Report Feedback for 2011-2012 Report

Report Feedback for 2011-2012 Report Below you will find our feedback for your 2011-2012 Report submission. Please consider our comments as you complete this year’s report. Below the comments, you will find a few resources, our website outlining the assessment process and the link for the APP site, for additional programmatic information. Contact our office at [email protected] or 480-965-9790 with any questions. Comments

Please provide more information about how faculty are involved in assessment activities and how they use data to drive curricular decisions. The descriptions for each outcome were helpful, however, we would like to see more description about the overall assessment approach and use of data in the summary.

Report Overall Rating

Meets expectations

Please visit our website for additional information regarding: a. Data Collection: https://uoeee.asu.edu/data-collection b. Interpreting Results: https://uoeee.asu.edu/interpret-results c. Reporting Process: https://uoeee.asu.edu/report d. Acting on Results: https://uoeee.asu.edu/act-results

If you would like additional program information that may aid in the assessment process, please view or request access to the APP site: https://app.vpaa.asu.edu. 2012-13 Academic Program Assessment Report Reports must be approved by the college and uploaded in STEPS no later than September 30, 2013.

College: COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS & SCIENCES Academic Unit: CGEOGRAPHY

Program: LA_GR_CGEOGRAPHY_MAJ_Geography_LAGEOGMA

Program Background Please provide your program mission statement. The School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning lacks a mission statement and goals. The 2011 self-study indicated that this omission is a consequence of the rapid pace of change of the School List the names and titles of those participating in the assessment planning, analysis and reporting activities for this program. Professor Ron Dorn, in concert with the full faculty of Geography Please describe your program’s assessment process and specific assessment activities during the 2012-13 academic year. Please include who was involved and how they were engaged in assessment activities. Two students completed a M.A. degree in geography. The assessment process involved the full faculty, at faculty meetings,during discussions of the graduate program, and discussions amongst the two committees that admit students and administer the program.

If no data were collected for this program during 2012-13, please use the space below to note the reason and describe the strategies in place to ensure that data collection will occur during 2013-14, and then continue to the last page of this report and provide any changes to your current assessment plan.

During the 2012-13 academic year, what changes have been made to the program, curriculum, and/or instruction? Why were these changes made? Please discuss how those changes were implemented and their intended impact on student learning.

No changes have been made to the M.A. degree in geography. Our M.A. degree has decreased in the number of students enrolled, because our emphasis has shifted to generating high quality Ph.D. students for employment as faculty in institutions of higher learning. The existing M.A. program has been working well for several years. The full faculty regularly discuss the degree program, requirements, and other issues related to student performance. There has been no need to change the basic program, curriculum, or assessment process. Program Assessment Results

Outcome 1: Able to read & analyze the research literature of the various subfields in geography.

What do these results indicate about the extent to which students from this program possess the knowledge or skill reflected in Outcome 1? How do your results support this conclusion? Please use the space below to indicate whether or not each performance criterion was met and to describe components of the program you believe contributed to this result. Please see more detailed analysis for each metric below. Outcome 1 met? Use Dropdown to Select

Measure 1.1 A literature analysis written for GCU 529 (Geographic Thought) Was the Performance Criteria Met? Performance Criteria 1.1 At least 80% of the students will perform at or above mastery. Use Dropdown to Select

Number of Observations 2 or 100% Proportion of Target Population Yes Included in Assessment (e.g. Assessed number of students, papers, projects) Data Collection Challenges or This course is the first required course. Professor McHugh has done an outstanding job of Issues [if applicable] assessing student performance and guiding them towards either success or the realization that the program might not be for them. In this case, 100% of the students performed above mastery.

Measure 1.2 A literature review paper written for GCU 585 (Advanced Research Methods) Was the Performance Criteria Met? Performance Criteria 1.2 At least 80% of the students will perform at or above mastery. Use Dropdown to Select

Number of Observations 2 or 100% Proportion of Target Population Yes Included in Assessment (e.g. Assessed number of students, papers, projects) Data Collection Challenges or This is the second required course. The faculty rotating into this course on research methods have Issues [if applicable] had years to refine an approach of guiding students towards a research-based masters thesis. Thus, there have been no challenges with regards to data collection. *Ideally, the eligible population includes only students enrolled in your program. In cases where vital courses have students from various programs, specify when the population may include non-majors. The measure may be targeting, graduating students, alumni, students in junior level or capstone courses. The measure should be specific and the proportion should be of that group. Outcome 2: Will conduct research in the discipline. What do these results indicate about the extent to which students from this program possess the knowledge or skill reflected in Outcome 2? How do your results support this conclusion? Please use the space below to indicate whether or not each performance criterion was met and to describe components of the program you believe contributed to this result. The committee members of masters students take their mentoring responsibility very seriously. The methods section often involves multiple iterations of feedback and revisions. The oral defense is often well practiced with guidance from the advisor. Outcome 2 met? Use Dropdown to Select

Measure 2.1 The methods section or chapter of the M.A. thesis. Was the Performance Criteria Met? Performance Criteria 2.1 At least 80% of the students will perform at or above mastery. Use Dropdown to Select

Number of Observations 2 or 100% Proportion of Target Population Yes Included in Assessment (e.g. Assessed number of students, papers, projects) Data Collection Challenges or The data collections comes from the thesis advisor. Issues [if applicable]

Measure 2.2 The oral defense of the M.A. thesis. Was the Performance Criteria Met? Performance Criteria 2.2 At least 80% of the students will perform at or above mastery. Use Dropdown to Select

Number of Observations 2 or 100% Proportion of Target Population Yes Included in Assessment (e.g. Assessed number of students, papers, projects) Data Collection Challenges or The data collection comes from the thesis advisor. Issues [if applicable] *Ideally, the eligible population includes only students enrolled in your program. In cases where vital courses have students from various programs, specify when the population may include non-majors. The measure may be targeting, graduating students, alumni, students in junior level or capstone courses. The measure should be specific and the proportion should be of that group. Program Self-Assessment Please summarize how the assessment results for the 2012-13 academic year will impact your academic program in the coming year. Consider what the assessment data indicate are programmatic strengths or weaknesses and areas of possible development. The masters thesis academic program has been ‘stable’ for the last decade. It has done a truly remarkable job of culling students who should not have been admitted from those who are on track for moving onto a Ph.D. program or a career in industry and government. The current assessment data of student success upon graduation is consistent with prior years.

Please summarize how the assessment results for the 2012-13 academic year will impact your assessment process for the coming year. Please consider revisions to your plan, sampling strategies, data collection, or any other areas. No changes are considered.

Assessment Plan 2013-2014 Academic Year

To make assessment plan revisions for the 2013-14 academic year, please visit our website at: https://uoeee.asu.edu/revising-plan for detailed instructions. Our plan revision webpage has a link to which you will log-in and be able to review comments on your 2012- 2013 plan and revise specific aspects of your program’s assessment plan. The log-in information is listed below. Some programs have been encouraged to revise aspects of their plan and our office has been working with each college’s assessment delegates to assist with this process; please work closely with your assessment delegate for further details regarding revising your assessment plan for the coming year. All modifications to the assessment plan for the 2013-2014 academic year must be submitted by September 30, 2013.

Login LAGEOGMA Password CGEOGRAPHY_LAGEOGMA