Student Learning Outcomes - UWF

footlickertreeΒιοτεχνολογία

3 Δεκ 2012 (πριν από 4 χρόνια και 8 μήνες)

551 εμφανίσεις

1

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Division of Academic Affairs

Annual Reports
2009
-
2010


Academic Departments

(and Other Units to Which Student Learning Outcomes Pertain)


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010


Department/Division:

Biology


College:

CAS


Part I
-
SP, Summary Report on Status of Strategic Planning Goals/Objectives



Progra
m
/Fun
ction/S
ervice

Strategic Goal/Objective
a

Related
UWF
Strategic
Goal
b

Method of
Assessment

Summary of
Assessment
Results
cd

Use of Assessment

Results to Improve
Program/Function/
Service
e

Biolog
y

Biology’s
undergraduate
enrollment is growing
and its graduate
enrollment has the
potential to grow
dramatically with new
initiatives that have
been put in place this
year (10% increase in
FTE production against
a 19% increase during
2006
-
2007). We
cannot

continue to
accommodate
increasing numbers of
students with the same
number of faculty. We
must have the Marine
Biology position we
have requested every
year for the past five
years and we need to
be favorably
considered for at least
another
lecturer/ins
tructor to
help with the rapidly
growing enrollments in
all of our lower division
majors and non
-
majors

Increa
se
enrollme
nt to at
least
12,000
by 2012.


Determi
ne
resource
distributi
ons
based
on

the
converg
ence of
academi
c
program
analyses
,

strategic
goals
and
priorities
, market
demand

and
workforc
All goals
set for
2009
-
2010
are
proposals
for specific
actions
which can
be easily
assessed
by the
Departme
nt. This
assessme
nt process
involves
the full
faculty in
faculty
meetings
and the
Chair of
Biology.

This goal
was unmet.
Its
completion
depends on
line

allocation to
the
Department
by the
administratio
n.

NA

2

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

courses. Our goal is to
acquire the Marine
Biology position we
need so badly and to
acquire an additional
lecturer position during
2009
-
2010.

e needs.



With the departure of
Dr. Venkat Sharma
Biology will experience
an intolerable hole in
teaching and service to
our huge pool of pre
-
professional students
who are among the
best at UWF. It is
absolutely imperative
that Biology not have
this positio
n swept as
has been the case with
the last two
retirements/departures.
In fact, this provides
the administration an
opportunity to “set the
situation right” in
Biology and partially
address the previous
goal as well as this one


allow biology to use
Dr.
Sharma’s entire
salary to hire his
replacement as well as
a lecturer to address
our enrollment growth.


Increase
enrollme
nt to at
least
12,000
by 2012.


Determi
ne
resource
distributi
ons
based
on

the
converg
ence of
academi
c
program
analyses
,

strategic
goals
and
priorities
, market
demand

and
workforc
e needs.


All goals
set for
2009
-
2010
are
proposals
for specific
actions
which can
be easily
assessed
by the
Departme
nt. This
assessme
nt process
involves
the full
faculty in
faculty
meetings
and the
Chair o
f
Biology.

This goal is
in the
process of
being met.
The
administratio
n has
granted us
permission
to conduct a
search for a
replacement
for our
departed
immunologis
t and we
currently
have
37

applicants in
the pool
.

Dr.
Kris Behan
has
assumed
the
responsib
iliti
es of Pre
-
professional
Advisor in
the interim
so our large
pool of
excellent
pre
-
professional
students are
currently
being well
-
serviced.

We will being
using these
results to
further improve
service to our
pre
-
professional
students and to
cover crit
ical
courses that are
currently
covered by the
Chair of Biology
or have not
been offered.







a
From unit’s
2009
-
2010

strategic or action plan. Add lines as necessary.

3

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

b
Insert Focus/Goal number/letter from the UWF Strategic Priorities and Measurable

Achievements, 2008
-
2012.


c
Data/information used to determine goal/objective status.

d
Can comment on status of goal as “met,” “not met,” or “in progress.”

e
Describe decisions made based on assessment results to improve program


An
nual Report,
2009
-
2010


Department/Division:

Biology


College:

CAS


Part I
-
ALC/ALP/AFP, Summary Report on Assessment of Student Learning

Undergraduate Programs:

Academic Learning Compacts (ALC)

included below

Graduate Programs:


Academic Learning Plans (ALP)

included below

General Education:

Academic Foundation Plans (AFP)

inserted into the assessment
report for Gen ED



I
-
ALC
Undergraduate Programs: For Each Program



INTERDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES/PRE
-
PHARMACY


I.

