Graduate Degree Program Assessment Progress Report Cover Sheet

Graduate Degree Program Assessment Progress Report Cover Sheet:

Degree: Master of Science Communication Sciences & Disorders For Calendar Year: 2015 (Date submitted to college committee: ______4/29/16____By: _Betholyn Gentry, Ph.D.___) (Date posted on college assessment website:______)

Overall Rating:______

Respond to all six parts following the “Degree Program Assessment Progress Report Instructions.” (NOTE: Parts 1 through 4 can be copied from the relevant sections of your assessment plan.) Attach additional pages as needed.

(1) Student learning goal(s) addressed this year: Our goals are:

1) To produce clinician-scholars who engage in lifelong learning activities that build on knowledge obtained in our program. 2) To develop specific and current competencies for evaluating and treating children and adults with speech, language, swallowing, and/or hearing disorders. 3) To provide research skills as a foundation for advanced studies and/or as an informed consumer of research.

(2) Learning outcomes/objectives for those goals addressed this year: The objectives for the Graduate Communication Sciences and Disorders Program include producing speech pathology graduates who will demonstrate:

1. knowledge and skills related to the assessment and diagnosis of adults and children with speech, language, literacy, swallowing, and/or hearing disorders. 2. knowledge and skills in the (re)habilitation of adults and children with speech, language, literacy, swallowing, and/or hearing disorders. 3. knowledge of research methodology in general and within the field of communication disorders.

(3) Courses & activities where assessed: These goals were assessed during throughout the lifecycle of the 2013 cohort and the 2015 calendar year. Data were collected in academic, clinical and work place settings.

(4) Methods used: The professional community is the second largest consumer of and primary target of our services/product, which are well-trained competent professionals. Tools to assess professional

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 1 community perception include the following: Employer Surveys, Focus Groups, and Graduate Employment Surveys.

(5) What are the assessment findings? How did you analyze them? When appropriate, means were calculated for the various assessment measures. A summary of the findings are provided below:

AUSP Graduate SLP Course Evaluations The course/instructor rating form consists of two parts (a) statements related to the related to the course, and (b) statements related to the instructor. The average ratings for 12 didactic courses were calculated in terms of the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values. Ratings show that students agree (.80 to .89) or strongly agree (.90 or greater) with the course and instructor statements.

Graduate SLP Exit Surveys Due to faculty turnover and the transition of the department to a new department chair the Graduate Exit Survey (Appendix A) was not completed for the class of 2015. We will resume administration of this survey for the class of 2016 using our usual format. The procedure for collecting the Exit Survey will change for the class of 2016 to include this survey as part of the graduation checkout process.

Nine Month Post- Graduation Surveys Attempts were made to collect data from recent speech language pathology graduates. The nine month post graduate survey form was sent to students who graduated in 2013 to 2014 and 12 surveys were returned. This survey used a 5 point scale with 1 indicating strong disagreement and 5 indicating strong agreement. All questions were worded such that a positive response was always toward 5 and a negative response toward 1. There were 13 questions, five covering the knowledge-base, four covering clinical proficiency, three covering behavioral skills and one for an overall program rating. The grand mean for all 13 questions was 4.5 with a range between 4.0 and 5.0. For the five knowledge-based questions the mean was 4.4 with a range between 4.0 and 5.0. Students were generally pleased with their ability to identify and interpret diagnostic data, reported that they had learned sound clinical judgment but felt that they could learn more about therapeutic procedures. For the four clinical questions the mean was 4.3 with a range between 4.0 and 4.6. On the three questions related to behavioral skills, the mean score was 4.8 with scores ranging from 4.6 to 5.0. The overall rating for the program was 4.4 (where 4 = good and 5 = excellent). In general, these nine months post- graduation survey data indicate that students are pleased with the education they receive from the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology. Helpful suggestions were offered by many students regarding topics that need more coverage, course sequencing,

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 2 and practicum placements. An online survey will be launched next year on a trial basis in an effort to improve response rates

Diversity of Students The graduate program in Communication Sciences and Disorders appears to be recruiting students from diverse backgrounds at a higher rate than reflected across other programs in the US. Our students reflect a higher proportion of males than other programs across the country and higher proportion of students who identify as Black/African American, Latino, Asian, and Native American. Efforts should continue in this area. Although the proportion of male students in our graduate program was twice that of the national average, it was still considerably lower than the roughly 50% of the population at large. Furthermore, efforts need to continue to ensure racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity in our programs.

Graduate SLP Student Financial Support – 2015 Financial support is an important factor for many of our graduate students in the Speech- Language Pathology program. Each semester, we are able to provide assistantships to a significant number of students. Most of these graduate assistantships were generated by collaborative efforts of the department and off campus practicum sites. In 2015, 15 students received assistantships in the spring, 10 students received assistantships in the summer, and 16 students received assistantships in the spring (see table below). It should be noted that graduate assistantships totaled $88,250. The amount of money associated with each assistantship varies, but typically ranged from $3,000 to $6,000.

Graduation Completion Rates - SLP The AUSP department is committed to the successful completion of the graduate SLP program by our graduate students. One way of monitoring our success is to keep track of graduate SLP student graduation completion rates. Of the cohort of 20 students who were admitted the into the graduate SLP program in fall, 2013, 20 students graduated on time in May, 2015 for a graduation completion rate of 100%.

