Results from Online General Education Assessment Form

Spring 2002

See also e-mailed comments in response to questions.

Legend:

• preparation adequate/yes: yes
• preparation not adequate/no: no
• not assessed or no basis for judgement: n/a

Writing

writing: no, There is a major chasm between the few students who are well prepared to write a critical paper and those who are almost illiterate. In general, more than half of the students have been ill prepared in this area.

writing: no, We (K - 20) are evidently doing a poor job. Students should be encouraged/required to write both short (e.g., 1 page) and moderate (e.g., 2-3 page) papers more often.

writing: no, Students need much more practice with their writing skills. They come into the university unprepared for college writing and the English classes have to do a lot of remedial work so that there is simply not enought course time to raise them to the level of true baccalaueate competency.

writing: no, Students that have completed basic English 100 series still have trouble writing decent arguments and frequently complete sentences.

writing: yes, 6 on a scale from 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (excellent)

writing: no, This seems to vary a great deal from student to student. I have had some excellent students, but most have been marginal I suppose.

writing: no, basically they need more practice

writing: no, Many students still cannot recognize a complete sentence, or adequately edit to their own papers for organization and completeness

writing: yes, If students have had Eng.101/102 the prep is good, but making sure students take 101/102 before upper division classes is a problem.

writing: no, Students ability to construct logical arguments and get their points across is, in general not good. There are a number of good students whose writing is good to exceptional. I am unsure how any of the typical CWU student's writing skills change once they get here. It seems to me that students who write well came to CWU with that ability. We may have refined it, but it was there from the start.

writing: no, despite "successful" completion of gen ed writing courses many students I encounter are functionally incapable of executing a coherent writing assignment

writing: yes, Yes, for the most part. But I have heard colleagues from other departments complain about poor preparation in writing. Students should be required to finish their writing requirements as soon as possible. Seniors sometimes enroll in ENG 101.

writing: no, Preparation varies, obviously -- but it is amazing how many of them have no clue how to do a research paper, and mechanics of writing are often weak. It is difficult to tell, however, if this is due to inadequate preparation or not. The either/or, all-or-nothing phrasing of the question doesn't lend itself to an accurate answer.

Communication

communication: yes, many (most?) seem capable of in-class participation at a suitable level (this is for Jr. and Sr. in particular)

communication: yes, While I do not do oral reports in my classes, I do use group discussion and group reporting. I find that students are generally able to express themselves verbally.

communication: no, Students are not prepared as effective listeners or articulate speakers. I don't think they get enough experience speaking in class either in terms of class discussion or formal presentations.

communication: no, Many students do not have basic oral presentation skills, although this is a learning outcome in our program and we are assessing it currently.

communication: yes, 7 on a scale from 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (excellent)

communication: no, I'd like to see a component of gen ed address this area.

communication: yes, Very few problems here once you get them to speak.

communication: n/a, I would suppose, though, that students are weak in this area because they are not trained to speak well.

communication: yes, This is a hard skill to master, and compared to many undergraduates I have encountered, CWU students are capable but not extraordinary.

communication: no, One-on-one communication is generally "ah, like, dude" OK, but formal public speaking (like writing) varies dramatically. I use oral reports or debates in a number of classes, in part specifically to get them experience in this area.

Diversity

diversity: yes, This could be better, but is improving.

diversity: yes, Depending on which gen ed courses have been taken, the students are fairly well prepared for appreciating diversity, although they do not necessarily know why.

diversity: yes, 7 on a scale from 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (excellent)

diversity: no, We certainly could improve on this.

diversity: no, My answer is oriented more toward the great diversity of the world rather than the United States. Our students are woefully unaware of the world beyond Washington State.

diversity: no, More needs to be done to expand student perspectives on gender/race/economic diversity.

Thinking

thinking: no, The problem here is that our students have not done enough reading. How can you think critically about ideas, if you have never read anything. Critical thinking should be changed to critical reading. Perhaps the poor reading habits contribute to the poor writing skills.

thinking: no, Students show an unwillingness to challenge their own beliefs or even examine the basis for the beliefs they come with.

thinking: no, This is probably one of the weakest aspects of gen ed program in my opinion. I have to teach this one from the ground up.

thinking: no, 5 on a scale from 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (excellent)

thinking: yes, I personally believe this is a skill mostly acquired at the upper-division level.

thinking: no, this is borderline adequate/inadequate - a significant aspect of this area is addressed specifically through content in our discipline

thinking: yes, many expect black & white answers in science, and have poor skills in problem solving, and deeper thought

thinking: no, They generally have difficulty thinking about higher-order concerns and analysis as opposed to mere description and regurgitation.