Mission Statement

In keeping with the University mission, the
Department of Biology is dedicated to
creation, transmission, application and preservation of knowledge. Within this
framework, the primary mission of the Department of Biology is to develop, support and
conduct high quality educational and research progra
ms in the life sciences with
emphasis on marine biology, environmental biology, biotechnology and pre
-
professional
programs.


II.

Student Learning Outcomes

UWF Pre
-
Pharmacy graduates should be able to do the following:


1.

Content



Identify and use the concepts,
principles, and theories that constitute the core
sub
-
disciplines of the biological sciences



Employ techniques central to analysis of biological materials

4

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010



Describe the areas of specialization in pre
-
pharmacy and the additional
qualifications that must be s
ought in preparing for a career in those
specializations.


2.

Critical Thinking



Apply scientific method to solve problems in the biological sciences



Select and conduct appropriate statistical analyses


3.

Communication



Employ biological terminology accurately



Use language in written form effectively and professionally



Communicate biological information in oral form employing appropriate
technology


a)

Integrity/Values



Describe ethical challenges in conducting scientific research with humans and
animals



Adhere to
appropriate ethical practices in research and teaching


b)

Project Management



Design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address
a problem in the biological sciences



Draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the study



Collaborate effectively with others on team projects.


(1)

Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

Both direct and indirect methods of assessment will be used. Exit and alumni surveys
will comprise our indirect approach, while rubrics have been designed to a
ssess student
achievement of the SLOs listed above through their performance in a set of capstone
pathway courses. For the Pre
-
Pharmacy specialization, this pathway includes the
following courses: Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and Comparative Animal
Phy
siology.


(2)

Job Prospects for Pre
-
Pharmacy Graduates

Pharmacist

Research in Pharmaceutical Sciences

Pharmacy sales

Pharmacy
-
related jobs in health Care


5

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Find Out More about Pre
-
Pharmacy:

http://uwf.edu/biology/bs
-
interdis/


PRE
-
PHARMACY


College

of

Arts

&

Science


04/09



(i)

Interdisciplinary Studies

B.

Mission Statement

In keeping with the University mission, the Department of Biology is dedicated to
creation,
transmission, application and preservation of knowledge. Within this
framework, the primary mission of the Department of Biology is to develop, support and
conduct high quality educational and research programs in the life sciences with
emphasis on marine
biology, environmental biology, biotechnology and pre
-
professional
programs. The Department of Biology oversees the Bachelor of Science in
Interdisciplinary Sciences program that is intended to provide a broadly based
education in the natural sciences and

mathematics (biology, chemistry, computer
science, environmental studies, mathematics, physics, and zoo science).



a)

Student Learning Outcomes


UWF Interdisciplinary Sciences graduates should be able to do the following:


(1)

Content



Identify and use the con
cepts, principles, and theories that constitute the core
subdisciplines of
two of the areas of science or of Biology and business (Zoo
Science)



Employ techniques central to analysis of materials and problems in the chosen
areas



Describe discipline
-
relate
d career paths for which recipients of this degree are
qualified


(a)

Critical Thinking



Apply scientific method to solve problems in the chosen areas



Select and conduct appropriate statistical analyses of data from the chosen
areas


(2)

Communication



Employ
terminology from the chosen areas accurately



Use language in written form effectively and professionally

6

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010



Communicate information from the chosen areas in oral form employing
appropriate technology


(a)

Integrity/Values



Describe ethical challenges
involved in conducting scientific
research in the chosen areas



Adhere to appropriate ethical practices in research and teaching


(b)

Project Management



Design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address
problems in the chosen are
as



Draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the study



Collaborate effectively with others on team projects


Job Prospects for Graduates of Interdisciplinary Sciences

Environmental Science

Health Support Professions

Forensic Science

Pharmaceuti
cal Science


Zoo Science track

Zoo Keeper

Zoo Curator

Zoo Director

Private Business



Find Out More about

Interdisciplinary Sciences at UWF:

www.uwf.edu/biology/degree



(i)

INTERDISCIPLINARY
SCIENCES
College of Arts &
Sciences



BIOLOGY / MARINE BIOLOGY

Mission Statement

In keeping with the University mission, the Department of Biology is dedicated to
creation,
tra
nsmission, application and preservation of knowledge. Within this
framework, the primary

mission of the Depa
rtment of Biology is to develop, support and
1.