Employer Survey The Employer Survey was completed by five employers of students who graduated in May 2013 and 2014 (See Appendix F).The Employer Survey used a 5 point scale with 1 indicating strong disagreement and 5 indicating strong agreement. All questions were worded such that a positive response was always toward 5 and a negative response toward 1. There were 18 questions, six covering the knowledge-base, three covering clinical proficiency, seven covering behavioral skills and two for program evaluation. The grand mean for all 16 questions was 5.0 with all ratings being 4.96. For the six knowledge-based questions the mean was also 4.92 with all ratings ranging from 4.6 to 5.0. For the three clinical questions the mean score was 4.92

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 3 with a range of 4.6 to 5.0; and the mean score for the seven questions related to behavioral skills, was 4.97 with ratings ranging from 4.85 to 5.0. The rating for the overall quality of the program’s graduates was 5.0. The rating for the overall quality of the program in CSD was also 5.0. The employers who responded to the survey were very pleased with the quality of the graduates of the CSD program in the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology.

Post-Graduation Job Survey A survey was conducted to collect information regarding the employment status of the 2015 Communication Sciences and Disorders graduate class. Additionally, information regarding the type of work setting was obtained. Eighty percent (80%) of the students responded to the survey and provided the requested information. Ninety-three percent (93%) of the respondents are currently employed as Speech-Language Pathologists, and sixty-three percent (63%) are employed in the state of Arkansas. Nearly half (47%) of the graduates that responded are employed in a school setting. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are employed in an early childhood setting, thirteen percent (13%) are employed in a hospital setting and thirteen percent (13%) are employed in skilled nursing facilities. According to the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA), more than half of Speech-Language Pathologists are employed in educational settings that include early intervention, preschool and K-12 schools, and the second ranked employment setting is a medical facility. This trend is reflected in our graduate student employment status.

Focus Groups There were no formal focus groups conducted for 2015. However, the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology in the College of Health Professions at UAMS teamed up with the Speech-Language Pathology Division of Rehabilitation Services at UAMS to co-host a two- day workshop on Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES). Joseph Murray, Ph.D., CCC-SLP, BCS-S taught the course. He is the Chief of the Audiology and Speech Pathology Service at the Veteran's Administration Ann Arbor Healthcare System in Ann Arbor Michigan. A total of 52 participants attended the 12 hour conference, which included an 8 hour didactic participatory presentation on the first day in which everyone attended and a 4 hour hands-on practice session the second day. The second day the hands-on sessions were split into professional education (31 speech-language pathologists) in the morning and pre-professional education (19 SLP students accompanied by 2 faculty members) in the afternoon.

(6) What conclusions were drawn and what decisions were made as a result? How were stakeholder groups involved? The data collected for this assessment report are reflective of our stakeholder’s satisfaction with the department and the academic and clinical education of our students. It is imperative that off campus practicum sites meet the high standards of our program and the profession.

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 4 Therefore, it is important for these sites to be part of the feedback loop. Assessing the professional community will help us address concerns and make decisions about the viability of various clinical sites for our graduate students. The data collected for this assessment report are reflective of community satisfaction with our department and the academic and clinical education our students are receiving. Graduation completion rates are at 100 for the class of 2015. The department continually seeks additional financial support for our students in the way of graduate assistantships and funds for scholarships. In addition, our clinic continues to seek opportunities to serve the community. We continue to utilize student action and student remediation plans where needed as a way to keep students on track for graduation. Our pass rate for the Praxis exam continues to be high. Each student who graduated was successfully employed in the profession. Despite tough economic times, student funding through departmental scholarships and graduate assistantships totaled $88,250. The total number of students receiving some type of financial support (i.e., scholarship or graduate assistantship) remained steady with approximately 75% of the first year graduate students receiving an assistantship. The current assessment measures provide good information to the department; however, in an effort to continually improve the faculty plan to conduct a thorough review of each assessment plan for the five programs in the department to identify new assessment strategies.

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 5 Curriculum Assessment Map: Degree Program Assessment Audiology and Speech Pathology M.S. Degree

Emphasis: Extensive Somewhat Little None Assessed: Exam Paper Project Other Not Assessed

Goal # 1 - To produce clinician-scholars who engage in lifelong learning activities that build on knowledge obtained in our program, to develop specific and current competencies for evaluating and treating children and adults with speech, language, swallowing, and/or hearing disorders, and to provide research skills as a foundation for advanced studies and/or as an informed consumer of research.

Courses and How Outcomes Outcome # 1.- Outcome # 2- Outcome #3- Activities are Addressed Students will Students will Students will and Assessed demonstrate demonstrate demonstrate knowledge and skills knowledge and skills knowledge of related to the in the (re)habilitation research assessment and of adults and methodology in diagnosis of adults children with speech, general and within and children with language, the field of speech, language, swallowing, and/or communication swallowing, and/or hearing disorders disorders. hearing disorders. AUSP 7092 Emphasis: Somewhat Somewhat Extensive Independent Assessed Project Project Project Research AUSP 7093 Topics Emphasis: Extensive Extensive None in Speech Assessed Exam Exam Language Pathology AUSP 791-7691 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive None Practicum Assessed Other Other AUSP 7193 Emphasis: Somewhat Extensive None Independent Assessed Paper Paper Study Exam Exam AUSP 7264 Emphasis: None Little None Organization and Assessed Other Other Administration of Clinical Programs AUSP 7270 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Fluency Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Disorders

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 6 AUSP 7273 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Neurogenic Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Speech Disorders AUSP 7275 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Craniofacial Assessed: Exam Exam Other Speech Disorders Other Other AUSP 7377 Voice Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Disorders Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Project AUSP 7282 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Learning Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Disabilities AUSP 7294 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Augmentative Assessed: Exam Exam Exam and Alternative Communication AUSP 7360 Emphasis: Little Little Extensive Research Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Methods in Communicative Disorders AUSP 7263 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Sociolinguistics Assessed: Exam Exam Exam

