Program/Major Periodic Review

To a certain extent, every major or program is continuously reviewed, and consequently it is frequently adjusted in small ways. In addition, it is essential that programs undergo a more systematic assessment on a periodic basis, according to the rotation scheduled outlined in the document Ohio Valley University Mission, Goals, Assessment, and Evaluation. The elements of this period assessment are described below.

Before beginning the period assessment, the one leading the review should consult with the school chair, the college dean, and the vice president for academic affairs in order to be made aware of any relevant issues, concerns, or opportunities, etc. By the end of fall semester, the results of the periodic assessment should be presented as a written report that is submitted to the relevant school chair and/or dean, vice president for academic affairs, and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness; copies will also be given to the Deans Council and Faculty Assessment Committee. Recommendations for program change should also be submitted to Academic Council. It is ultimately up to the vice president for academic affairs to determine whether recommendations should be adopted, especially as they relate to program continuance, program staffing, and program budget. When decisions are made or action taken based on the report’s recommendations, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness should be informed.

I. The following program information/data should be collected and, as appropriate, evaluated (in many cases, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness should provide this data in order to ensure consistency across programs):A. Program mission and goals, which includes school/program mission statement, learning

outcomes, curriculum map, assessment methods, and linkage of learning outcomes to assessment methods.

B. Program structure (from the catalog)C. The trend in program enrollmentD. Credentials of those teaching in the program; at minimum, this would be full-time

faculty and regular adjuncts.E. Changes in program staffing (full-time and part-time) since the last periodic review.F. Percentages of courses and/or credit hours taught by full-time, part-time, and adjunct

facultyG. Aggregated course evaluations across all faculty who taught in the program during the

period of reviewH. Number of advisees for each advisor in the programI. Library resources available to students in the program, including databasesJ. Any other resources available to the program (e.g., endowment, scholarships, dedicated

space)K. Courses that link learning with the communityL. Changes made in the program since the last systematic reviewM. Any program accreditation reports sent to national professional association or

specialized accrediting agencies

1

N. Results from assessment testing (Major Fields test, departmental tests, etc.)O. Results from any exit surveys administered by the programP. Graduation survey results Q. Alumni survey results (if available for your program)R. Ongoing collaborations with the communityS. A comparison of the curriculum for this program with that of peers (e.g., sister

institutions and other WV or ACA institutions)

II. The following individuals should assist in analyzing the data:A. Faculty teaching in the program (full-time, part-time, and adjunct)B. Current student or studentsC. Outside advisors from the community (probably members of the program’s, school’s or

college’s advisory board)

III. The assessment report will contain the following elements:A. General Information

1. Date report prepared and reviewed2. Personnel

a. List of primary author(s) and contributorsb. List of reviewers (including their position, e.g., adjunct faculty, alumni,

student, community member, faculty at another institution)B. An overview of the program

1. Mission and goalso School and/or program mission statemento Learning Outcomes should be listed. o A chart matching learning outcomes to coursework (a curriculum map)

should be referenced here, but included as an appendix.o List key assessment methodso List key assessment methods for each learning outcome.

2. Program Structureo Include description of major from the current catalog

3. The trend in program enrollment o Note: Number and name this and all subsequent figures and tables, e.g.,

“Figure 1: Trend in Program Enrollment.”4. The credentials of those teaching regularly in the program (presented in format that

seems appropriate for the program). At minimum, it should include full-time faculty and regular adjuncts (a potential definition of a regular adjunct: those who have taught four or more courses in the past two years and who likely will continue to teach in the program); the program review author will determine whether to include those no longer teaching in the program.

5. Changes in full-time and part-time staffing in the program during the review period (e.g., when someone resigned or retired, when someone began employment). Adjuncts do not need to be included in this listing.

2

6. Percentages of courses and/or credit hours taught by full-time, part-time, and adjunct faculty. For some programs, it may be useful to separate this by general education courses and program courses, especially if enrollment in the general education courses far exceeds enrollment in the program courses.

7. A summary of aggregated course evaluations. For some programs, it may be useful to separate this by general education courses and program courses, especially if enrollment in the general education courses far exceeds enrollment in the program courses.

8. A summary of advising load of faculty members. It should reflect all the faculty members’ advisees, not just those in the program. This data is available from the registrar or from the annual program reports.

9. A list of resources available to the program (library, collaborations with the community, advisory council, dedicated rooms, specialized equipment, endowments, endowments, scholarships, etc.). Budget figures should not be included, as these are often for the school instead of for a specific program.

10. A list of courses that link learning with the community using the format of the sample table. Be sure to list the course number and name, whether or not the course is required, and a description of how learning is linked to the community.

11. A list of program changes since last review and the reason(s) for each change. This should be program structure changes, new courses, etc.—not personnel.

12. A summary of program reports sent to national associations or accreditors. The full-report should not be included in the body of this report; if it is included with this report, it should be as an appendix.