7

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

conduct high quality educational

and research programs in the life sciences with
emphasis on marine biology, environmental

biology, biotechnology and preprofessional

programs.

Student Learning Outcomes

UWF
Biology/Marine Biology graduates should be able to do the following:

Content

∙ Identify and use the concepts, principles, and theories that constitute the core

subdisciplines of the biological sciences

∙ Employ techniques central to analysis of biological
materials

∙ Describe disciplinerelated

career paths for which recipients of the BS in Biology are

qualified

Critical Thinking

∙ Apply scientific method to solve problems in the biological sciences

∙ Select and conduct appropriate statistical analyses

Communication

∙ Employ biological terminology accurately

∙ Use language in written form effectively and professionally

∙ Communicate biological information in oral form employing appropriate technology

Integrity/Values

∙ Describe ethical challenges involve
d in conducting scientific research with humans
and

animals

∙ Adhere to appropriate ethical practices in research and teaching

Project Management

∙ Design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address a
problem

in the biological

sciences

∙ Draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the study

∙ Collaborate effectively with others on team projects.

Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

As a Biology/Marine Biology major, you will be assessed in y our application of core

principles

and knowledge, scientific methods and communication skills in the
biological/marine sciences.

You will be evaluated in terms of your ability to engage in
ethical analyses and employ statistical

analyses in projects related to your discipline.
F
inally, you will be assessed for your

understanding and ability to apply current and
emerging technologies to problems in your field of

study.

Job Prospects for Biology Graduates

Biology
Marine Toxicologist

Bioremediation Environmental Permitting & Enforce
ment

Biotechnology Education

Medical Research Environmental Law

Industry

Government
Interdisciplinary Sciences

Education Environmental Science

Microbiology Health Support Professions

8

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Health Professions Forensic Science

Research Laboratories Pharmaceutical
Science

Teaching
Zoo Science track

Pharmaceuticals Zoo Keeper

Public Health Zoo Curator

Food Production Zoo Director

Pollution Control Private Business

Environmental Diagnostics

Forestry
Bioinformation Technology

Agriculture Bioinformatics Programmer

Softw
are design Biotechnician

Marine Biology
Computational Biologist

Marine Biologist Biological Data Analyst

Fisheries Management Bioinformation Technologist

Aquaculture

Pollution Biologist

Find Out More about Biology at UWF:

http://uwf.edu/biology/bsbiology/

02/06

I
-
ALP
Graduate Programs: For Each Program



MASTER OF SCIENCE IN BIOLOGY/THESIS TRACK

Mission Statement

In keeping with the University mission, the Department of Biology is dedicated to creation,
transmission, application and preservation of knowle
dge. Within this framework, the primary
mission of the Department of Biology is to develop, support and conduct high quality educational
and research programs in the life sciences.

Student Learning Outcomes

UWF Biology MS graduates should be able to do t
he following:

Content

Identify and use advanced concepts, principles, and theories that form the foundation of research in
the biological sciences

Employed advanced biological techniques central to analysis of biological materials and able to
defend the use of these techniques based on the current scientific literature

Describe discipline
-
related career paths for which recipients of the MS in Biolog
y are qualified


Critical Thinking

Employ and defend the scientific method in solving defined problems in the biological sciences

Employ statistical methods appropriate to analysis of data generated in the thesis


Communication

Employ biological terminology accurately in the thesis and oral defense

Use language in written form effectively and professionally in developing the thesis

Communicate biological information in oral form during the thesis defense


9

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Integrity/Values

App
ly ethical considerations in the conduct of scientific research with humans and animals

Adherence to appropriate ethical practices in the thesis research


Project Management

Design and execute a thesis project within a reasonable timeframe

Draw and def
end conclusions related to the results of the thesis study

Collaborate effectively with your thesis committee in completing the thesis and respond effectively
to constructive feedback


Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes

Biology graduate students wi
ll acquire advanced skills and knowledge that enable them to join the
scientific profession or pursue additional graduate studies at the doctoral level. Direct assessment in
this program is conducted on the thesis, which is the required capstone experience

at the end of a
student’s program of study. The capstone requirement allows students to conduct and defend a
research project under a faculty’s direction and with the help of a thesis committee. The student will
be assessed on abilities to collaborate and

communicate effectively with faculty, abide by ethical
standards in the conduct of scientific research with humans and animals, make a creative contribution
to the field, and work independently on thesis research within reasonable timeframes. Indirect
ass
essment practices in this program include an exit survey and student evaluations of courses.

