throughout the semester.  My thought is to use exams, group projects, papers, etc., to measure student progress as we move through the semester.”  
This could prove additionally useful as students move through a sequence of courses, in this case from ECON 1A to ECON 1B.
Michelle Johnson, Reedley College Institutional Researcher, has these thoughts on the value of pre-test/post-test assessment:
Pre-test Post-test assessments are often the preferred method to determine if learning (degree of change) has taken place after being taught (treatment) in some area. In education, specifically in David Meier’s Econ classes, he proposes a pre-test that will determine if a student has prior knowledge of complex ideas such as differing economic theories. Once scored, these will become the baseline for each student. After the students have been given the treatment (classes, homework, readings, discussions, or a combination of these) Mr. Meier will ask the students to once again answer the same questions. In scoring the post-test, the difference will indicate the degree of learning (change) that has taken place due to the classes. Indeed, this can be a beneficial tool in education. 

There are a couple of things to keep in mind while pre-test post-testing students. 
1.	The pre and post tests must be matched to the same students. 
2.	The pre-test may not always be a true measure of knowledge and in some cases may be good guessing. In the example Meier example, this is less likely as it is a written response as opposed to multiple guess. 
3.	The very act of the pre-test itself may lead some students to act or behave differently thereby confounding the results. For instance, they may be more motivated to study because of the pre-test itself. 

Pre-test and post-test designs have some problems and care should be taken to make sure that what is intended to be measured is being measured with as few of these confounding problems as possible. When done so, these can be powerful measures and yield interesting and insightful results.
Thank you David and Michelle.

March 16, 2010
All,
I recently sat in on an English 252 essay norming session.  In the brief time (this only took an hour), the faculty involved gained insight into the main difficulty students have in their writing at this level (the development of ideas), shared teaching and assignment-writing strategies, and shared techniques for improving overall student performance.  An added benefit is that this dialogue moved across departments.  Emily Berg arranged the session and had this to say:
Since the fall semester of 2009, all full-time and adjunct instructors of English 252 have been encouraged to participate in giving students a common midterm, a timed in-class essay.  The instructors have created a single question that each student in the English 252 classes responds to in two fifty-minute sessions.  After giving the midterm, instructors meet together, bringing in copies of a few of their students’ essays to grade them together, using a rubric they had created previously for all English 252 essays.    This semester all English 252 instructors, ESL instructors, the learning specialist, and all English instructors were invited to attend the norming session.  After the norming session, English 252 instructors divide up their own students’ work and grade each others’ papers.  The instructors will begin tracking the students’ success on these essays and assessing which skills the students need improvement on.  

Below is the SLO Report Form the English 252 instructors decided to use.  Additional documents such as the English 252 essay grading rubric, guidelines for administering the exam, and the writing prompt are available from Eileen Apperson or Emily Berg. 
English 252: Student Learning Outcomes
•	Please put your class section number here          ________
•	The section number will be removed from the results page. It is used only to ensure that all classes are reported. Data is not tracked back to individual classes or instructors. 

A summary of our student learning outcomes (SLO)
1.	Write a paper of at least 500 words with an introduction, body of at least one paragraph, and a conclusion 
2.	Plan and revise with guidance, employing all stages of the writing process when necessary. 
3.	Write an in-class paper with a beginning, middle, and end that communicates a clear idea.

PROCESS: Each instructor will give one in-class essay for tracking the student learning outcomes, and the results of these papers will be reported as required:
An in-class timed essay with an introduction, at least 3 body paragraphs, and a conclusion in which the students employ all stages of the writing process.  The essay should be about 500 words.  
Each instructor is highly encouraged to use the essay prompt from the English 252 common midterm/norming, although the specific topics for this essay are left to the discretion of the instructor.  Instructors should give one 50 minute class session to brainstorm and outline and one 50 minute class session to write the paper.  Even if the class session is two hours in length, the instructor should give the test over two separate days so students have time to think about the essay before turning it in.  
The in-class essay should be administered in weeks 9 or 10 (at Reedley College prior to the norming session). Reporting is due prior to week 14. 
Guidelines for evaluating the in-class essay:
•	Use the English 252 rubric. Rubrics are attached to this form, and are available on the RC English department Blackboard site. 