C. Analysis of data should include the following:1. A summary and discussion of the results of key assessments of student learning

outcomes. This section should be organized by learning outcome.2. A summary and discussion of other indirect assessments not covered in section C-1

(e.g., graduation or alumni surveys) 3. A discussion of the program’s success in integrating faith and learning4. A discussion of how well the program fulfills its goals (program, school, and/or

college)5. A summary of the comparison with selected peers’ curriculum6. A description of the program’s strengths7. A description of the program’s weaknesses and/or challenges/threats8. A description of the program’s opportunities/aspirations for growth or change

D. Outcomes (recommendations):1. In what ways does this program contribute to the mission of the university?2. Should the program’s mission and/or goals be adjusted, and if so, how?3. Is our current staffing appropriate? If not, what needs changed? How should these

changes be prioritized?4. Do the assessment tools for this program need to change? If so, how?5. How can faith and learning be more effectively integrated in this program?

3

6. What changes should be made to the curriculum (adding new courses, deleting courses, changing content of current courses, etc.)? (When recommending changes, the effect of these changes on other programs at OVU should also be considered.)

7. How can we more effectively link learning with community? (Questions to consider: Are there additional collaborations with the community that should be explored? How can we incorporate civic engagement more effectively into this program? How can we more effectively integrate service learning in this program?)

8. What are the budget needs of this program?9. For what reasons should this program continue?

E. Outcomes (implementing recommendations):1. Who is responsible for putting these recommendations into effect?2. What is the timeline for putting these recommendations into effect?3. What resources are needed to put these recommendations into effect?4. What is the budget for these resources?This information is best presented in a table like that below.

RecommendationPerson

Responsible Timeline Resources Budget

4

SAMPLE ASSESSMENT REPORT

This report takes elements from previous (or fictitious) to show what data to present. It may be simplest to use the tables and figures below—replace this data with your own.

A. General Information:The following report was prepared in the fall of 2014 and uses data available through May 2014. Steven Hardy served as the primary author, using data gathered by him and by Carolyn Sturm.

The report was reviewed by these individuals, who had the opportunity to ask questions and make further recommendations.

Ethan Ash (program alumnus) Missy Bannister (adjunct faculty) Kyle Carlsen (program alumnus) Gavin Fury (current student) Wes Harrison (Chair, School of Liberal Arts at OVU) Rebecca Hoff (English department faculty at West Virginia University-Parkersburg) Blake Jones (OVU History faculty) Carolyn Sturm (program faculty) Jayne Whitlow (retired English teacher from Parkersburg South High School)

B. An Overview of the Program

1. Mission and Goals Present the School Mission statement (and/or the program mission statement), student learning outcomes for the program (a chart matching learning outcomes to coursework, i.e., a curriculum map, should be referenced, but included in an appendix), key assessment methods, a matching of the key assessment methods to the learning outcomes. No commentary is needed; these are just presented

The following are the learning outcomes for the English Program were created in the summer of 2014; they are a restatement of goals that had been written when the program was established in 2005.

Mission: We seek to educate students in the fields of behavioral sciences integrating biblical faith and service to God and humanity.

Learning Outcomes:1. Knowledge base in Western literature:

a. Develop knowledge of key texts of British literatureb. Develop knowledge of key texts of American literaturec. Develop knowledge of key texts of European literatured. Develop knowledge of theoretical approaches to literaturee. Develop knowledge of literary terminology

2. Research skills

5

a. Gather, evaluate, and synthesize information from a variety of sourcesb. Use sources ethicallyc. Document research using MLA formatting

3. Communication skillsa. Apply knowledge of English grammar, mechanics, and syntaxb. Write effectively in a variety of stylesc. Develop proficiency in oral communication

4. Connections between the major and the outside worlda. Recognize literary allusions and figures of speech b. Recognize how literary texts can be valuable in one’s faith journeyc. Understand that all texts are subject to multiple interpretations

Curriculum MapThese learning outcomes have been mapped to the curriculum; a chart showing this mapping is appended to this document.

Assessment MethodsStudents’ learning is assessed through the following methods. With the exception of the Senior Seminar exit interview, which has yet to be administered, all of these assessment methods have been used since at least 2012.

ETS Major Fields Test – Literature in Englisho This test is administered during the semester when a student takes ENG 451: English

Senior Seminar, ordinarily in the student’s final or penultimate semester. Student grades (e.g., major tests, research projects, writing assignments, and final grades)

o Student performance evidence that the student has gained the requisite knowledge Graduation survey

o The graduation survey for English majors is administered during ENG 451: English Senior Seminar.

Senior Seminar projecto Students in ENG 451: English Senior Seminar complete an extensive research project

on a topic related to the major. They write a paper of at least 20 pages and present the project orally to departmental faculty.

Senior Seminar exit interviewo Students in ENG 451: English Senior Seminar are interviewed about their OVU

experience (including such things as classes, information presented, range of works studied, opportunities available, perceived gaps in knowledge, how they can help they can provide the program in the future, etc.).

Assessment methods linked to learning outcomes.A. Knowledge base in Western literature

a. ETS Major Fields Testb. Student gradesc. Graduation surveyd. Senior Seminar project

6

e. Senior Seminar exit interview

B. Research skillsa. Senior Seminar projectb. Student gradesc. Graduation surveyd. Senior Seminar exit interview

C. Communication skillsa. Senior Seminar projectb. Student gradesc. Graduation surveyd. Senior Seminar exit interview

D. Connections between the major and the outside worlda. Graduation surveyb. Senior Seminar exit interview

2. Program Structure (from the most recent academic catalog)

Students majoring in English must meet the following requirements:

1) Satisfy the General Institutional Requirements for a Bachelor’s Degree.