Job Prospects for Biology Graduates

MS in Biology
Bioremediation Biotechnology Medical Research Industry Government Education
Microbiology Health Professions

Re
search Laboratories Teaching Pharmaceuticals Public Health Food Production Pollution Control
Environmental Diagnostics Forestry Agriculture

Find Out More about Biology at UWF:

http://uwf.edu/biology/

BIOLOGY College of Arts & Sciences

12/07


BIOLOGY


Master’s Program/NonThesis

Track

Mission Statement

In keeping with the University mission, the Department of Biology is dedicated to
creation,

transmission, application and preservation of knowledge. Within this framework, the
primary mission of

the
Department of Biology is to develop, support and conduct high quality educational
and research

programs in the life sciences.

Student Learning Outcomes

UWF Biology MS/nonthesis

graduates should be able to do the following:

10

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Content


Identify and define adv
anced concepts, principles, and theories that form the
foundation of

research in the biological sciences


Effectively execute literature searches and employ the results in scientific writing.


Describe disciplinerelated

career paths for which recipients
of the MS in Biology are qualified

Critical Thinking


Employ and defend the scientific method in solving defined problems in the biological
sciences


Employ statistical methods appropriate to analysis of scientific data.

Communication


Employ biological

terminology accurately in oral presentations


Use language in written form effectively and professionally in completing written
assignments

Integrity/Values


Apply ethical considerations in the conduct of scientific research with humans and
animals as
it

applies to grants and research programs


Adhere to appropriate ethical practices in professional activities

Project Management


Design and execute a project within a reasonable timeframe


Draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the
assigned projects


Collaborate effectively with your nonthesis

advisor in completing the coursework and respond

effectively to constructive feedback

Assessment
of Student Learning Outcomes

Biology graduate students will acquire the advanced skills and kno
wledge that allow
them to

function as professional scientists. Direct assessment in this program is conducted in
the course

Professional Development in Biology and includes assessment of the student’s abilities
to

successfully complete and defend a researc
h paper within reasonable timeframes and
respond

effectively to constructive feedback. Indirect assessment practices in this program
include an exit

survey and student evaluations of courses.

Job Prospects for Biology Graduates

MS/nonthesis

in Biology

Bior
emediation

Biotechnology

Medical Research

Industry

11

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Government

Education

Microbiology

Health Professions

Research Laboratories

Teaching

Pharmaceuticals

Public Health

Food Production

Pollution Control

Environmental Diagnostics

Forestry

Agriculture

Find Out
More about Biology at UWF:

www.uwf.edu/biology/degree/

BIOLOGY College of Arts & Sciences

AFP
Academic Foundations: General Education Status: For Each Course Assessed


I
-
AFP
. Academic Foundations / General Education
-

To be completed by academic units
offering courses
related to General Studies.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:

Biology



College:

College of Arts and Sciences



Part I
-
AFP, Summary Report on Assessment, Academic Foundations Plan


General Studies Course
a
:


BSC1005


Biology

for NonMajors



a
Prepare separate summary table for each course assessed.



Departments offering Academic Foundations/General Education courses are required to report on at least
two student learning outcomes.



Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ performance this year to their performance last year.
Duplicate

this section w
hen reporting
assessments for more than one domain for a given course.


Indicate the Academi
c Foundations learning domain assessed (check one):

X

Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Communication


Project Management


Based on departme
ntal assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

X

Equivalent to
last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this do
main (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
12

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

measures used to assess learning in this domain.

We conducted our assessment of SLO in the
laboratory exercise on the peer
-
reviewed scientific article on the effects
of lights on hatchling sea turtles. We modified the original exercise to accommodate a quantitative assessment of
critical thinking. The assessment was completed in September 2009
. The assessment included two SLOs involving
critical thinking within the sciences:


A. Student was able to identify steps in the scientific method and answer specific questions about the experimental
design.