thinking: yes, again, adequate if students have had Eng.101/102

thinking: no, Sense of audience is poor

Logic

logic: no, Very hard to judge here. Given the students' poor backgrounds in reading and writing, it's hard to ask them to make logical inferences about anything.

logic: yes, My real feeling is somewher between adequate and not adequate - this is quite related to critical thinking

logic: yes, YIKES!

logic: n/a, I don't assess this in my courses currently.

logic: no, 5 on a scale from 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (excellent)

logic: n/a, I am not sure--I fight a lot with the "most of this is common sense" attitude, but most students do seem to be able to understand the notion that step one must occur before step two, and can appreciate how independent variables produce changes in dependent variables. They may simply choose to ignore facts and scientific evidence when it is convenient.

logic: n/a, This is hard to measure; in their papers, they do have some problems with logical arguments.

logic: no, this is a toss-up. some are good, some are horrible

Numeracy

numeracy: n/a, I don't assess this in my courses currently.

numeracy: no, Numeracy!

numeracy: no, The students are very weak in this area

numeracy: no, 3 on a scale from 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (excellent)

numeracy: no, They can add, subtract, etc., but have trouble understanding simple percentages and ratios

numeracy: no, poor quantitative abilities, fear of math is common, no appreciation for the applications of math to life

numeracy: yes, NOTE: physics students tend to be a special subset of all students. In general I find the numeracy of CWU students abysmal - abysmal!

numeracy: no, Many have difficulty with simple algebraic manipulations, and understanding of the use of variables

numeracy: n/a, Is this a word? I assume it's "numeric literacy"?? [editor's note: yes, it's a word; yes, it means numeric literacy.]

Interconnectedness

interconnectedness: yes, While their backgrounds are poor in this area, I think I do a good job in my humanities course of leading them to see the interconnnectedness of knowledge. Do they remember any of it after completing my class? I don't know.

interconnectedness: no, Faculty must share some of the blame for our rigidity of disciplines, but only a minority of students draw from other courses and disciplines to inform and compound their knowledge.

interconnectedness: yes, Anthropology is inherently this way and interdisciplinary, thus it is hard to tell what they have picked up from gen ed courses or upper division anthropology.

interconnectedness: no, 4 on a scale from 1 (unacceptable) to 10 (excellent)

interconnectedness: n/a, Highly variable--some can do this, others cannot.

interconnectedness: no, My impression is that many view their courses like islands, separated by insurmountable distance

interconnectedness: no, Problems with documentation and awareness of research

Comments

comments: We have got to get these people doing significant reading in the general ed sequence. They have read nothing. A few years ago I could count on students having at least a reading familiarity with The Bible. That is no longer true. In a class of 25, there will be no more than three students who have read anything significant in their high school classroom. Let me give an example. I often give a lecture on Shakespeare's theater at Eisenhower High School in Yakima for the woman who teaches a Shakespeare course. Sounds great, doesn't it, a high school course in Shakespeare. They don't read the plays. They watch films of them.

comments: Gen Ed Program requires too much. Suggest focus be on reducing level of course work, example: require students to take 2 of 3 a/b/c in each main area. My comments mirror student perceptions.

comments: I think this is a great start to assessing the gen ed. program. Way to go! I hope that you will be interacting with the Assessment committee as you revise your mission statement and the gen. ed. program.

comments: Thanks for doing these surveys and focus groups!

comments: On many of these, I had a tough time deciding between adequate and not adequate. Students need to work on all of these skills in GE and non-GE courses.

comments: The Writing Program at Central suffers from lack of administrative support. We are the only university in Washington without a writing center. Efforts to encourage writing across the curriculum have also been hindered by lack of administrative oversight. When ENG 301 was removed from the Gen Ed curriculum, departments were to assume the responsibility of assigning and assessing writing at the junior level. Only a few departments have done so.

comments: I really feel students should not be allowed to register for upper division classes (300/400) if they have not had English 101 and 102. Students who take upper division without those classes really have a difficult time writing research papers.

comments: This survey is an improvement over the one introduced Fall Qtr., but still could be better designed.
As for the program, I do think there needs to be some integration about what aspects of gen ed each course
is meeting across the disciplines (e.g., writing, speaking, etc.), without, however, completely losing the
important disciplinary distinctions, dept. control and individual academic freedom we have now.

comments: The Writing Program at Central suffers from lack of administrative support. We are the only university in Washington without a writing center. Efforts to encourage writing across the curriculum have also been hindered by lack of administrative oversight. When ENG 301 was removed from the Gen Ed curriculum, departments were to assume the responsibility of assigning and assessing writing at the junior level. Only a few departments have done so.

comments: Students in non-GE classes often have problems adapting to different writing situations and do not have a good sense of how research is carried out and responsible use of sources.