2) Satisfy the requirements of the General Education program, which includes the following: General Education Course Requirements Bible Course Requirement Writing Competency Requirements Diversity Requirement Foreign Language Requirement

3) Receive formal admission to the English program, preferably during a student’s sophomore year; the application is part of ENG 299.

4) Meet the following grade requirements: Earn a grade of B or higher in College Writing I (ENG 131) and College Writing II (ENG

132). Earn at least a 2.75 GPA on the required literature, genre, and writing courses. Earn a grade of C or higher on all required courses.

5) Earn no more than 6 hours of electives in technical fields.

6) Complete 6 credit hours in a single foreign language.

7) Complete at least 15 credit hours of upper-level English (ENG) or literature (LIT) courses at Ohio Valley University

7

8) Complete 47 credit hours, distributed as follows: 27 credit hours of required literature courses:

o LIT 235 Western Literature through the Renaissance (3 credit hours)o LIT 236 Western Literature since the Enlightenment (3 credit hours)o LIT 301 American Literature to 1865 (3 credit hours)o LIT 302 American Literature since 1865 (3 credit hours)o LIT 310 Novel (3 credit hours)o LIT 411 Foundations of Literary Theory (3 credit hours)o LIT 441 British Literature to 1800 (3 credit hours)o LIT 442 British Literature since 1800 (3 credit hours)o LIT 446 Shakespeare (3 credit hours)

6 credit hours of genre requirements chosen from the following:o LIT 309 Short Story (3 credit hours)o LIT 313 Poetry (3 credit hours)o LIT 314 Drama (3 credit hours)

6 credit hours of writing requirements:o ENG 301 Advanced Grammar and Composition (3 credit hours)o ENG 333 Professional Writing (3 credit hours)

6 credit hours chosen from the following:o COM 238 Media Writing (3 credit hours)o COM 330 Oral Interpretation of Literature (3 credit hours)o EDUC 237 Children’s Literature (3 credit hours)o THE 121 Theatre Appreciation (3 credit hours)o THE 123 Introduction to Film (3 credit hours)o Any LIT or ENG courseo Any foreign language reading course beyond the 6 credit hours required (3 credit hours)

ENG 299 English Program Admission (0 credit hours) ENG 451 English Senior Seminar (2 credit hours)

3. The trend in program enrollment.

8

2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

5

10

15

20

25

Bible and Ministry Majors

B.A.B.S.Total Fall Enrollment

Year

Num

ber o

f Stu

dent

s

Figure 1: Trend in Program Enrollment

Sample: Insert a graph (like the one above) and a short paragraph interpreting the graph. For example: “There appears to be an upward trend in program enrollment; this trend is primarily driven by increases in enrollment in the B.A. program. The enrollment in the B.S. program appears stable.”

4. The credentials of those teaching regularly in the program Present a summary like the following for full-time faculty and frequent adjuncts. Full-time faculty:Jonathan P. MillerAssociate Professor; Chair, School of Behavioral SciencesPh.D., Behavioral Neuroscience, Bowling Green State University, 2005M.S., Clinical Psychology, Abilene Christian University, 2000B.S., Psychology, Lipscomb University, 1998

Steven R. HardyProfessor of English Ph.D. English, University of Minnesota, 2003M.A., English, University of Nebraska, 1988B.A., English and Political Science, University of Nebraska, 1983

Regular adjuncts (be sure to include your definition of a “regular adjunct,” e.g., those adjuncts who have taught 4 or more courses in the past two years, excluding those adjuncts no longer active in the program)

9

Gern BlanstonM.S., Health Psychology, University of Connecticut, 2011B.S., Psychology, Rochester College, 2008

5. Changes in full-time and part-time staffing in the program during the review period.

A. 2010-111. Full-time professor B. F. Skinner retired

B. 2011-121. Carl Rogers began employment as a full-time assistant professor.

6. Courses and or credit hours taught by full-time and non-full-time (part-time and adjunct) faculty

Table 1: Courses and Credit Hours2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-2014

FT-facultyNumber of faculty 2 2 2 1 2

REG IND REG IND REG IND REG IND REG INDCourses taught 13 11 1 13 5 4 1 9 1

Credit hours taught 42 32 3 41 15 14 3 29 3

Students taught 167 164 2 163 5 65 2 133 1

Student credit hours 231 478 6 502 15 231 6 439 3

Average class size 12.85 14.91 2 12.54 1 16.25 2 14.78 1

Non-FT faculty

Number of faculty 6 7 7 10 6

REG IND REG IND REG IND REG IND REG INDCourses taught 13 17 2 14 1 20 15 1

Credit hours taught 39 50 6 40 3 59 44 3

Students taught 208 195 2 218 1 241 243 1

Student credit hours 609 584 6 647 3 713 501 3

Average class size 16 11.47 1 15.57 1 12.05 16.2 1

TOTAL faculty

10

2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-2014Number of faculty 8 9 9 11 8

REG IND REG IND REG IND REG IND REG INDCourses taught 26 28 3 27 6 24 1 24 2

Credit hours taught 81 82 9 81 18 73 3 73 6

Students taught 375 359 4 381 6 306 2 376 2

Student credit hours 840 1062 12 1149 18 944 6 940 6

Average class size 14.42 12.82 1.33 14.11 1 12.75 2 15.67 1

Sample analysis: In the report, you may want to present a ratio or percentage of courses and/or credit hours and/or students taught by full-time compared to non-full-time faculty. A discussion of average class size would also be appropriate here (see the example below).