The rubric used for the assessment of this SL
O required the student to identify steps of the scientific method in the
peer
-
reviewed article and/or ask questions regarding the details of each step in the process: 1) preliminary
information, 2) hypothesis, 3) experimental design, and 4) results.


B.
Student was able to summarize and describe experimental process


The rubric for this assessment required that students interpret directly from graphs in the results section of the peer
-
reviewed article on lights and sea turtles.


If you observed changes
in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature of these changes.

This assessment was not conducted in 2008. However the assessment was conducted in 2007 and very similar
results
were seen.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve stude
nt learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The data was presented in the March 2009 Faculty Meeting. This faculty meeting was specifically devoted to the
discussion of as
sessment data from the 2009/2010 academic year. During the meeting the faculty discussed
concerns as to whether data collected could withstand scrutiny of statistical analysis. Additionally, when data from
this assessment was compared with data from the
other general education assessment, it was noted that some
instructors used stricter or more lenient standards for very good to excellent, satisfactory, and unsatisfactory. The
faculty decided to keep the current General Education assessments as is and on
ly use them for comparisons within
courses and not between courses.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

As described above, faculty were somewhat concerned about the standardization of assessment procedures.
H
owever, at this time, no changes are scheduled for assessment procedures







General Studies Course
a
:


BSC1086


Anatomy and Physiology II



a
Prepare separate summary table for each course assessed.



Departments offering Academic Foundations/General
Education courses are required to report on at least
two student learning outcomes.



Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ performance this year to their performance last year.
Duplicat
e

this section w
hen reporting
assessments for more than one domain for a given course.


Indicate the Academic Foundations learning domain assessed (check one):


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values

X

Communication


Project Management


Based on departme
ntal assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

13

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year

X

Cannot be compared (this is the
first year for this assessment)



the domain for assessment was changed


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric,

etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning in this domain.

Students were given a writing assignment as an assessment of communication skills. They were given a very
specific handout regarding types of information to

be included in the essay, questions to be answered in specific
paragraphs, and details regarding citations. Students were assessed for three SLOs within the Communication Skills
domain. These included:

Organization

Students organizes ideas into logical,

coherent message

Grammar/Spelling

Student uses appropriate grammar and spelling

References

Student adopts proper citation practices

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or t
wo sentences) the nature of these changes.

Previous assessments in this class were of project management. The previous assessments used the same
assignment to analyze student abilities within project management. However, as stated last year in the annua
l report,
I felt as though the students were so lacking in communication skills, that it obscured any analysis of project
management. This year’s assessment was to establish a baseline for those communication skills and students ability
to use the assignm
ent handout as a guide.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to
improve student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The data was presented in the March 2009 Faculty Meeting. This faculty meeting was specifically devoted to the
dis
cussion of assessment data from the 2009/2010 academic year. During this meeting the state of the students
communication skills (poor) were discussed.


I advised the faculty on my plans to assist with their communication skills. These included making u
se of the student
writing lab on campus. I had thought to make this an optional portion of the assignment and give extra credit points
to students utilizing the resource. Many faculty members, however, advised me to make it a mandatory portion of the
ass
ignment with a specific due date. This would ensure that all students got their essays completed ahead of the due
date and actually included edits and revisions. I concur with their advice and intend to make submission to the
editorial process provided b
y the writing lab mandatory.


As a bit of additional information, I gave the same assignment in my spring 2010 A & P II class and offered extra
points to students if they utilized the writing lab. Although the students who did use the writing lab turned

in far
superior papers, I was shocked at how few students actually used the resource. I will definitely make it mandatory in
the Fall 2010 semester and assign a date for submission to the writing lab at least a month before the actual essay
due date.


U
se of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

As described above, the assessment will be
modified to require students to utilize the student writing lab. It will be
interesting to see if there is an improvement in student performance as a result.





Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be e
xamined from the department’s multi
-
year

assessme湴np污渠i渠
2MNM
-
㈰ㄱ

Critical Thinking


BSC1005

Communication


BSC1086

14

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Assessment question(s) to be addressed in
2010
-
2011

In the critical thinking domain, students will continue to be assessed on
their ability to correctly identify portions of the
scientific method and analyze summarized data provided by a relevant research paper.


