Colorado School of Mines

Use of Information Acquired through Assessment Activities

Semester	Source(s)	Concern	Response	Follow-up
Spring '97	Feedback from Physics Department	Students Knowledge of Vectors in Physics Course. Vectors were discussed in Physics the semester before they were addressed in Calculus.	Revision of Calculus sequence to correspond with the physics sequence. The introduction of vectors now occurs in Calc II rather than Calc III.	Mini-grant study completed in Summer of 1999 by Dr. Barbara Bath suggests that students have been successful in the new sequence. This same study also recommends further analysis with regard to the effect of the sequence upon students performances in physics.
Spring '98	Faculty Survey	Appropriateness of the general set of Departmental Goals and Objectives to Core Courses, Mathematics Major Courses and Computer Science Major Courses.	Departmental Goals and Objectives were re-examined and separate lists of Goals and Objectives were developed for Core Courses, Mathematics Major Courses and Computer Science Major Courses.	On-going review of the Faculty Survey and appropriateness of current goals and objectives by Undergraduate Curriculum Committee.
Spring '98	Faculty Survey Undergraduate Student Survey	Several objectives were identified that were not being adequately assessed across courses.	The undergraduate curriculum committee decided that a new proposed course would have components that directly address the concerns. Additionally, the Calculus sequence has been re-designed to include the missing objectives.	On-going review of the Faculty Survey and the Undergraduate Student Survey.
Spring '98	Expressed Concerns of Course Instructors	Instructors felt that students were not developing the practical programming skills that they needed.	MACS 261 and 262 were redesigned (over the summer) to contain a strong emphasis on a lab component.	Student data were collected in the spring of ’98 in the old course so that comparisons can be made with student data in new course in the spring of ’99. Report completed by Barbara Jennings suggests the success of the new program.
Fall '98	Student Feedback Student Performance on in-class exams	During the fall of 1998, students complained that they did not have enough in-class time to learn the material in Differential Equations. The results of the students' performance on the midterm exam supported the students' concerns.	Course was changed mid-term from 2 lectures and 2 recitations to 3 lectures and 1 help session. One faculty member volunteered to lead the "help session" (in addition to his regular course load).	Differential Equations became a coordinated course beginning in the Sp’ 99. This was in reaction to the concerns expressed by students the prior term. A textbook that provided a better structure for the course was selected. Each semester a Focus Group is held mid-way through the semester for improvement purposes.
Spring '99	Student Evaluations	By design, there is an overlap between the material covered in Cal III and Differential Equations. Student evaluations indicated that at the beginning of the semester too much time was spent on things that they already knew.	Differential Equations Course was changed to have only a brief review of material covered in Cal III.	Course continues to be monitored through focus group activities.
Spring '99	Focus Group	As a follow-up to the assessment of Differential Equations in the F' 98, a focus group activity was held midway through the spring semester. Students requested, at this time, that the course include three tests and a final rather than a mid term and a final.	Differential Equations was revised to have three tests and a final.	Course continues to be monitored through focus group activities.
Spring '99	Faculty Survey Undergraduate Survey	Inconsistency exists in the requirements of the performance criteria for the departmental Goals and Objects.	Performance criteria for the student survey were revised to be consistent with the requirements of the faculty survey.	Both the Faculty Survey and the undergraduate survey will be reviewed and the results compared during the next cycle of the assessment process.
Fall '99	Faculty raised concerns	In the Fall of 1996, a new curriculum had been implemented for the Calculus sequence. Now that the curriculum had been in place for 2 years, there was a need to evaluate the effectiveness of that curriculum.	Analysis completed on the pass rates in the old Calculus sequence and compared to the pass rates in the new curriculum.	In a report completed by Barbara B. Bath, it was found that the pass rates had improved. This confirmed the success of the new curriculum.
Fall '99	Feedback from faculty	Concerns were raised as to whether the AB Advanced Placement test was an appropriate indicator as to whether students would succeed in the Honors sequence.	Analysis was completed on honor students' performance in Calculus III, Physics I and Physics II.	In a report completed by Barbara B. Bath, it was found that these students performed well in the analyzed courses. This suggests that Advanced Placement test appears to be an appropriate indicator.