The average class has ranged between approximately 13-16 students. This is larger than the university’s publicized average class size of 10 students. In fact, seven fall courses have 11 or more students enrolled at this point (two of these already have over twenty students enrolled). Once the income 2014 freshmen class registers, it is likely that three or four additional courses will also exceed 11 students (with two of these likely to be exceed 20 students) The enrollment numbers in the psychology courses are only partly due to the number of psychology majors. Many other majors require students to complete psychology coursework; with the largest number of students completing majors including, Bible, criminal justice, interdisciplinary studies, sociology, and wellness. Other courses own their higher enrollment due to the course rotation. Several courses are only offered every second year. These courses frequently end with higher enrollment numbers. Finally, courses such as general psychology and human growth and development also host a large number of students who are using the courses to satisfy

The average would increase considerably if senior seminar, practicum, and social work courses were excluded from the data. Practicums are available every semester and frequently only have between 2-5 students enrolled in any given semester. In addition, senior seminar courses must be offered at least once per year regardless of the number of graduating seniors. The increase in double majors….

7. A summary of aggregated course evaluationsThe following table shows aggregated course evaluations. To create the table, course evaluation data from all courses with an ENG or LIT prefix were collected for the 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-14 academic years. Course evaluations from previous years are not included because the

11

course evaluation system and questions were revised for the 11-12 year. Therefore, comparison with older data is not appropriate.

The scale used is as follows:5= Strongly Agree4=Agree3=Neutral2=Disagree1=Strongly Disagree

Table 2: Average of Aggregated Course Evaluations for the Program2011-

122012-

132013-

141. Instructor has organized and structured the class well. 4.58 4.39 4.692. Instructor is available for help outside of class time. 4.48 4.43 4.693. Instructor encourages students to ask questions and/or

express their own ideas in class. 4.57 4.68 4.85

4. I would recommend this course because it is valuable and I learned a lot. 4.13 4.27 4.0

5. Instructor has a firm understanding of the subject matter. 4.68 4.61 4.776. Instructor clearly stated the requirements for the course. 4.61 4.34 4.697. Instructor evaluates students on the material emphasized in

the course. 4.60 4.55 4.62

8. Instructor uses effective examples and illustrations during instruction. 4.34 4.52 4.54

9. I would enjoy taking another course from this instructor. 4.29 4.48 4.2310. Instructor seems enthusiastic about the subject. 4.59 4.55 4.4611. Instructor evaluates assignments in a timely manner. 4.55 4.14 4.3112. Instructor encourages students to use the library. 3.02 3.09 3.3813. Instructor integrates the subject matter being studied with

spiritual and ethical truths. 4.11 4.16 4.23

14. Instructor is consistently prepared for class. 4.66 4.27 4.6215. Instructor helps students evaluate the ability to evaluate

evidences and ideas. 4.45 4.48 4.54

Sample text: Overall, course evaluations indicate students strongly agree or agree with each of the questions. A notable exception is question 12, “Instructor encourages students to use the library.” Student responses are stable across all three years, averaging around 3.0, which suggests that students neither agree nor disagree with this statement. The program will evaluate whether more emphasis should be given to student use of library resources.

12

8. A summary of advising load of faculty members

2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Advising Load per Advisor

Advisor 1Advisor 2Advisor 3Advisor 4TOTAL

Year

Num

bef o

f adv

isees

Figure 2: Advising Load

Sample text: Due to growth in the program (plus the need for program faculty to advise students in other programs within the school), the number of students advised by program faculty has increased. One faculty member (Advisor 2) resigned at the end of the 2010-11 school year, which led to significantly increased responsibilities for Advisor 1, as he took on Advisor 2’s advisees. While a new faculty member (Advisor 3) began in the 2011-12 academic year, she has only been advising students who are new to the program, as it was believed that students should not be forced to switch again to a new advisor. Due to program grown, an additional faculty member was hired for the 2013-14 academic year (Advisor 4). Advisor 1 has not been assigned any new advisees in the 2012-13 or 2013-14 school year, so his advising load has decreased as advisees graduate or leave the program.

9. A list of resources available to the program (library, community, financial, etc.)The following individuals are part of the program’s advisory council: Ray Bradbury, deceased science fiction author J.K. Rowling, billionaire author of the Harry Potter series Scott Turow, the best writer of courtroom drama

These library databases are available: PsychInfo Psychology and Behavioral Science Index Mental Measurements Yearbook

13

PsychArticles Masterfile Premier Academic ASAP JSTOR

Scholarships: None

Dedicated Equipment: None

Faculty Offices: Regular: 308, 313, 314, and 317 Adjunct: 320

Dedicated Rooms: Conference Room (301):

o Mounted LCD projector, screen, conference table and chairs Work Study Room (302):

o Table, mismatched chairs Student Lounge: 356

o Couches, microwave, coffee pot, one computer workstation with an older model computer

10. Courses that link learning with the community:

Table 3: Courses that Link Learning with Community

Course Title/Number Required? How Learning Is Linked to the Community

Introduction to Psychology Seminar/PSY 111

Yes

A minimum of five guest speakers who hold a variety of professional positions in the community related to the field of psychology address the class and answer questions related to their occupations.