In the Communication domain, students will be challenged to improve their organizational skills by seeking editorial
c
omments and including revisions prior to the submission of a final essay to the instructor.




I
-
ALC.

Undergraduate Programs
-

To be completed by academic units offering degree programs.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:

Biology/School of

Allied Health and Life Sciences



College:

College of Arts and Sciences



Part I
-
ALC, Summary Report on Assessment, Academic Learning Compacts (ALC)


Program Title
a
: ______

Biolog
y
_______________________ Degree
b

__

BS

___

CIP Code: __
260101
__________


a
Prepare separate summary table for each degree program.

b
For example, BA, BS, BSBA





Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ performance this year to their performance last year.




D
uplicate this section
when reporting assessments for more than one domain for a given program.


Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):

x

Content


Communication


Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other
(describe)


Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
.

Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this domain.

The assessment is to s
elect one lab report assignment
of the Biochemistry course in Spring 2010 with a group of 10
students
that emphasizes both content an
d project
-
management based skills.

IT measures students’ abilities to:
=
1.

I
dentify and use the concepts, principles, and theories that constitute the core sub
-
disciplines of biological sciences.

2.

E
mploy techniques central to the analysis of biological
materials.

3.

D
escribe discipline
-
related career paths for which recipients of the BS in Biology are qualified.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature

of these changes.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to impr
ove student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the
past few
years. Normally assessment coordinators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to t
he
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further di
scussion
on assessment was held.

15

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each co
urse is to assess either one
or more SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the cou
rses use the whole class
students to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of

students being
assessed is less than half of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data w
e
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs t
o be improved. We
found that students who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve studen
ts’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meanin
gful assessment to help students’ learning, faculty made the following suggestions:


1.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

2.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs,
choose two or three such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

3.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

4.

Redesign the assessment template.

5.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Proc
edures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s)
to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication.
These are areas which after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, t
he department will thoroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.



Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content

x

Communication


Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)


Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last
year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this doma
in.

The assessment here is based upon a writing assignment of the Ecology course with a group of 46 students, and an
oral presentation of the Genetics course with a group of 43 students.

In the Ecology course it measures students’ abilities to

1.

Adhere to

technical writing style

2.

Review and summarize scientific literature

3.

Evaluate and present scientific data

4.

Integrate scientific results with existing knowledge

In the Genetics course each course, students’ skills in:
=
1.

Organization of ideas



2.

Presentation mann
er

16

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

3.

Answering questions

Detailed rubrics of each of the courses can be found in the appendixes 1 and 2.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature of
these changes.



Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve

student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the pas
t few
years. Normally assessment coordinators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to t
he
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further discu
ssion
on assessment was held.


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each cours
e is to assess either one
or more SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the course
s use the whole class
students to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of st
udents being
assessed is less than half of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data w
e
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs to b
e improved. We
found that students who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve studen
ts’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meaningfu
l assessment to help students’ learning, faculty made the following suggestions:


1.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

2.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs, choos
e two or three such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

3.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

4.

Redesign the assessment template.

5.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment
Procedures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and
Communication. These are areas which after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this
year, however, the department will thoroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.



Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content


Communication

x

Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)


Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better

than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)

17

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this doma
in.

The assessment is to s
elect one lab report assignment
of the Biochemistry course in Spring 2010 with a group of 10
students
that emphasizes both content and project
-
management based skills.

It measures:

1.

Project Conceptualization
:

to design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address a
problem in the biological sciences.

2.

Project Delivery
: to draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the study.

3.

Team
-
Work Skills

or
Self
-
Regulation
: to
collaborate effectively with others to execute experimental protocols and
collect empirical data.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature of these c
hanges.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve student

learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the past f
ew
ye
ars. Normally assessment coordinators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to the

whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further discussi
on
on

assessment was held.


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each course is to
assess either one
or more SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the courses use th
e whole class
students to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of students b
eing
assessed is less than half of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data w
e
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs to be improv
ed. We
found that students who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve studen
ts’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meaningful assess
ment to help students’ learning, faculty made the following suggestions:


1.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

2.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs, choose two or

three such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

3.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

4.

Redesign the assessment template.

5.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Descr
ibe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined

from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. These are areas

which after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, the department w
ill thoroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.