Fall '99	Feedback from faculty	Faculty members who were teaching Differential Equations complained that there was too much overlap between the end of Calculus III and Differential Equations. This resulted in students 'tuning out' for the first couple of weeks- creating an inappropriate learning environment.	The Calculus III and Differential Equation curriculum were redesigned to minimize the overlap.	Conversations between the Calculus III and Differential Equations instructors are on-going.
Fall '99	Faculty Survey	Based on the results of the Faculty Survey, several departmental objectives are not being adequately addressed.	Report was submitted for consideration by the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee.	Faculty members were asked to review the departmental goals and objectives as the prepared for the next semester.
Spring '00	Exit interview	Due to a large number of graduating seniors, the head of the department could not complete an exist interview with all students. The decision was made to interview a random sample of 10 graduating seniors. Complaints were made by students that they had not been selected for the interview. Additionally, the department was concerned by the lost data.	For large graduating classes, a focus group will replace the exit interview process.	Graduating seniors are either invited to participate in an exit interview or a focus group prior to graduation.
Spring '00	Course evaluations	A set of open-ended questions were added to the course evaluations in 1997. The average faculty rating on each question in 1997 was compared to the average faculty rating in 2000. The faculty ratings have increased since the changes have been implemented.	Current faculty evaluation system will be maintained.	Open-ended questions continue to be used a part of the faculty evaluation.
Fall '00	Course evaluations	Concern was raised that faculty do not use the information that is provided by students in response to the faculty evaluations.	A set of questions was developed that asks faculty to examine the student evaluations and to write a response as to how they would use the information to improve the course. Additionally, faculty are asked to explain how they have used prior evaluations to improve the course.	Faculty continue to respond in writing to the student evaluations each semester. Department head reviews the response.
Spring '01	Course evaluations Feedback from Engineering Division	Concern was raised about the content of the Probability and Statistics for Engineers Course.	A new book was selected that better meets the needs of engineers. Additionally, new labs were created with the same purpose in mind.	A mini-grant was sought and acquired to support the improvement of this course in an appropriate manner. As part of this effort, a survey has been developed and is administered each year concerning students' experiences in the course.
Fall '01	Feedback from Engineering Division	A general review of our assessment system indicated that a number of our instruments and methods are out of date.	An effort was begun to revise the goals, objectives and overall system in a manner that is appropriate to our current needs.	The revised goals, objectives and overall system were reviewed and approved by the Undergraduate Committee in the Spring '02.
Spring '02	General Review of Assessment System	Revised goals and objectives resulted in the need to implement a revised assessment plan.	New assessment plan that was consistent with revisions was implemented.	This plan is currently in use.
Fall '02	Feedback from Head of Department	Additional courses were designated as coordinated courses. The purpose was to improve assessment methods and increase consistency in quality of student learning.	Differential equations, Programming Concepts (C++), Data Structures became coordinated courses.	These courses continue to be coordinated.
Spring '03	Student feedback	Students who were majoring in mathematics or computer science expressed an interest in acquiring a minor in education.	Efforts began to explore the potential of our students completing minors in education at the Colorado Christian University.	Two grants were acquired to support this effort. Negotiations are still underway.
Fall '03	Accreditation feedback	The state has a list of requirements for students to become K-12 teachers.	A mapping of our course objectives to the state education requirements was completed.	Review and revision of this mapping was completed in 2005.
Spring '04	Feedback from Head of Department	Desire to acquire external feedback concerning our assessment efforts.	Two faculty, one mathematics and one Computer Science, attended the Supporting Assessment in Undergraduate Mathematics (SAUM) workshop.	On-going participation in SAUM activities.
Spring '05	Feedback from faculty	Desire to acquire feedback from students concerning the fairness, appropriateness and effectiveness of the assessment system.	Extensive data collected through student surveys and grade analysis to evaluate effectiveness of core courses.	Greater emphasis on collaborative instructional interactions.
Fall '06-'07	Assessment Plan	Undergraduate curriculum and degree options had been recently revised. This resulted in a need for a review and revision of our assessment plan.	A departmental assessment committee was formed and our previous plan was reviewed. This resulted in the development of new Educational Objectives and Outcomes as well as a complete revision of the plan.	Revisions completed for core curriculum.
Spring '07	Assessment Plan	Process of implementing a revised assessment plan was implemented.