English 252 SLO report form        # of students enrolled at census (end of week 3) _______
In-class timed essay 
•	# of students who passed (grade C or better)     _______
•	# of students who failed (grade D or F)                  _______
•	# of students who did not attempt                          _______
•	Of those, how many are NOT attending?              _______

What problems did you notice were most prevalent in your students’ papers? Please rank the top 5 problem areas: 1 = most prevalent or serious problem, etc.
____  Missing or unclear thesis statement
____  Missing or unclear topic sentences
____  Weak supporting details which are poorly developed or repetitive
____  Weak or undefined introduction
____  Weak or undefined body paragraphs
____  Weak or undefined conclusion
____  Unorganized ideas
____  Few or improperly used transitions
____  Sentences are grammatically incorrect—many spelling, punctuation, or mechanical errors (run-ons, comma splices, or fragments)
____  Few attempts made to vary sentence structure
____  Word choice errors

Eileen Apperson

May 5, 2010
Thank you to the Spanish program for sharing their following assessment experiences.    We hope you find it informative and useful to your own programs.
To all,
The Language Programs at Reedley College and the North Centers began their Student Learning Outcome Assessment in the Spring 2008 semester (with the Fall 2007 semester as a pilot semester).  As of now, the programs have conducted assessments and gathered data of thirteen different Student Learning Outcomes within five of its courses (Spanish 1, 2, 3NS & 4NS, and French 1).  
REWRITING SLOs
From the beginning of the assessments, the Language faculty was aware of the need to rewrite some of the Student Learning Outcomes in the various Credit Course Outlines, with the goal of a more concrete and practical assessment per outcome in mind.  As an example, SLO B in the Spanish 1 Credit Course Outlines currently states:  
Upon completion of this course, students will be able to:

choose, evaluate and apply the correct usage of basic grammatical structures to express ideas, describe present events, ask simple questions, and respond, both orally and in writing, to simple questions.
Oral performance and writing were mentioned in the same Student Learning Outcome.  The Language faculty decided to simplify and separate these skills, keeping in mind the goal of student learning outcome assessment and reporting.  Instead, two new proposed outcomes, with such skills listed separate, will soon be presented to curriculum.  These are:
Upon completion of this course, students will be able to:

orally produce comprehensible sentences and phrases in Spanish to respond appropriately to questions, initiate and sustain simple conversations, or describe people, places and activities within the contexts covered in classroom instruction.
construct simple sentences and compose basic paragraphs applying correct usage of basic grammatical structures to express ideas within the contexts covered in classroom instruction.

EXAMPLES OF RUBRICS USED IN SPANISH 1
Evaluating Listening Comprehension.  Explanation:
Each chapter test includes five orally transmitted questions to which students must respond in writing.  Instructors copy and retain the results from tests 2 and 4 for analysis and to retain as evidence.
Each question is worth 2 points.  The rubric follows:

No response                         0 points

Illogical response that          0 points
does not correspond to 
the question

Logical response but used    1 point
incomplete sentence

Logical response with           1.5 points
some error in spelling or 
punctuation