AUSP 7364 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Little Language Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Assessment and Project Project Therapy AUSP 7365 Emphasis: Somewhat Somewhat None Counseling in Assessed: Exam Exam Communication Project Project Disorders AUSP 7366 Emphasis: Somewhat None None Advanced Assessed: Exam Anatomy and Physiology for Speech AUSP 7367 Infant- Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Somewhat Toddler Assessed: Exam Exam Project Communication: Development and Assessment AUSP 7368 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Somewhat Dysphagia Assessed: Exam Exam Exam

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 7 AUSP 7371 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Somewhat Neurogenic Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Language Disorders AUSP 7372 Emphasis: Extensive Extensive Somewhat Advanced Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Articulation Disorders AUSP 7385 Emphasis: Somewhat Somewhat Little Audiologic Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Rehabilitation: Children

AUSP 7386 Aural Emphasis: Somewhat Somewhat Little Rehabilitation: Assessed: Exam Exam Exam Adults AUSP 7392 Emphasis: Somewhat Little None Multicultural Assessed: Exam Exam Issues Project AUSP 7396 Emphasis: Extensive None None Advanced Assessed: Exam Exam Differential Diagnosis of Speech and Language Disorders

AUSP 8100-8600 Emphasis: None None Extensive Thesis Assessed: Project

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 8 ASSESSMENT REPORT MASTER OF SCIENCE DEGREE in Communication Sciences and Disorders College of Education and Health Professions (UALR) Ann Bain, Dean College of Health Professions (UAMS) Douglas Murphy, Dean Audiology and Speech Pathology Department Nannette Nicholson, Ph.D., Interim Chair Betholyn Gentry, Ph.D., Graduate Program Coordinator and College Assessment Committee ANNUAL REPORT for 2015 Submitted APRIL, 2016

AUSP Graduate Assessment Contributors Betholyn Gentry, Ph.D., Nannette Nicholson Ph.D., Donna Kelly, Ph.D., Greg Robinson Ph.D., Stacey Mahurin M.S.,

Department Mission

The mission of the Audiology and Speech Pathology (AUSP) department is to educate professionals who serve persons with communication, swallowing, literacy, hearing, and balance disorders at local, state, national, and international levels. The department is dedicated to excellence in: (a) teaching and lifelong learning in a student-centered environment; (b) service in a patient-centered environment based on academic excellence, leadership, and the ethic of community responsibility; and (c) research that supports communication science and the practice of audiology and speech-language pathology (AUSP Strategic Plan, 2012). The department contributes to the College of Professional Studies (CPS) mission by advancing collaborative problem-solving, entrepreneurial public leadership, and effective use of communication to develop dynamic, healthy, and safe communities through theoretic and applied research and instruction (CPS Strategic Plan, 2007); and to the mission of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR) by developing the intellect of students; discovering and disseminating knowledge; serving and strengthening society by enhancing awareness in scientific, technical, and cultural arenas; and by promoting humane sensitivities and understanding of interdependence. Within this broad mission are the responsibilities to use quality instruction to instill in students a lifelong desire to learn, to use knowledge in ways that will contribute to society, and to apply the resources and research skills of the University community to the service of the city, the state, the nation, and the world in ways that will benefit humanity (Adopted by the UALR Faculty Senate, 1988).

Graduate Speech Pathology Program Goals

The Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology will continue to expand its influence as a dynamic, collaborative, and innovative consortium program striving to meet the following

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 9 goals: (a) improving academic programs to attract outstanding students and promote intellectual development; (b) engaging in service that strengthens our ties to the community, region, and state; (c) strengthening research programs through scientific inquiry and scholarly endeavors; and (d) increasing fiscal self-sufficiency. Furthermore, goals for our students are to produce clinician-scholars who engage in lifelong learning activities that build on knowledge obtained in our program, to develop specific and current competencies for evaluating and treating children and adults with speech, language, literacy, swallowing, and/or hearing disorders, and to provide research skills as a foundation for advanced studies and/or as an informed consumer of research.

The objectives for the Graduate Communication Sciences and Disorders Program include producing speech pathology graduates who will demonstrate:

4. knowledge and skills related to the assessment and diagnosis of adults and children with speech, language, literacy, swallowing, and/or hearing disorders. 5. knowledge and skills in the (re)habilitation of adults and children with speech, language, literacy, swallowing, and/or hearing disorders. 6. knowledge of research methodology in general and within the field of communication disorders.

Five-year Assessment Plan: Graduate

The faculty of the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology reviewed the assessment plan last year and decided to revise the existing plan for future assessment reports. One major change to the new plan was to go to a five year assessment plan rather than a three year rotating assessment plan. Five areas for assessment were identified within the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology and include: assessment of overall program, assessment of student clinical training, assessment of graduate students, assessment of professional community perceptions, and assessment of consumers of clinical services. These assessments will be analyzed using descriptive statistics. The Audiology and Speech Pathology assessment plan includes rotating the focus of assessment each year following the new five-year cycle.

First Year Assessments (2012): The first year of the new five year cycle involves gathering data related to assessment of the overall graduate speech pathology program. This assessment process includes collecting data from the following areas: Graduate Exit Survey, Nine Month Post Graduation Survey, Graduate Course Evaluation, Town Hall Meeting (as needed), Diversity of Students Admitted, Graduation Completion Rates, and Student Financial Support. These data will be used to evaluate overall program effectiveness by obtaining input from and about one of our major stakeholders, students. Results from and about our student stakeholders will be used for program improvement and decision-making.

