Name of Program: Psychology, Criminal Justice, Sociology/Social Work

Assessment Summary: May 2015

Year of Assessment Report: 2014-2015

Faculty Participants: Maria LaPadula, Dina Karafantis, Susana Case, Emily Restivo, Blair Hoplight, Beth Adubato, Len Tester

1. Which program learning outcomes have been assessed for the planned academic year?

The focus for the 2014-2015 academic year was on assessing the NYIT Global competency outcome in our Behavioral Science courses. We assessed this competency in our psychology, criminal justice and sociology/social work courses. This is the second year that we did this assessment because last year we found that 13 to 20% of the students were in the failing range. We made minor changes to the rubric we used to assess this outcome and gave the students the rubric at the beginning of each semester, before the assignment was due, so they knew what they were being graded on.

2. Which measuring instruments were used for the assessment?

Data was collected during the fall 2014 and spring 2015 semesters in the following courses. In these courses the direct measures were either a paper, student presentation or exam questions as can be seen below. A rubric was used that was developed within the department to grade all of the papers/writing assignments. (see attached rubric).

Psychology: PSYC 220 Child Psychology (Fall 2014): paper about an issue in child psychology from a global perspective PSYC 235 Adolescent Psychology (Spring 2015): Paper about an issue in adolescent psychology from a global perspective PSYC 370 Research Methods (Spring 2015): literature review for research project, exam questions

Criminal Justice CRIM 300 Ethics in CJ (Spring 2015): paper on death penalty from a global perspective Sociology/Social Work: SOCI 101 Introduction to Sociology (Fall 2014): exam questions SOCI 301 Marriage and Family (Fall 2014): paper regarding gender roles in two societies outside U.S.

In addition, we planned to focus on the sociology/social work program and re-evaluate the program outcomes to be sure they are consonant with the standards of higher education and the discipline of sociology/social work, which would mean updating our program outcomes. We completed the psychology and criminal justice programs last year, and wanted to complete this one.

3. What were the important findings? How well did students achieve the targeted learning outcomes?

In all of the classes the direct measures were graded out of 100 so that we could assess the results. The following scale was used to assess student work:

Superior Work: 90-100 Very Good Work: 80-89 Satisfactory Work: 70-79 Poor Work: 60-69 Failing: below 60

Data was collected from 22 students in the Criminal Justice courses, 45 students in the Sociology/Social Work classes, and 55 students in the psychology classes.

The results are as follows for the Criminal Justice classes:

59.1% of the students’ work fell into the superior range (last year was 28.6%)

12.2% of the students’ work fell into the very good range (last year was 25.4%)

22.7% of the students’ work fell into the satisfactory range (last year was 25.4%)

0% 0f the students’ work fell into the poor range 0% (last year was 6.3%)

6% of the students’ work fell into the failing range (last year was 14%) The results are as follows for the Sociology/Social Work classes:

6.9% of the students’ work fell into the poor range (last year was 9.4%)

8.1 % of the students’ work fell into the failing range (last year was 20.3%)

The results are as follows for the Psychology classes: PUT NEW NUMBERS

3.6% of the students’ work fell into the poor range (last year was 19.8%)

7.3% of the students’ work fell into the failing range (last year was 13.5%)

We were pleased that at least 70% of the students were in the very good range or higher, which was an improvement from last year. Moreover, between 6 to 8% were in the failing range, as opposed to last year when 13 to 20% of the students were in the failing range. Giving the rubric to the students before the assignment was due and modifying the rubric helped a great deal. 4. Select action items the faculty believes may enhance student learning. Decide who will be responsible for the action, and establish a timeline for completion.

Faculty will meet in August 2015 to look at these results in more detail. Since the results were analyzed after the end of the spring semester the department as a whole has not yet reviewed the results, only Drs. LaPadula and Karafantis reviewed the results. After reviewing the results we will determine if we are now satisfied with the results of this assessment. The assumption is that all faculty will be satisfied with these results.

5. What’s the assessment plan for the next academic year?

The faculty will meet in August 2015 to discuss our assessment plan in more detail for the 2015-2016 year.

We had planned to also focus on the sociology/social work program and re-evaluate the program outcomes to be sure they are consonant with the standards of higher education and the discipline of sociology/social work, which would mean updating our program outcomes. We completed the psychology and criminal justice programs last year, and wanted to complete this one. We were not able to complete this goal, so we will do this during the 2015-2016 academic year so that we will have updated program outcomes for each of our three undergraduate programs. So, we will review the Subject Benchmark Statement for Sociology and Social Work from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education, as we did for the psychology and criminal justice program two years ago.

Global Rubric

1 (unsatisfactory) 2 (novice) 3(Basic) 4 (Competent)

Understanding the Student does not Demonstrates Student is aware Student interconnected demonstrate an basic that the demonstrates nature of modern understanding that understanding conditions of one a level of global different cultures of the modern nation can critical thinking environment and nations impact multinational impact those of and analysis one another system, but other nations. concerning knowledge is Does not political/social general and demonstrate and sparse. awareness of the environmental impact of global issues raised interdependence. by the interconnected nature of the current global situation.

Cultural Diversity Student does not Demonstrates The Student The student demonstrate an basic demonstrates a demonstrates understanding of knowledge of working and different cultures. major cultural knowledge of the understanding differences. cultural of the social, Does not differences and historical, demonstrate the factors that religious, and any contributed to environmental understanding the differences. factors that of the reasons encompass the for these development cultural of global differences. cultures.

Knowledge of Demonstrates no Demonstrates Demonstrate a The student Global trends understanding of a rudimentary understanding of demonstrates current world understanding world events a deep events of current from a western- knowledge of global events. European current global perspective events and the factors which brought about these events.