Psychology Field Lab/PSY 327 No

Students are engaged in a community agency and are required to complete 35 contact hours for each 1 hour of credit. Common placements include Westbrook and West Virginia Children’s Society. Students keep a journal. Their site supervisor evaluates them, and their OVU supervisor meets with the student periodically to guide self-reflection based on the experience.

Psychology Practicum/PSY 489

Yes Students are engaged in a community agency and are required to complete 35 contact hours for each 1 hour of credit. Common placements include

14

Westbrook and West Virginia Children’s Society. Students keep a journal. Their site supervisor evaluates them, and their OVU supervisor meets with the student periodically to guide self-reflection based on the experience. In addition, students compose an APA-style paper that includes a summary of their experiences at the agency, a literature review on a topic related to the agency, a reflection on the ethics of the field, and an integration of classroom knowledge and the practical experience.

11. A list of program changes since last review

The following program changes have been made since the last periodic review in 2008. 2009-10

o New courses: PSY 498: Psychology Senior Assessment (0 credits): This course was

added to assist the program in completing all relevant assessment materials.

PSY 345: Forensic Psychology (3 credits): This optional course was created when CRJ 345: Forensic Psychology was created for the Criminal Justice major. It is a cross-listed course that gives students in each track an additional Psychology elective.

o Courses eliminated: PSY 211: Marriage and Family Relations (3 credits): This course

became a Bible course, BIB 211.

2010-11o Change in program requirements:

PSY 443: Cognitive Psychology (3 credits): This course had been a Psychology elective but was added to the required core because students were not sufficiently exposed to cognitive psychology principles prior to the curricular change. In addition, student feedback indicated that several graduate programs were requiring this course as a prerequisite for admission.

2011-12o No changes were made.

12. A summary of program reports sent to national associations or accreditorsThis will vary by program; the summary should be quite brief.

15

C. Analysis of data should include the following:1. A summary and discussion of the results of assessment testing

Present data in graph or table form. How this data is presented will vary a lot depending on the kinds of assessment testing done.

Analyze the data presented in the graph or table.

Learning Outcomes:a. Knowledge base in Western literature:

As is mentioned above, the program adopted the ETS Major Fields Test Literature in English as an assessment method for those enrolling in ENG 451: English Senior Seminar since the 2012-13 academic year. To date, only three students have taken the test, two in spring 2013 and one in fall 2013. These students’ percentile scores are shown below.

Table 4: Major Field Test Results

Student/Year OverallLiterature

before 1900Literature after

1900Literary Analysis

Literary History & Identification

1/2013 Sp 93 96 76 98 772/2013 Sp 84 88 60 81 843/2013 Fa 12 12 12 23 1Average 63 65 49 67 54

So, student 1’s overall score was in the 93 percentile of students nationwide who were taking the test; this student scored in the 96th percentile in Literature below 1900, the 76th percentile in Literature after 1900, 98th percentile in literary analysis, and 77th percentile in Literary History and Identification.

With only three students taking the test so far, there is not enough data to draw conclusions. However, some initial observations may be made: Student 3 did significantly worse than the other two students, and as we go forward, we will

need to see whether scores like those of students 1 & 2 or like those of student 3 are more typical. It should be noted that Student 3 transferred to the program from elsewhere (and some coursework from her previous institution was used to substitute for OVU coursework); also, the student took ENG 451: Senior Seminar before completing all program coursework. It also can be noted that this student has struggled with some course exams, though the student has earned a high GPA. This student is also majoring in English Education, and she did not earn a West Virginia passing score on the ETS Praxis covering content knowledge.

The fact that two students who completed their entire program at OVU (with the exception of CLEP credit and AP credit) were able to score as high as students 1 & 2 did indicates that OVU students are likely exposed to the same subject matter knowledge as is typical at other colleges and universities.

Both student 1 & 2 had their lowest score in Literature after 1900; program faculty will continue to monitor subscores to see if this proves to be true of other students as well.

Program completers have filled out a survey asking how well they believe the program fulfilled program goals. Results are below:

16

Use this scale:1 – The program definitely did not prepare me in this way.2 – The program generally did not do a good job in preparing me in this way.3 – Uncertain or neutral about the program’s effectiveness in preparing me in this way. 4 – The program generally did a good job preparing me in this way.5 – The program did an excellent job preparing me in this way.

Table 5: Student Perception of Knowledge Base in Western Literature2009 2012 2012 2013 2013 Mean

1. To read key texts from American literature from various time periods, cultures, and genres

5 4 5 5 4 4.6

2. To read key texts from British literature from various time periods, cultures, and genres

5 5 5 5 5 5

3. To read key texts from European literature from various time periods, cultures, and genres

5 4 5 5 3 4.4

Students reported that the program did a good to excellent job in providing them with a knowledge base.

b. Research skillsStudents completing the senior seminar project were evaluated on their ability to do the following: Gather, evaluate, and synthesize information from a variety of sources Use sources ethically Document research using MLA formattingStudents’ projects were scored on a 1-4 scale for each of these categories; higher scores indicate greater skill. Each student received a score of at least a 3 on every category, which suggests that students have adequate research skills.

Use this scale:1 – The program definitely did not prepare me in this way.2 – The program generally did not do a good job in preparing me in this way.3 – Uncertain or neutral about the program’s effectiveness in preparing me in this way. 4 – The program generally did a good job preparing me in this way.5 – The program did an excellent job preparing me in this way.