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 10 Second Year Assessments (2013): During the second year of the five-year cycle assessment efforts will focus on graduate speech pathology student clinical training. Clinical training for Speech Pathology graduate students will be assessed with data obtained in the following areas: Graduate Student Practicum Evaluations, Practicum Supervisor Evaluation, Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (clinic related questions), Diversity of Clients Served (off and on campus), and Site Evaluation. This information will be used to assess how well the program is meeting the clinical needs of our graduate speech pathology students. These data will be used to make decisions about the graduate speech pathology clinical training program.

Third Year Assessments (2014): During the third year of the five-year cycle assessment efforts will focus on assessment of our graduate speech pathology students. Assessment will be conducted using the following information: Graduate Speech Pathology Comprehensive Examination, SLP Comprehensive Examination Student Survey, Speech Pathology Knowledge and Skills Assessment (KASAs), Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (student questions), Pass/Fail Rates on the National Examination, Outcomes of Research Requirement, and Student Scholarships and Awards. These data should indicate how well the graduate program is meeting the needs of our graduate speech pathology students and ensure that we are graduating the best prepared students possible. Additionally, these data will provide information on how well our students are prepared for the professional examination compared to national results.

Fourth Assessment Year (2015): During the fourth year of the five-year cycle professional community perception will be the focus of assessment. The professional community is the second largest consumer of and primary target of our services/product, which are well- trained competent professionals. Tools to assess professional community perception include the following: Employer Surveys, Focus Groups, and Graduate Employment Surveys. It is imperative that off campus practicum sites meet the high standards of our program and the profession. Therefore, it is important for these sites to be part of the feedback loop. This assessment will help us address concerns and make decisions about the viability of various clinical sites for our graduate students.

Fifth Year Assessment (2016): During the fifth year of the five-year cycle the focus of assessment will be on the consumers of clinical services. Assessment will focus on: Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services (clinic related questions), Diversity of Clients Served (UALR Clinic), and Types of Services Provided to Consumers (UALR clinic). Consumers are important stakeholders and we value their input. The data collected will be used to make decisions about changes to clinical services offered to the public by our in house clinic and when making decisions regarding marketing and quality improvement initiatives.

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 11 Audiology and Speech Pathology Department Graduate Speech Pathology Program Five-Year Assessment Plan (2012 - 2016)

Assessment Tool Grad SLP Objective(s) Cycle Year Assessment of Overall Program* 1 & 2 Year 1 2015 Graduate Exit Survey Nine Month Post Graduation Survey Graduate Course Evaluation Town Hall Meeting (as needed) Diversity of Students Admitted Graduation Completion Rates Student Financial Support

Assessment of Student Clinical Training 1 & 2 Year 2 2013 Graduate Student Practicum Evaluation Practicum Supervisor Evaluation Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services Diversity of Clients Served Site Evaluation

Assessment of Graduate Students 1, 2, & 3 Year 3 2014 Graduate Speech Pathology Comprehensive Examination SLP Comprehensive Examination Student Survey Speech Pathology Knowledge and Skills Assessment Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services Pass Rates on National Examination Outcomes of Research Requirement Scholarships and Awards

Assessment of Professional Perceptions* 1 & 2 Year 4 2015 Employer Survey Focus Groups Post-Graduate Job Survey

Assessment of Consumers of Clinical Services 1 & 2 Year 5 2016 Consumer Evaluation of Clinical Services Diversity of Clients Served (UALR clinic) Types of Services Provided to Consumers (UALR clinic)

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 12 Use of Assessment The Audiology and Speech Pathology Department (AUSP) has historically assessed graduate students using a variety of assessment tools that have been useful for program building and improvement. With the implementation of our new five-year plan the following assessment tools were given this year to help meet our graduate speech language pathology (SLP) program objectives as reflected by an assessment of our overall graduate program: graduate course evaluation, graduate exit survey, nine month post-graduation survey, town hall meeting (as needed), diversity of students admitted, graduation completion rates and student financial support. In addition, graduate student employer surveys, focus groups and student financial support were reported.

AUSP Graduate SLP Course Evaluations The M.S. program in Communication Sciences and Disorders (CSD) offers two different ‘types’ of course work. These include (a) didactic coursework and (c) practical experience in the form of intern and externships. The table below represents the average rating of 12 didactic courses taught by the audiology faculty and by adjunct professors during the 2015 calendar year.The course/instructor rating form consists of two parts (a) statements related to the related to the course, and (b) statements related to the instructor. Evaluation items from 1 to 4 in the Table titled “Mean M.S. Course Evaluations” are statements about the course in general. Items from 5 to 11 in the table are statements about the course instructor. Students are asked to choose a rating of Strongly Agree (5), Agree (4), Neither Agree nor Disagree (3), Disagree (2), Strongly Disagree (1) or Not Applicable (N/A). The average ratings for 12 didactic courses are show in the table as the mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum values. Ratings show that students agree (.80 to .89) or strongly agree (.90 or greater) with the course and instructor statements.

Mean M.S. Course Evaluations (N=12)

Evaluation Item Mean SD Min Max

1. Organization 0.83 0.12 0.63 0.97

2. Content 0.87 0.11 0.56 0.97

3. Objectives 0.86 0.16 0.41 1.00

4. Assignments 0.86 0.12 0.56 0.98

5. Fluent English 0.99 0.02 0.96 1.00

6. Preparation 0.88 0.12 0.62 1.00

7. Knowledgeable 0.89 0.17 0.46 1.00

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 13 8. Presentation 0.81 0.16 0.56 0.98

9. Atmosphere 0.88 0.10 0.68 1.00

10. Grading 0.91 0.14 0.46 1.00

11. Professionalism 0.90 0.07 0.75 0.98

Graduate SLP Exit Surveys

Due to faculty turnover and the transition of the department to a new department chair the Graduate Exit Survey (Appendix A) was not completed for the class of 2015. We will resume administration of this survey for the class of 2016 using our usual format. The procedure for collecting the Exit Survey will change for the class of 2016 to include this survey as part of the graduation checkout process.

