World Langugages Third Year Review Written Report

Evaluation Rubric

Contact Person and preparer of report: Lesley H. Walker

See attached Assessment plan of 2005 (the plan did not change in 2006).

See attached up-dated Assessment plan 2007.

1. Changes to program’s educational goal since our last review: 

We crafted a set of educational goals in 2005 (see attached) and up-dated them this spring.  We integrated our goals with the campus strategic plan to internationalize the curriculum and have included teaching of history as one of our goals.  Item “c” now reads: “In keeping with the campus’s strategic initiative to internationalize our curriculum, all students taking language courses in our department will become acquainted with issues involving course-cultural communication, world history and geography, and have developed an appreciation for and sensitivity to people of different nationalities and ethnicities.”

2. Changes to our assessment techniques:

1. The Department received a grant from “Information Technologies Funding” to purchase a battery of high-quality, proficiency based assessment tools for reading, writing, listening and speaking.  The Minnesota Language Proficiency Assessment (MLPA) Exam was developed through funding support from the U.S. Department of Education, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the University of Minnesota.  We will use these materials for the first time in spring 2007 in both our 204—French, Spanish, and German—courses and in our Spanish 400-level course.  In each case, we will test students’ reading proficiency. (In 1999 the Department purchased the reading portion of MLPA at the intermediate low proficiency level.  We administered these tests in French, German, and a few Spanish sections of 204.  At that time, it appeared that our students were reaching the appropriate level of proficiency in reading.  Professor Cheri Brown has continued to give the text—a print/paper version—to her students.  What we will now be able to do is administer the on-line version).

2. Both majors and minors are required to complete a language/cultural portfolio.  We have completed the task of creating portfolios/advising folders for all of our majors.  The folder itself is divided into two sections.  One half is devoted to advising: it contains the student’s record and a sheet that chronicles advising appointments.  The other half holds student papers.  We have developed an “Artifact Checklist” to ensure the placement of appropriate items.

3. Portfolio evaluation:  A committee of three full-time faculty members is formed; each committee has a chair.  The chair ensures that the portfolio is complete; contacts the student for his/her exit interview; sends the student the exit questionnaire; and arranges a time for all to meet before graduation.  The Chair writes up a brief summary of the committee’s findings.  At our last faculty meeting of the year, each chair presents their findings.  (This Spring we have 7 students graduating and another 6 in August).

3. Attach assessment instruments:  Attached please find our exit questionnaire, artifact checklist, instructions for portfolios evaluation, and an example of the MLPA reading proficiency test.

4. What analysis has been done of this data:  It does appear that in French and German, our 204 students are attaining appropriate proficiency levels in their reading.  With regard to our majors, however, we have been working diligently to put the portfolio process in place.  We have collected no real data to this point.

5. What changes have been made:  The dual purpose portfolios have allowed us to rationalize and centralize our advising procedures. Additionally, we have determined that adding a history component to our curriculum will enhance our majors’ understanding of an increasingly global world and contribute to their education as world citizens.

6. How did assessment data support these changes:  The portfolio was conceived as an important assessment tool. 

7. What changes does the department plan to make:  We are quite pleased to have a new qualitative procedure in place—that is the portfolios—to evaluate the progress of our students in their language skills as well as their cultural and historical awareness and competence.  Last summer we did a portfolio review with a graduating senior.  It was a positive experience we felt for both the student and the committee—Lesley Walker, Tammy Morgan and Oscar Barrau.  We are looking forward to gathering more data this spring and summer.   By August we should have at least 12 evaluations completed; by next spring, we should be able to supply some analysis of our data.  Thus we do not anticipate many changes to our assessment plan—except perhaps tweaking questions and so forth.  What we need to focus on is gathering the data from the portfolio reviews and the exit questionnaires.  We will, however, continue our discussions about developing a cap-stone course for seniors; we may need more majors for this to run successfully.

8. How were people involved in assessments: All tenure-eligible faculty as well as our Senior Lecturer, John Davis, are actively involved in designing our assessment plan, carrying it out, and analyzing the results.   Our majors have been very cooperative, supplying the requested information for their portfolios, and making themselves available for the exit interviews.  Our Alumni, however, remain an untapped resource.

9. How were results shared: At our final faculty meeting of the year, the chairs of the portfolio committees will share their findings with the department.  Likewise, results of the MLPA will be discussed at that meeting.  With regard to students, they will received feedback from their portfolio committee.

10. One paragraph conclusion:  In the Department of World Language Studies, our overall goals are two-fold.  Because CLAS has a four-semester language requirement, we think that it is important to assess the proficiency of those students.  We are pleased to have purchased the MLPA tests that will allow us to assess some aspects of the intermediate language skills of those students.  Second, and as important, are our majors.  We are eager to begin evaluating their portfolios and to read their reflections on the exit questionnaire.  These data will allow us to continue to improve our program.  We are especially interested in their reasons for studying or not studying abroad; their cultural and historical competence; their skills level; and their ability to find work in a language related field.            

top