Student Perceptions of Preparation and Program Goals

Table 6: Student Perceptions of Research Skills2009 2012 2012 2013 2013 Mean

1. To develop research skills, being aware of the reliability of information and the ethical use of texts

4 4 4 5 5 4.4

17

Students reported that the program did a good to excellent job in providing them with research skills.

c. Communication skillsEtc.

d. Connections between the major and the outside worldEtc.

2. A summary and discussion other indirect assessments not covered in C-1 (e.g., exit surveys, graduation and/or alumni surveys).

Exit Surveys (if not presented above)Present data in graph or table form. How this data is presented will vary a lot depending on the kinds of exit surveys administered.

Analyze the data presented in the graph or table.

Graduation Survey Results

Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Not applicable0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Overall Satisfaction in the Major

Skills/Knowledge in field Understanding of ethical issues Use of professional literature2Self-confidence Overall quality of program

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Figure 3: Graduates' Satisfaction in Major

Sample analysis: The results of exit surveys of 37 graduates over the past five years are displayed. Overall, it appears program graduates are satisfied in all areas. One particular curious finding is the percentage of students who selected “not applicable” to “use of professional literature”; this area also had the least percentage of very satisfied students.

18

Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Not applicable0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Overall Value of Degree

Personal Value Professional Value Value of Financial Investment

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Figure 4: Graduates' Perceptions of Degree Value

Sample Analysis: The result of exit surveys of 37 graduates over the past five years are displayed. Overall, it appears program graduates are satisfied with the value of the degree, with a higher percentage of graduates showing great satisfaction with the professional value of the degree over the personal value. Most noteworthy is the percentage of graduates who are neutral or show some level of dissatisfaction with the financial value of the degree.

Alumni Survey ResultsData should be presented in the same way as the Graduate Survey Data. If there was not enough data to include results (i.e., if there are fewer than five responses), then say the following: Due to the small number of alumni surveys returned, there is insufficient data to present here.

19

Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfiedNot applicable0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

Overall Satisfaction in the Major

Skills/Knowledge in field Understanding of ethical issues Use of professional literature2Self-confidence Overall quality of program

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Figure 5: Alumni's Satisfaction in Major

The results of surveys of six alumni over the past three years (current form of the graduation survey began in the 11/12academic year) are displayed. Overall, it appears program alumni are generally satisfied. One particular finding is the percentage of students who selected “Neutral” to “use of professional literature”; this area also had the least percentage of very satisfied students.

Very satisfied Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied Not applicable0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Overall Value of Degree

Personal Value Professional Value Value of Financial Investment

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Figure 6: Alumni Perception of Degree Value

20

The results of surveys of six alumni over the past three years are displayed. Overall, it appears program alumni are satisfied with the value of the degree, with a higher percentage of graduates showing great satisfaction with the personal value of the degree. Ratings for professional and financial value of the degree are lower, but still reveal that graduates are generally satisfied. Most noteworthy is the percentage of alumni who are responded “Neutral” with the professional and financial value of the degree. However, there was no reported dissatisfaction with any of the three categories related to value of degree.

3. A discussion of the program’s success in integrating faith and learningIntegrating faith and learning is an important aspect of the English program and has been in the nine years since the program was developed. One of the newly written program learning outcomes is this: “students recognize how literary texts can be valuable in one’s faith journey:; this concept was stated in the following manner in the previously written program goals: “To understand how literary texts can be valuable in one’s faith journey by exploring ethical and spiritual dimensions of texts.”

As is shown in the results from the survey “Student Perceptions of Preparation and Program Goals,” program completers surveyed generally believed that the program was successful in this area. In response to the program goal “To understand how literary texts can be valuable in one’s faith journey by exploring ethical and spiritual dimensions of texts,” five out of six completers said the program did a good or excellent job in preparing them in this way.

The study of literature naturally lends itself to integration of faith, as literary works often raise issues of a moral or ethical nature. Many works deal specifically with Christian themes, while others deal with Christian themes indirectly. To discuss many older works, it is essential to discuss the religious background of the work. In discussion, students often share their own religious viewpoints.

Full-time faculty members in the program are required to include “faith and learning statements” in their syllabi; while adjuncts are not required to include these statements, some do.

Through their teaching, program faculty attempt to explore Christian themes. Just a few examples are given below: Dante’s Divine Comedy is explored in LIT 235, Western Literature through the Renaissance In LIT 236, Tartuffe, which has as its titular character a religious hypocrite, is studied. LIT 301, several works with Christian themes are considered, such as Jonathan Edward’s

“Sinners in the Hand of an Angry God,” the journal of the Quaker abolitionist John Woolman, several Puritan writings, and Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter.

Milton’s Paradise Lost is covered in its entirety in LIT 441, British Literature to 1800, and many of the works covered in the course also raise Christian themes (Donne’s Holy Sonnets, for example).

In LIT 446, Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice is one of the comedies studied; this comedy is chosen for the curriculum partly because of its theme of Christian mercy (and because of the way it portrays Christians interacting with the Jewish villain, Shylock).

21

In LIT 442, British Authors since 1800, several works probe the connection between faith and learning. For example, while studying Conrad’s Heart of Darkness students are encouraged to think about the nature of the human heart, and while studying Shaw’s Mrs. Warren’s Profession they challenged by Mrs. Warren’s unconventional definition of morality.