Nine Month SLP Post Graduation Survey

Attempts were made to collect data from recent speech language pathology graduates. The nine month post graduate survey form was sent to students who graduated in 2013 to 2014 and 12 surveys were returned. This survey used a 5 point scale with 1 indicating strong disagreement and 5 indicating strong agreement. All questions were worded such that a positive response was always toward 5 and a negative response toward 1. There were 13 questions, five covering the knowledge-base, four covering clinical proficiency, three covering behavioral skills and one for an overall program rating. The grand mean for all 13 questions was 4.5 with a range between 4.0 and 5.0. For the five knowledge-based questions the mean was 4.4 with a range between 4.0 and 5.0. Students were generally pleased with their ability to identify and interpret diagnostic data, reported that they had learned sound clinical judgment but felt that they could learn more about therapeutic procedures. For the four clinical questions the mean was 4.3 with a range between 4.0 and 4.6. On the three questions related to behavioral skills, the mean score was 4.8 with scores ranging from 4.6 to 5.0. The overall rating for the program was 4.4 (where 4 = good and 5 = excellent). In general, these nine months post- graduation survey data indicate that students are pleased with the education they receive from the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology. Helpful suggestions were offered by many students regarding topics that need more coverage, course sequencing, and practicum placements. An online survey will be launched next year on a trial basis in an effort to improve response rates. (See Appendix B)

SLP Town Hall Meeting – SLP

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 14 Town Hall meeting are a useful tool to assess student related issues. These are used whenever there are issues that require input from our graduate SLP students. There were no SLP Town Hall Meetings during 2015.

Diversity of Students Admitted into the Graduate Program

Background Diversity may pertain to a variety of different traits. For the purposes of this assessment, we chose the following: Gender, Age, Race/Ethnicity, Nation of Birth, Native Language, and Disability Status. The field of Speech-Language Pathology is a remarkably and regrettably homogenous field. To contextualize the data in this report, the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA) reported in 2011 the graduate student population in Speech- Language Pathology was 87% White and 95% Female.

Method A 9-question, paper survey was given to all graduate students in the speech-language pathology program for completion (Appendix C). A total of 35 students were surveyed (18 first-year graduate students and 17 second-year graduate students). The results were as follows:

Gender The respondents to this survey were 89% female and 11% male. Notably, this proportion of male students is more than 2 times their representation nationally (5%) as reflected in the table below. The underrepresentation of males in the field of communication sciences and disorders has been an ongoing issue (Maier, 2013). Our program is representing males at a significantly higher rate than the field as a whole.

Age The average age of the respondents was 26 years old. This distribution was positively skewed with 60% of students between the ages of 22 and 24 years. The youngest respondent was 22 years of age and the oldest respondent was 40 years of age. Notably, almost 30% of the graduate students were 30 years old or older, reflecting a non-traditional student population in terms of age (see table below).

Race/Ethnicity A total of 83% of the respondents reported their race/ethnicity to be “White/Caucasian.” Three respondents (8%) identified as Black/African American, 1 identified as Hispanic/Latino (3%),

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 15 one identified as Asian/Pacific Islander (3%) and one identified as multiple races/ethnicities (White/Caucasian, Black/African American, and Native American/Alaskan Native).

These percentages are somewhat less diverse than the proportions reported during the 2000 Census in Arkansas (c.f., White = 77%, Black = 15%, Latino = 6.4%, and Asian = 6%). However, they represent much greater diversity than that reported by ASHA for the fields of Speech- Language Pathology and Audiology and for the Arkansas graduate programs in Speech- Language Pathology. The graduate student population in the US for Speech-Language Pathology in 2011 was only 13% non-White compared to almost 17% non-White students in UAMS speech-language pathology program. It appears that our program is doing a fair job recruiting students from minority backgrounds into the graduate program.

US Born/Native Language Two of the respondents reported that they were born outside of the US (India, Saudi Arabia). One respondents indicated that their native language was something other than English (Arabic) and one indicated English was their native language, but they had also learned ASL before the age of 5 years old.

Disability Two respondents (8.6%) indicated that they had a disability.

Discussion The graduate program in Communication Sciences and Disorders appears to be recruiting students from diverse backgrounds at a higher rate than reflected across other programs in the US. Our students reflect a higher proportion of males than other programs across the country and higher proportion of students who identify as Black/African American, Latino, Asian, and Native American. Efforts should continue in this area. Although the proportion of male students in our graduate program was twice that of the national average, it was still considerably lower than the roughly 50% of the population at large. Furthermore, efforts need to continue to ensure racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity in our programs.

References American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2011). 2009– 2010 academic year state-by- state data on graduate education in communication sciences and disorders. Available from www.asha.org Maier, K. (2013) Why the scarcity of male SLPs and what can be done? The ASHA Leader Blog. Retrieved March 18, 2016 from http://blog.asha.org/2013/08/13/why-the-scarcity-of-male- slps-and-what-can-be-done/.