Correct response                   2 points

Evaluating Reading Comprehension.  Example.  
Roberto Durán, estudiante de medicina
¡Hola! Me llamo Roberto.  Soy de Quito, Ecuador.  Tengo diecinueve años y soy estudiante de medicina en la Universidad de Quito.  Esta universidad es muy grande.  Hay más de veinte mil estudiantes.  Tengo muchas clases difíciles.  Primero tengo una clase de biología a las 9:00 de la mañana, y después una clase de química a las 10:00.  Mi clase favorita es la de química porque el profesor explica todo muy bien y es muy inteligente y divertido.  Después de la clase de química voy a la cafetería.  A mediodía tengo mi última clase, la de física.  Es una clase muy aburrida porque el profesor no es entusiasta.  Creo que a él  no le gusta la física.  
Tengo poco tiempo libre durante la semana.  Tomo dos autobuses para llegar a la universidad porque está muy lejos de mi casa.  Estudio mucho durante la semana pero los fines de semana me gusta descansar y ver una película.  También me gusta pasear por el centro con mis amigos y practicar mi deporte favorito, el tenis.  Cuando hace buen tiempo prefiero nadar en la piscina de la universidad.  
Escoja la respuesta más lógica.
___ 1.  ¿Qué edad tiene Roberto?
                a.  15                      b.  27                      c.  29                      d.  19
___ 2.     ¿Cuándo asiste Roberto a sus primeras dos clases?
                a.  Antes de mediodía                                                         c.  Asiste a biología, física, química
                b.  Por la tarde                                                                      d.  Prefiere la clase de química
___ 3.  ¿Por qué no es buena la clase de física? 
                a.  Roberto no tiene clase de física                                   c.  Porque el profesor es estupendo
                b.  Porque es una clase muy difícil                                   d.  La clase es muy aburrida
___ 4.  ¿Cuántos estudiantes hay en la universidad de Quito?
                a. 15.000               b.  Más de 13.000                                c.  18.000                              d.  Más de 20.000
___ 5.  ¿Qué hace Roberto durante su tiempo libre? 
a.	No tiene tiempo libre
b.	Le gusta descansar, ir al cine, pasear, jugar al tenis y nadar 
c.	Estudia mucho los siete días de la semana
d.	Va a la cafetería o ve un programa de televisión

Evaluating Cultural Knowledge.  Example.
Lección 4   México 
¿Cierto o falso? Indicate whether these items are cierto or falso. 
___ 1. Los incas dominaron (dominated) en México del siglo (century) XIV al XVI. 
___ 2. Frida Kahlo era (was) la esposa de Octavio Paz.
___ 3. La Ciudad de México está situada en Tenochtitlán, la capital de la cultura azteca.
___ 4. El D.F. es otro (another) nombre para la Ciudad de México.
___ 5. México es el mayor productor de esmeraldas (emeralds) del mundo.
Goal:  70% of the students will receive 70% or better
FORMER AND NEW SLOs FOR SPANISH 1
Attempting to include all knowledge and information about Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment, the Language faculty has rewritten all beginning level language outcomes.  See example below:
Currently the Spanish 1 Credit Course Outline states:
II.  COURSE OUTCOMES:
(Specify the learning skills the student demonstrates through completing the course and link critical thinking skills to specific course content and objectives.)

Upon completion of this course, students will be able to:

A.     engage in conversation, applying “survival skill” Spanish outside of the classroom in a variety of  contexts within the limits of personal language experience.  These contexts include meeting people; describing oneself; talking about family, friends, pastimes and habits; and making plans.         
B.     choose, evaluate and apply the correct usage of basic grammatical structures to express ideas, describe present events, ask simple questions, and respond, both orally and in writing, to simple questions. 
C.     read and understand specific pieces of information from authentic, graphically-represented text such as ads, short magazine or newspaper articles, and short stories.
D.   meet and get to know native speakers of Spanish through face-to-face contact, personal correspondence, the Internet, or travel.

E.  have a greater understanding and appreciation of the diversity of Hispanic cultures and the products of these cultures.

New Spanish 1 Student Learning Outcomes to be proposed (Fall 2010) include:
Listening comprehension:
A.	Recognize and understand basic spoken Spanish within the limited range of contexts covered in classroom instruction.  
Speaking:
B.	Orally produce comprehensible sentences and phrases in Spanish to respond appropriately to questions, initiate and sustain simple conversations, or describe people, places and activities within the contexts covered in classroom instruction.
Reading:
C.	Read, identify and comprehend specific pieces of information from selected short readings and authentic, graphically-represented text such as ads or short magazine articles.
Writing:
D.	Construct simple sentences and compose basic paragraphs applying correct usage of basic grammatical structures to express ideas within the contexts covered in classroom instruction.
Culture: 
E.	Show a greater understanding and appreciation of the diversity of Hispanic cultures and the products of these cultures.

INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN TO SPANISH ADJUNCT FACULTY AT THE NORTH CENTERS AND REEDLEY COLLEGE (SPRING 2008)  
10 de enero de 2008
Estimados/as colegas,
Durantes los próximos semestres se llevará a cabo un auto estudio del departamento de español de Reedley College y de los Centros Norteños.  Este proceso es conocido como Program Review.  Como parte de este auto estudio, tenemos que evaluar y medir si nuestros estudiantes están logrando los SLO (Student Learning Outcomes) de la clase.

En esta ocasión hemos elegido la clase de Español 1 para realizar el auto estudio.  Al dorso de esta hoja encontrarán una lista de preguntas para cada capítulo del texto Arriba.  Les pedimos que durante el examen de cada capítulo, administren estas preguntas como parte de la sección oral de dichos exámenes.  Sin embargo, como parte del auto estudio, solamente evaluaremos los capítulos 2 y 4.  Es muy importante que todo evaluemos de la siguiente forma:
1.	Lean la pregunta en voz alta a los estudiantes un máximo de dos veces solamente.  No tengan la pregunta escrita en el examen.
2.	Den suficiente tiempo para que los estudiantes contesten la primera pregunta y continúen con la siguiente.
3.	Al evaluar las respuestas escritas, hagan favor de seguir la siguiente rúbrica:

Ninguna respuesta	0 puntos	
Respuesta ilógica que no corresponde a la pregunta	
0 puntos	
Respuesta lógica pero oración incompleta	
1 punto	
Falta de ortografía o puntuación 	1.5 puntos	
Respuesta completa y correcta	2 puntos	

** Cada respuesta vale un máximo de 2 puntos. 
4.	Después de calificar las respuestas e indicar el total de puntos, hagan favor de sacar una fotocopia de las respuestas de los estudiantes (una por cada estudiante/ examen) y entréguenlas a una de nosotras.  Las respuestas nos ayudarán a realizar nuestro análisis de auto estudio.
5.	Recuerden las preguntas se deben administrar en todos los capítulos; sin embargo, solo evaluaremos como grupo los capítulos 2 y 4.

Gracias de antemano por su cooperación y no duden en contactarnos en caso de preguntas.
We hope this information is of use to your department / program.  
North Centers and Reedley College Language Programs

November 2, 2010
History instructor, Randy Genera, presented at the recent Division A Assessment Summit on October 15.  The following is an excerpt from his presentation.  This excerpt deals specifically with communication with part-time instructors regarding the History program’s SLO process.  Randy’s full power point presentation may be found on the SLO/Assessment Blackboard site under the Information tab and within the Division Summit folder.  Thank you, Randy!    

Dear Colleagues:
The following paragraphs describe the process used by the Reedley College and North Centers History Program to move toward the implementation of Student Learning Outcome assessment in our courses.  We will use our History 11 course, US History to 1877, as an example to illustrate our approach to the SLO assessment issue.
1. The three full-time History instructors met for a flex day in Spring 2010 to rewrite the SLOs for   History  11.
•	Our decision was to reduce the number of SLOs to five broad outcomes.  
•	We further decided to compose two multiple-choice assessment questions for each of the SLOs; this would yield a ten-question assessment instrument we decided to administer to students in  “pre-semester” and “post-semester” quizzes to identify their knowledge on the questions before and after one semester of instruction.
•	We also decided to apply the same kind of approach (five SLOs and a ten-question instrument) for all of the History courses in our curriculum.