4. A discussion of how well the program fulfills its goals (program, school, and/or college)Sample analysis (this is a broad summary of 1, 2, and 3 above).The evidence is mixed. The program is doing extremely well when indirect satisfaction and self-evaluation measures are examined. In addition, students are showing success in obtaining entrance to graduate students and employment. However, the MFT data show that while students have gains in most areas, the gains (as measured by the MFT) are modest.

5. A summary of the comparison with selected peers’ curriculumThe English program requirements at OVU were compared to those at five other colleges and universities—two institutions affiliated with the Churches of Christ, two West Virginia universities, and one nearby college.

In the table, OVU courses in regular font are required in the program; those in italic font are not required courses, but can be used to fulfill program requirements. (Students must choose two of the following three courses: Drama, Poetry, and Short Story.) An R indicates that an OVU course is required at the other college or university; an E indicates that it serves as an elective course at other colleges and universities.

Table 7: Comparison of OVU Program to Other Programs

Ohio Valley University Courses

Lipscomb

University

Harding U

niversity

Mariett

a College

West Liberty U

niversity

Shepherd U

niversity

ENG 131 College Writing I R R R R RENG 132 College Writing II R R R RENG 292-95 English Special Topics EENG 301 Advanced Grammar & Composition R R E R EENG 330 Curriculum & Methods of English EENG 331 Creative Writing R E E E EENG 333 Professional Writing E E EENG 451 English Senior Seminar R R R R RENG 490-91 English Guided Research EENG 492-95 English Special TopicsLIT 235 Western Lit through Renaissance E E ELIT 236 Western Lit since Enlightenment E E E

22

Ohio Valley University Courses

Lipscomb

University

Harding U

niversity

Mariett

a College

West Liberty U

niversity

Shepherd U

niversity

LIT 280 Western Lit Seminar InternationalLIT 292-95 Literature Special TopicsLIT 301 American Literature to 1865 E R R R ELIT 302 American Literature since 1865 E R R R ELIT 309 Short Story E E ELIT 310 Novel R E E ELIT 313 Poetry R E ELIT 314 Drama ELIT 411 Foundations of Literary Theory R E E ELIT 422 Young Adult Literature E ELIT 441 British Authors to 1800 E R R R ELIT 442 British Authors since 1800 E R R R ELIT 446 Shakespeare R E E R RLIT 490-91 Literature Guided Research E ELIT 492-95 Literature Special Topics

The comparative data suggests that OVU’s program has a great deal of overlap with the programs at other institutions; for example, 11 OVU courses are either required or elective courses at other colleges and universities.

The data also indicates that OVU’s program is more prescriptive than those in the comparative group. OVU requires 14 specific courses; the second most prescriptive program, West Liberty University, only required nine specific courses. Certain courses that OVU requires are not required by any other college or university (LIT 235, LIT 236, and ENG 333) in the comparison group. One reason that OVU’s program is prescriptive is that we offer fewer courses; other institutions offer a lot more courses, and can thus give students the opportunity to choose one or more out of a group of several courses. With our small number of students, we cannot offer such a variety of courses, for only a few would get sufficient enrollment to “make.”

In making this comparison, the other programs were examined to see what courses they required that OVU does not require or does not offer. All but Marietta College have a higher foreign language requirement than OVU. OVU

requires 6 credits in a foreign language; Lipscomb requires 10 credit hours, Harding requires 12 credit hours, West Liberty requires 12 credit hours, and Shepherd requires 12 credit hours.

Lipscomb requires Introduction to Literary Studies and requires students to take one 3-credit seminar in one of these areas: American, English, or World Literature, or in a Special Topic. Lipscomb also has a Writing Track. Lipscomb also requires a practicum of at least one credit hour.

23

Harding University requires an Introductory course (English Studies), a linguistics course (Nature and History of Language), and in addition to requiring a course comparable to OVU’s Advanced Grammar and Composition, they require Advanced Composition course.

Marietta College also requires an introductory course (Methods of Literary Study). Marietta College does require five courses in a category called “Specialized Perspectives,” and these courses are narrowly focused (examples are “Studies in the Early American Novel,” “African-American Literature,” and Studies in the Later British Novel”). Marietta requires three courses in a category called “Conceptual Perspectives”; examples are Concepts of Postcolonialism, Myth and Folklore, Literature into Film, Concepts of Gender, Concepts of Comedy, and Concepts of Nature.

West Liberty does not require any courses that OVU does not require. In addition to a literature track, West Liberty has a rhetoric and writing track and a graphic narrative track.

Shepherd University’s program only has four required courses, so it is the least prescriptive program in the comparison group.

Based on a comparison of the OVU curriculum with that of these other institutions, these broad differences exist between them and OVU: Most require more foreign language study than OVU does Most require a course like “Introduction to English Studies” Most offer students more options in what they take Others provide students with the opportunity to take more narrowly focused courses

For each of these five institutions, the English section of the catalog is appended to this report.