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 16 Graduation Completion Rates – SLP

The AUSP department is committed to the successful completion of the graduate SLP program by our graduate students. One way of monitoring our success is to keep track of graduate SLP student graduation completion rates. Of the cohort of 20 students who were admitted the into the graduate SLP program in fall, 2013, 20 students graduated on time in May, 2015 for a graduation completion rate of 100%.

Graduate SLP Graduation Rates – 2015 Cohort Year Graduation Year # Admitted Graduation Rate 2013 2015 20 100%

Graduate SLP Student Financial Support – 2015

Financial support is an important factor for many of our graduate students in the Speech- Language Pathology program. Each semester, we are able to provide assistantships to a significant number of students. Most of these graduate assistantships were generated by collaborative efforts of the department and off campus practicum sites. In 2015, 15 students received assistantships in the spring, 10 students received assistantships in the summer, and 16 students received assistantships in the spring (see table below). It should be noted that graduate assistantships totaled $88,250. The amount of money associated with each assistantship varies, but typically ranged from $3,000 to $6,000.

Number of SLP Graduate Assistantships Awarded by Site & Semester

Spring 2015 Summer 2015 Fall 2015

Student Student Source of Funding Student Cohort Cohort Cohort

2nd Semester 3rd Semester 4th Semester 1st Semester

ACCESS Preschool 1 1 0 1

ACCESS Upper Academy 1 0 0 1

Arkansas Children’s Hospital 1 1 0 0 (ACH), Listening Center

Arkansas Children’s Hospital (ACH), Speech Pathology 1 1 1 1 Outpatient

Department of Audiology and 0 0 1 0

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 17 Speech Pathology, Clinic Coordinator

Department of Audiology and 1 0 0 1 Speech Pathology, Front Office

Department of Audiology and 1 0 0 1 Speech Pathology, PLEP Group

Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, Pragmatics 1 0 0 1 Group

Department of Audiology and 0 0 1 1 Speech Pathology, Research

Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology, 1 0 0 1 Undergraduate Coordinator

Grow Learning Centre 0 0 0 1

NeuroRestorative Timber Ridge 1 1 0 1

Onsite Therapies 1 1 0 1

University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS), Family 4 4 0 1 Preventative Medicine (3)

University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS), 1 1 0 1 Genetics

Subtotals 15 10 3 13

Totals by Semester 15 students 10 students 16 students

Employer Survey

The Employer Survey was completed by five employers of students who graduated in May 2013 and 2014 (See Appendix D).The Employer Survey used a 5 point scale with 1 indicating strong disagreement and 5 indicating strong agreement. All questions were worded such that a positive response was always toward 5 and a negative response toward 1. There were 18 questions, six covering the knowledge-base, three covering clinical proficiency, seven covering behavioral skills and two for program evaluation. The grand mean for all 16 questions was 5.0

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 18 with all ratings being 4.96. For the six knowledge-based questions the mean was also 4.92 with all ratings ranging from 4.6 to 5.0. For the three clinical questions the mean score was 4.92 with a range of 4.6 to 5.0; and the mean score for the seven questions related to behavioral skills, was 4.97 with ratings ranging from 4.85 to 5.0. The rating for the overall quality of the program’s graduates was 5.0. The rating for the overall quality of the program in CSD was also 5.0. The employers who responded to the survey were very pleased with the quality of the graduates of the CSD program in the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology.

Focus Groups

There were no formal focus groups conducted for 2015. However, the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology in the College of Health Professions at UAMS teamed up with the Speech-Language Pathology Division of Rehabilitation Services at UAMS to co-host a two- day workshop on Fiberoptic Endoscopic Evaluation of Swallowing (FEES). Joseph Murray, Ph.D., CCC-SLP, BCS-S taught the course. He is the Chief of the Audiology and Speech Pathology Service at the Veteran's Administration Ann Arbor Healthcare System in Ann Arbor Michigan. A total of 52 participants attended the 12 hour conference, which included an 8 hour didactic participatory presentation on the first day in which everyone attended and a 4 hour hands-on practice session the second day. The second day the hands-on sessions were split into professional education (31 speech-language pathologists) in the morning and pre-professional education (19 SLP students accompanied by 2 faculty members) in the afternoon.

Following the workshop, Amy Chandler, Director of Speech-Language Pathology Clinical Services at UAMS reported "I received a lot of positive feedback and Joe Murray is an exceptional speaker. The students seemed really excited after the event. I hope it gives them an employment advantage in the future." Dana Moser, Assistant Professor stated that all of the students who wanted to, were able to practice conducting an endoscopic evaluation during the supervised hands-on practice session on Sunday afternoon, and many of the students also volunteered to be participants receiving an endoscopic evaluation from their peers as well. Dana conducted a small survey from students in her class who attended the workshop and report that ". . . comments were overwhelmingly positive and students are hoping that this event can be co-sponsored every year." The student satisfaction score was 4.8 on a 5.0 Likert scale. We congratulate the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology and the Division of Speech-Language Pathology Clinical Services for teaming up to provide this cost-saving continuing education opportunity for several UAMS SLPs and for making this opportunity available to students. An added benefit was the opportunity for students to meet many of the practicing professionals they may someday work with either as a preceptor or colleague.

Post-Graduation Job Survey

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 19 A survey was conducted to collect information regarding the employment status of the 2015 Communication Sciences and Disorders graduate class. Additionally, information regarding the type of work setting was obtained. Eighty percent (80%) of the students responded to the survey and provided the requested information. Ninety-three percent (93%) of the respondents are currently employed as Speech-Language Pathologists, and sixty-three percent (63%) are employed in the state of Arkansas. Nearly half (47%) of the graduates that responded are employed in a school setting. Twenty-seven percent (27%) are employed in an early childhood setting, thirteen percent (13%) are employed in a hospital setting and thirteen percent (13%) are employed in skilled nursing facilities. According to the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA), more than half of Speech-Language Pathologists are employed in educational settings that include early intervention, preschool and K-12 schools, and the second ranked employment setting is a medical facility. This trend is reflected in our graduate student employment status. The diversity of employment settings can be seen in the figure below.