2. To inform our part-time instructors of their SLO assessment responsibilities, we decided to communicate the rationale and process to them via an email sent during the summer before fall semester 2010.  Below is an extended excerpt from that email.  Bear in mind that the language shown here represents our particular take on the subject of SLOs, an approach that is not necessarily acceptable to all parties on our various campuses.   In any case, the memo reads as follows: 
“Dear History Colleagues Assigned to Teach History 11 in Fall Semester 2010:
Please excuse me for intruding into your summers, but fall semester is rapidly approaching, and now is as good a time as any to spell out some specific tasks I must ask each one of you to perform during the Fall 2010 semester.  I apologize in advance for the length of this email; there is quite a bit to explain, and I ask you to read it with care.

The tasks I will discuss revolve around the issue of Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and assessing student performance with respects to specific SLOs.  Not everyone who will receive this email is familiar with the concepts of SLOs, so I will provide a brief explanation.  
Every History course in the Reedley College curriculum (and all Reedley College courses) has an official course outline that spells out the elements of the course (content, assignments, sample textbook titles, etc).  This is the document that is reviewed by other institutions to which our students transfer.  When a four-year institution approves our course outline, they are acknowledging that the course has enough rigor and content quality for 3 units of transferable credit.

Each course outline contains a section entitled Student Learning Outcomes where some specific learning goals for the course are enumerated.  In the past five to ten years, a trend has swept across the field of higher education in the United States that places a distinct emphasis on Student Learning Outcomes and measuring whether or not students achieve these outcomes (that is, spelling out what students should learn in a given course as well as assessing how well they are learning the desired material). The issue of SLOs and SLO assessment is now firmly rooted nationally for community colleges and many four-year institutions. Here in California, the very accreditation of a community college now depends on that college’s progress in implementing SLOs for all courses as well as establishing an ongoing process for assessing student performance on SLOs.  
Reedley College is about to undergo the regular five-year cycle for renewing its accreditation with the appropriate state-level authorities.  We must have SLOs and assessment procedures in place and functioning for all courses by 2012 at the latest. Failure to do so will jeopardize the college’s accreditation, and Reedley College simply cannot function without full accreditation.
The important information I have for you now is that we have developed some new Student Learning Outcomes and assessment guidelines for History 11. The new SLOs have been formally approved by the college curriculum committee and are now part of the official course outlines. Our plan is to implement and assess student performance on these SLOs in Fall 2010, and then continue to conduct assessments in Fall Semester only for a couple of years.  My objective here is to make this process as clear, simple, and straightforward as possible for all of you.  Here comes my explanation of the process, in the most succinct terms I can muster. My remarks in this email will concentrate on History 11.
New Student Learning Outcomes for History 11, US History to 1877
The new SLOs for History 11 now consist of five items, reduced from ten in the previous course outline. The SLO section of the History 11 course outline now reads as follows:
 “Upon completion of this course, students will be able to:
A. Identify the origins of America’s distinctive political traditions and governmental institutions.
B. Analyze the fundamental changes in the American economy from pre-industrial times to the late 1800s.
C. Identify the key trends and movements in American cultural, social, and intellectual life through 1877.
D. Analyze the causes and consequences of America’s foreign policy, wars, and its geographical     expansion through 1877.
E. Identify the contributions and changing roles of gender and ethnic groups in American history to 1877.

If you are slated to teach History 11 in fall semester, you need to include these SLOs somewhere in your syllabus.   I have attached my own syllabus for History 11 to illustrate how I have incorporated the SLOs into my document.
The SLO Assessment Process for History 11

To comply with the SLO assessment requirement, we have developed two multiple-choice questions for each History 11 Student Learning Outcome. Here are the SLOs shown again, now with the accompanying assessment questions.

NOTE: AT THIS POINT IN THE EMAIL, I LISTED THE FIVE NEW STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES FOR HISTORY 11, WITH THE TWO SLO ASSESSMENT QUESTIONS SHOWN FOR EACH SLO.