6. A description of the program’s strengths Diversity of coursework Excellent adjunct faculty Relationships with faculty Practicum experience Diversity in experience of full-time faculty

7. A description of the program’s weaknesses and/or challenges/threats Large number of courses taught by adjunct faculty in comparison to full-time faculty Turnover in faculty may have resulted in some disruption of student learning Few funds available to purchase materials/aids that could supplement course

instruction Little opportunity of student research

8. A description of the program’s opportunities/aspirations for growth or change New faculty member and new APA learning goals aligning with program review

giving an convenient opportunity to refresh the program to align with strengths of faculty and APA’s new learning outcomes

With the addition of another full-time PhD level faculty member, the programs has cleared one hurdle to having a Psi Chi (International Honor Society in Psychology) chapter on campus; still need an active psychology club.

24

D. Outcomes (recommendations):1. In what ways does this program contribute to the mission of the university?

Sample text: Because this program is popular and has a number of students enrolled in it, it contributes to the overall financial health of the institution, which helps the university fulfill its mission. However, as the analysis above shows, the program may not be helping the institution fulfill its mission. There is little integration of biblical faith into the program, and opportunities for service are marginal. Furthermore, students have not been successful in pursuing careers related to their major, and alumni express dissatisfaction with the overall value of the degree.

2. Should the program’s mission and/or goals be adjusted, and if so, how?Sample text: Student learning outcomes are appropriate and should be continued as stated.

3. Is our current staffing appropriate? If not, what needs changed? How should these changes be prioritized?Sample text: Current staffing is sufficient, but only because of the benefit of dedicated adjunct faculty. If and when current adjuncts decide that they are no longer interested in teaching, an additional faculty member to teach courses in English and Literature should be hired.

4. Do the assessment tools for this program need to change? If so, how?Sample text: The MFT and graduation survey have been helpful tools. In addition to these, the program will be more intentional about collecting and recording data from the practicum supervisor to add another piece of converging evidence. Additionally, a final practicum paper has been identified as a potential piece that may yield information relevant to the new learning goals. However, as stated in part two above, the program will be investigating some of the tools suggested by the APA to determine if they might provide more useful information or if they will improve the efficiency and quality over what has been currently identified.

5. How can faith and learning be more effectively integrated in this program?Sample text: Given the data collected on faith and learning and input from the reviewing team, it is believed that the psychology program does well integrating faith and learning in the curriculum. The program will remain open to suggestions and new ideas, but there does not appear to be a need for any major adjustment in this area. In fact, one of the student members of the review team believes that the program should maintain the current practices and that many change would detract from the success the program has in this area.

6. What changes should be made to the curriculum (adding new courses, deleting courses, changing content of current courses, etc.)? (When recommending changes, the effect of these changes on other programs at OVU should also be considered.)

25

Sample text: The reviewing team recommends the following changes based on the review of the data presented in this report:

Elimination of the Christian Counseling & Human Services tracko These tracks been steadily declining over the past five years anywayo Elimination would provide greater consistency in the knowledge and

skills of the psychology majorso Minors and courses structure will be maintained so student with

interest will still have an opportunity to learn these materials Add Cognitive Psychology and History and Systems in Psychology to the core

o This change will bring us in line with other schools and improve scores on the MFT

o Adding this course to the core will also increase standardization of curriculum between Pre-Professional and General tracks.

Add Social Psychology to the requirements of the Pre-Professional tracko Social Psychology is an optional elective course, but given the trends

at other institutions and the scores on the MFT, requiring this course seems prudent.

Provide a place for Field Lab and Special Topics courses to fill degree requirements

o These course fit the elective hours in the General track, but not in the Pre-Professional track

7. How can we more effectively link learning with community? (Questions to consider: Are there additional collaborations with the community that should be explored? How can we more effectively integrate service learning in this program?)Sample text: The psychology program provides opportunities for all students to link learning with the community as a part of the degree program. Additional opportunities are also available with field lab for student how what more interaction with the community. As was determined during the comparison with other programs, it appears somewhat unusual that a practicum is a requirement for program completion. In addition, there are limited opportunists in a community as small as the Mid-Ohio Valley to get students engaged in community agencies. Lastly given realties of confidentiality laws and skills sets of bachelor level students there would be limited value of increasing this type of requirement in the field of psychology.

8. What are the budget needs of this program?Sample text: Generally speaking, the current budget is adequate for program needs, as long as staffing remains as it is. See below for further recommendations.

9. For what reasons should this program continue?Sample text: The program is growing and is paying for itself, and for the reasons stated above, it is contributing to the mission of the university. Our students are

26

graduating and going to professional schools, graduate schools or into the work force. Alumni express satisfaction with the program.

E. Outcomes (implementing recommendations):Answer the following questions by completing a table like the one below.1. Who is responsible for putting these recommendations into effect?2. What is the timeline for putting these recommendations into effect?3. What resources are needed to put these recommendations into effect?4. What is the budget for these resources?This information is best presented in a table like that below.

Table 8: Implementing Recommendations

RecommendationPerson

Responsible Timeline Resources BudgetImprovement/further development of assessment tools (exit interview and student grades)

Steven Hardy & Carolyn Sturm By May 2016 None None

Encourage program completers to fill out the OVU graduation survey

Steven Hardy & Carolyn Sturm Ongoing None None

Fostering contacts with alumni who might be able to provide role models, mentoring, networking opportunities, or guidance to students currently in the program

Steven Hardy By May 2016 Database of alumni None

Developing marketing tools for the program

Carolyn Sturm and Marty Davis January 2016

Template from marketing

$2,000

27