2015 Graduates Employment Settings

Future Assessments

The department will follow the assessment outline listed at the beginning of this document. In summer 2015, the department will conduct a thorough review of the assessment plan for each program to determine what if any changes will be made.

Conclusions

The data collected for this assessment report are reflective of community satisfaction with our department and the academic and clinical education our students are receiving. Graduation completion rates are at 100 for the class of 2015. The department continually seeks additional financial support for our students in the way of graduate assistantships and funds for scholarships. In addition, our clinic continues to seek opportunities to serve the community. We continue to utilize student action and student remediation plans where needed as a way to keep students on track for graduation. Our pass rate for the Praxis exam continues to be high. Each student who graduated was successfully employed in the profession. Despite tough economic times, student funding through departmental scholarships and graduate assistantships totaled $88,250. The total number of students receiving some type of financial support (i.e., scholarship or graduate assistantship) remained steady with approximately 75% of the first year graduate students receiving an assistantship. The current assessment measures provide good information to the department; however, in an effort to continually improve the

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 20 faculty plan to conduct a thorough review of each assessment plan for the five programs in the department to identify new assessment strategies.

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 21 APPENDIX A

GRADUATE EXIT SURVEY Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology

The primary goal of the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology is to prepare the graduate to function as a competent audiologist or speech-language pathologist. This survey is designed to help the department faculty determine its’ strengths and areas needing improvement. All data will be kept confidential and will be used for program evaluation purposes only.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Name:______Address: ______

Phone Number:______Email address:______

Have you accepted a professional position? ______

If so, where?______

Consider each item separately and rate each item independently of all others. Circle the rating that indicates the extent to which you agree with each statement. Please do not skip any rating. If you do not know about a particular area, please circle NA. 5 = Strongly Agree 4 = Generally Agree 3 = Neutral (acceptable) 2 = Generally Disagree 1 = Strongly Disagree NA = not applicable.

I. KNOWLEDGE BASE (Cognitive Domain) The Program:

A. Helped me acquire the knowledge necessary to function in my work setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

B. Prepared me to identify and interpret pertinent data from patient charts/records. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

C. Prepared me to identify and interpret pertinent diagnostic and prognostic data 5 4 3 2 1 NA

D. Helped me to acquire the knowledge necessary to recommend and conduct appropriate therapeutic procedures. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 22 E. Trained me to use sound clinical judgment while functioning in this work setting. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

II. CLINICAL PROFICIENCY (Psychomotor Domain) The Program:

A. Prepared me to perform the clinical skills appropriate for my level of training 5 4 3 2 1 NA

B. Prepared me to perform accurate patient assessments. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

C. Prepared me to perform and interpret diagnostic procedures. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

D. Prepared me to perform appropriate therapeutic procedures. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

III. BEHAVIORAL SKILLS (Affective Domain) The Program:

A. Prepared me to communicate effectively in a clinical setting. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

B. Prepared me to conduct myself in an ethical and professional manner. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

C. Taught me to manage my time efficiently while functioning in a clinical setting. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

IV. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OVERALL RATING:

Please rate the OVERALL quality of the program in Communication Disorders and Sciences (please circle one)

5 = excellent 4 = very good 3 = good 2 = fair 1 = poor

Were any of the practicum or traineeship sites to which you were assigned within a one hour drive of your residence when you were a student? Yes No

If yes, approximately what percentage of them was within that distance? ______%

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 23 Please identify two or three strengths of the program.

______

Please make two or three suggestions to further strengthen the program.

______

THANK YOU! DATE:______

Graduate Exit Survey/May, 2004

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 24 APPENDIX B NINE MONTH POST GRADUATE SURVEY Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology

The primary goal of the Department of Audiology and Speech Pathology is to prepare the graduate to function as a competent audiologist or speech-language pathologist. This survey is designed to help the department faculty determine its’ strengths and areas needing improvement. All data will be kept confidential and will be used for program evaluation purposes only.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Name: ______Address: ______

Phone Number: ______Email address: ______

Job Title: ______Current Salary (optional):______

Length of employment at time of evaluation:______

Consider each item separately and rate each item independently of all others. Circle the rating that indicates the extent to which you agree with each statement. Please do not skip any rating. If you do not know about a particular area, please circle NA. 5 = Strongly Agree 4 = Generally Agree 3 = Neutral (acceptable) 2 = Generally Disagree 1 = Strongly Disagree NA = not applicable.

V. KNOWLEDGE BASE (Cognitive Domain) The Program:

A. Helped me acquire the knowledge necessary to function in my work setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

B. Prepared me to identify and interpret pertinent data from patient charts/records. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

C. Prepared me to identify and interpret pertinent diagnostic and prognostic data 5 4 3 2 1 NA

D. Helped me to acquire the knowledge necessary to recommend and conduct appropriate therapeutic procedures. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

E. Trained me to use sound clinical judgment while functioning in this work setting. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

VI. CLINICAL PROFICIENCY (Psychomotor Domain) The Program:

A. Prepared me to perform the clinical skills appropriate for my level of training 5 4 3 2 1 NA

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 25 B. Prepared me to perform accurate patient assessments. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

C. Prepared me to perform and interpret diagnostic procedures. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

D. Prepared me to perform appropriate therapeutic procedures. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

VII. BEHAVIORAL SKILLS (Affective Domain) The Program:

A. Prepared me to communicate effectively in the work setting. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

B. Prepared me to conduct myself in an ethical and professional manner. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

C. Taught me to manage my time efficiently while functioning in the work setting. 5 4 3 2 1 NA

VIII. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OVERALL RATING:

Please rate the OVERALL quality of your preparation as a speech pathology or audiology professional: (please circle one)

Please rate the OVERALL quality of the program in Communication Disorders and Sciences (please circle one)

Comments:

______

Were you employed six months ago in the professional discipline for which you received you education at UAMS?