My Suggestion for Completing the Assessment Process

The ten multiple-choice questions shown above need to be administered to students in our History 11 classes this coming semester, and we need to keep an account of how many students completed the questions, how many answered correctly, etc. Such data needs to be turned into me when it is collected.
Here is my strongest advice to you about how to administer these questions as efficiently and easily as possible. 
a.	Present the ten questions as a one-page quiz to students during the very first or second class session.  Students will need an 815 Scantron (QUIZSTRIP) for this purpose.  The will be a five point extra credit quiz (one-half point per question), a pre-semester quiz to establish a baseline of what the students know regarding the course SLOs.  Correct the quizzes, and run a scantron analysis form to generate an overall count of questions answered correctly; give the students the appropriate extra credit points, tally the results, and store the student scantrons somewhere safe.  Give them to me, if that is convenient.    From this “pre-semester quiz,” we will have some concrete data concerning the level of student knowledge on the SLOs before instruction began.

b.	Wait until the end of the semester.  During your final exam session, administer your final exam, but include with it the very same ten-question SLO quiz you gave at the beginning of the semester.  Again, value it at five extra credit points.  You could also do this on the last day of instruction.  Correct the scantrons and run a scantron analysis form.  Keep the scantrons, and send all documents (pre-semester and end of semester) to me.  With this, you have completed the SLO assessment process for the semester.

c.	I will collect the data from my own classes and all other Reedley History 11 instructors and compile a report on the data.  At some point the results will be disseminated to all instructors for review and consideration.  If students show considerable improvement from the pre-semester quiz to the end of the semester, that will be a good sign.  If there is marginal improvement, we may need to consider different ways to present our material.

As for me, I plan to stick to the pre and post quiz model. I think the pre and post quiz approach will prove relatively easy to administer while providing some measure of student learning over the course of the semester.  You may not agree with this approach and decide to submit the questions to your students in some other way, but we all need to complete the assessment process and maintain records on student performance. Let me say that I regret to impose this fairly arbitrary process on you; I see it as an infringement on academic freedom. However, that battle was fought and decided sometime ago.  Now the college’s accreditation depends on our complying with the SLO assessment process in some acceptable way.  My colleagues and I feel this process will do the trick.  
Please let me know as soon as possible if these instructions make sense to you and if you feel that you will be able to carry out the assessment process for your History 11 class as described above.  If you have any questions or doubts about the matter, don’t hesitate to express them. In the meantime, thank you for your cooperation and good efforts on behalf of Reedley College.
Sincerely, etc.

3.         This email, apparently, reached all the necessary parties and had the desired impact. At this point, all History instructors appeared to have completed the “pre-semester” quiz 
process. We will remind all hands toward the end of the semester that the “post-semester” quiz must be administered.  We have provided each instructor with a uniform data reporting form to facilitate the compilation of results.
This, in sum, represents the History Program’s approach to SLO assessment. We will soon learn if the process proved feasible for all instructors, and we will also find out of the process yields meaningful data. Our objective is to have all of our History courses under SLO/PLO/GELO assessment by Fall 2011. If you have any questions regarding the matters discussed above, please contact us.