Yes / No (circle one)

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 26 Are you currently employed in the professional discipline for which you received your education at UAMS?

Yes / No (circle one)

Based on your work experience, please identify two or three strengths of the program.

______

Based on your work experience, please make two or three suggestions to further strengthen the program.

______

What qualities/skills were expected of you upon your employment that were not included in the program?

______

Please provide comments and suggestions that would help to better prepare future graduates.

______

THANK YOU! DATE:______

Post Graduate Survey/December 3, 2006

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 27 Appendix C

Student Diversity Survey Audiology and Speech Pathology Graduate Students As part of our efforts to constantly improve as a program, the faculty in the UALR Audiology and Speech Pathology Department participate in extensive and ongoing assessment of our curriculum, students, and faculty. One of the things we want to track is the diversity of students admitted to our undergraduate major. Please take a few minutes to answer the following questions about yourself. Your responses will be completely anonymous. DO NOT PUT YOUR NAME ON THIS PAPER. You may choose not to answer any of the questions. These questions will only be used to track diversity among our undergraduate students. They will not be used for any other purpose.

1. Are you currently attending UALR as a major or post bac in the Audiology and Speech Pathology Department? (Circle One)

a. Yes, major

b. Yes, post bac

c. No (If no, then don’t complete this survey at this time)

2. What is your class rank? (Circle One)

a. Freshman b. Sophmore c. Junior d. Senior e. Post Bac

3. Gender: ______

4. Age: ______

5. How would you describe your race/ethnicity? (Note: You may circle more than one.)

a. White/Caucasian

b. Black/African American

c. Hispanic/Latino

d. Asian/Pacific Islander

e. Native American/Alaskan Native

6. Were you born in the U.S.? (Circle One)

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 28 a. Yes.

b. No. Where were you born? ______

7. Is English your native language? (Circle One)

a. Yes.

b. Yes, but I also learned ______before the age of 5.

c. No, my native language is ______.

8. Do you have a disability?

a. Yes.

b. No.

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 29 Appendix D EMPLOYER SURVEY UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK/ UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF AUDIOLOGY AND SPEECH PATHOLOGY

The primary goal of the faculty of the UALR/UAMS Communicative Disorders Program is to prepare our students to function as competent speech-language pathologists. This survey is designed to help the program faculty determine the strengths and weaknesses of our program. All data will be kept confidential and will be used for program evaluation purposes only. We request that this survey be completed by the graduate’s immediate supervisor.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Name of Graduate: ______Length of Employment at Time of Evaluation: ______months Place of Employment:______Immediate Supervisor of Graduate (optional):______

Consider each item separately and rate each item independently of all others. Circle the rating that indicates the extent to which you agree with each statement. Please do not skip any rating. If you do not know about a particular area, circle NA. 5 = strongly agree 4 = generally agree 3 = neutral (acceptable) 2 = generally disagree 1 = strongly disagree

NA = not applicable

I. KNOWLEDGE BASE The Graduate: a. Has the professional knowledge to function in this employment setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

b. Is able to collect pertinent data accurately from charts and patients/clients 5 4 3 2 1 NA

c. Is able to interpret pertinent patient/client data effectively 5 4 3 2 1 NA

d. Is able to select necessary and appropriate diagnostic tests 5 4 3 2 1 NA

e. Is able to recommend appropriate therapeutic procedures 5 4 3 2 1 NA

f. Uses sound clinical judgment while functioning in this employment setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 30 Comments: ______II. CLINICAL PROFICIENCY The Graduate:

a. Has the necessary skills to perform in this employment setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

b. Possesses the skills to perform accurate and efficient client/patient assessments 5 4 3 2 1 NA

c. Possesses the skills to perform appropriate therapy with clients/patients 5 4 3 2 1 NA

Comments:______

III. BEHAVIORAL SKILLS The Graduate:

a. Communicates effectively in this employment setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

b. Conducts himself/herself in an ethical and professional manner 5 4 3 2 1 NA

c. Functions effectively as a member of a team in this setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

d. Accepts supervision and works effectively with supervisory personnel 5 4 3 2 1 NA

e. Is self-directed and responsible for his/her actions 5 4 3 2 1 NA

f. Arrives at work prepared and on time 5 4 3 2 1 NA

f. Contributes to making a positive environment in this setting 5 4 3 2 1 NA

AUSP MS Report submitted 2016 31 Comments:______

IV. PROGRAM EVALUATION Overall Rating:

Please rate the OVERALL quality of the UALR/UAMS program’s graduates: (Please circle one)

5 = very good 4 = good 3 = fair 2 = not good 1 = poor

Please rate the OVERALL quality of the UALR/UAMS program in Communicative Disorders: (Please circle one)

5 = very good 4 = good 3 = fair 2 = not good 1 = poor

Comments:______

What qualities or skills did you expect of the graduate upon employment that he/she did not possess? ______

Please provide comments and suggestions that would help this program better prepare future graduates. ______