November 16, 2010
Many of you in instructional programs have revised your course SLOs into more meaningful and measurable statements.  Now, as program learning outcomes are being looked at more closely, those from both the instructional and non-instructional areas are re-thinking their PLOs.  This revision of outcomes should be viewed as a positive step in the assessment process.  Pat Jackson, of the Health Services Program, has described the evolution of the Health Services Program Learning Outcomes below.  Thank you, Pat, for sharing your experience.  
Note: If you do revise your PLOs, please send Eileen Apperson your new and improved statements.
From Pat Jackson:
When I initially completed the initial Student Learning Outcomes, I borrowed from the Health Communication model, using the following interventions, defined below :
“While exploring the Health Communication model, the following 
interventions were defined:  1) measure current level of knowledge,
 2) provide information regarding severity of the impending health 
problem, 3) provide information regarding the individual’s risk of 
developing that health problem, 4) give examples in which positive 
behaviors become part of activities of daily living, 6) help students 
identify and eliminate barriers to establishing positive behaviors,
 7) make interaction memorable, 8) measure outcome data,
 9) Evaluation.
Since communication strategies enhance health by informing and 
influencing individual and community decisions, it is a necessary 
foundational element for the improvement in personal and public 
health.”
However, I found that this model worked best in the clinical setting during a one-on-one interaction with individual patients. Since, that is only one component of the Health Services program, I elected to explore the parameters of my program to develop a grid which would allow for a variety of interventions in a variety of settings.
If you look at our Student Learning Outcome Assessment Grid, you will find 14 leading public health indicators defined by the national Healthy Campus 2010 framework.  (Twenty-eight leading public health indicators are identified by Healthy Campus 2010). I have selected those indicators I feel are most significant for Reedley College. These indicators will become the areas of focus addressed by our department.  (1) Access to health care is selected because of the high rate of uninsured individuals in our lower socioeconomic region and the high rate of uninsured among young people of college age. (2) Physical activity is selected because it and dietary consumption are two of the behaviors that have the most affect upon disease development. (3) Oral health care is selected because poor dental hygiene WILL result in bad outcomes and dental care is very limited for the uninsured. (4) Overweight and Obesity are directly related to the development of many cancers, diabetes and heart disease. (5) Diabetes is most prevalent in the Hispanic population and Hispanics make up the majority of our population, etc.
When the district nurses met to discuss Student Learning Outcomes, we decided to apply Title V Health Services activities to our grid.  Title V lists Assessment-Intervention-Referral, First Aid Emergency care, Health appraisal, Communicable Disease control, Crisis Management, Psychological/Emotional intervention, Health Education and Promotion, Student Insurance programs, Partnerships with other outside services and Support services.  These activities define the scope of our services.
So for example, we can decide to address substance abuse in the fall of 2011; we can also choose how we will address the subject by looking down the left column.  We can reach the most number of students with Health Education/Health Promotion with classroom presentations or outreach to the Student Center.  So, we decide we will do 2 outreach days in the Student Center with brochures, pictures, a video and we will post several attractive posters around campus.  We could also do a Power Point presentation for the Library and/or have special speakers during an event.
Another example, we could choose to assess immunization status for students during a health appraisal. Since we must see the immunization record to provide a thorough assessment, this activity is best performed in the office.  Data yielded would tell us what percentage of students were lacking booster shots, flu shots, TB skin tests, etc.  This might lead to an extension of Partnership with an outside agency to provide needed immunizations or we might propose to buy the necessary vaccinations and administer them ourselves.   
Over time, the grid will guide Health Services in covering all identified health measures and yield some data besides.
Data.
How to gather data? Well, during many of our activities, we do not identify the student being served.  Many times the information we are gathering is confidential. Since the Behavior Change Intervention Model guides our interventions and there are six levels of intervention, it is difficult to measure any measure of behavioral change.  See below:   
•	Pre-contemplation - "people are not intending to take action in the foreseeable future, usually measured as the next 6 months" 
•	Contemplation - "people are intending to change in the next 6 months" 
•	Preparation - "people are intending to take action in the immediate future, usually measured as the next month" 
•	Action - "people have made specific overt modifications in their life styles within the past 6 months" 
•	Maintenance - "people are working to prevent relapse," a stage which is estimated to last "from 6 months to about 5 years" 
•	Termination - "individuals have zero temptation and 100% self-efficacy... they are sure they will not return to their old unhealthy habit as a way of coping"
In the fall of 2009, I developed a survey which we applied to the incoming Residence Hall students anticipating that we could apply the survey in the spring of 2010 and find an improvement in attitude regarding many of the Public Health Indicators.  Well, this did not happen.  Actual measures showed a decline in attitudes regarding most of the measures.  It is possible that incoming students are more inclined to try and please the researcher, thereby recording more positive measures than they will record after 8 or 9 months in residence.
At this point, we will apply the survey in the spring of 2011 and compare it to the spring of 2010. We will repeat the survey each spring and monitor student attitudes, letting the feedback we receive guide our interventions. Granted this does not measure OUR interventions alone.  However, since environmental and developmental influences cannot be eliminated and it would be unethical to do so, we will measure health-related attitudes and let that guide us as we more fully develop our program.