18

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Indicate the student
learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content


Communication


Project Management

x

Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)


Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this doma
in.

The assessment is based on
question 31 of exam 3
of the Genetics course with a group of 43 students

in spring
2010. Question 31 of exam 3 of genetics course was designed to use a hypothetical data of a genetic experiment to
assess students’ understanding of genetic approaches and problem solving ability. Full points of question 31 are 17
points⸠ 却pdent
s= who= sco牥d= less= than= 1M= poin瑳= a牥= 牡ted= as= unsatisfacto特Ⱐ 1M
J
1P= points= 景爠 being= 牡瑥d= as=
sa瑩s晡c瑯特⁡nd‱4
J
1T⁰oin瑳⁡s⁶e特⁧oodLexcellentK
=
=
䥦⁹oubse牶ed=changes⁩n⁳tuden琠pe牦rrmance=on⁴his=measu牥⁷hen=compa物ng⁴he⁴wo⁹ea牳Ⱐbrie晬y⁤escr
ibe
=n=
one爠瑷o⁳en瑥nces⤠Fheatu牥映瑨ese=changesK
=
Comprehension ability seems to decline.
Training of improving students’ comprehension is required to
improve students’ problem solving ability and critical thinking skill.


Use of Assessment
Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve student learning in your program. De
scribe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the past f
ew
years. Normally assessment coo
rdinators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to the
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further discussi
on
on assessment was held.


The Bi
ology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each course is to assess either one
or more SLO
s; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the courses use the whole cl
ass
students to do
the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of students being
assessed is less than ha
lf of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data we
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs to be improve
d. We
found that students wh
o comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve students’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meaningful assessment to help students’ learni
ng, faculty made the following suggestions:


1.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

2.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs, choose two or three such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

3.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

4.

Redesign the assessment template.

5.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

19

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. These are areas which

after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, the department will th
oroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.


Appendix 1:


20

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Ecology Paper
-
guide


21

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010




22

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010




23

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010



24

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

25

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Appendix
2
:


Rubrics of assessing the group
project of the Genetics course is listed in the table below:


Criteria



Scope and depth of the content

Introduction (0
-
8 points)


Explanation on the scientist’s specific contribution related
to:



Formation of the hypothesis/idea (0
-
8 points)



Experimental
design (0
-
8 points)



The finding/result (0
-
8 points)


Discussing the impact of this specific contribution (0
-
8
points)



Clarity of the visual display (0
-
25 points)



Reference citation (0
-
10 points)



Presentation manner

(0
-
10 points)



Question
answering

(0
-
15 points)



Total (0
-
100 points)




I
-
ALC.

Undergraduate Programs
-

To be completed by academic units offering degree programs.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:

Biology

C
ollege:

CAS


Part I
-
ALC, Summary Report on Assessment, Academic Learning Compacts (ALC)


Program Title
a
: _____

Interdisciplinary Sciences, Biology

______

Degree
b

__

BS

___

CIP Code: __
_
300101
_
___


a
Prepare separate summary table for each degree program.

b
For
example, BA, BS, BSBA





Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ performance this year to their performance last year.




D
uplicate this section
when reporting assessments for more than on
e domain for a given program.




Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content


Communication

x

Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)




Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this
domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year

26

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)




Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess
learning outcomes in this domain.

The assessment is to s
elect one lab report assignment
of the Comparative Physiology course in Spring 2010 with a
group of 10 students
that emphasizes both content and project
-
management based skills.

It measures:

4.

Project
Conceptualization
:

to design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address a
problem in the biological sciences.

5.

Project Delivery
: to draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the study.

6.

Team
-
Work Skills

or
Self
-
Regu
lation
: to collaborate effectively with others to execute experimental protocols and
collect empirical data.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature

of these changes.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to impr
ove student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the
past few
years. Normally assessment coordinators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to t
he
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further di
scussion
on assessment was held.


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each co
urse is to assess either one
or more SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the cou
rses use the whole class
students to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of

students being
assessed is less than half of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data w
e
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs t
o be improved. We
found that students who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve studen
ts’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meanin
gful assessment to help students’ learning, faculty made the following suggestions:


6.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

7.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs,
choose two or three such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

8.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

9.

Redesign the assessment template.

10.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Proc
edures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s)
to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. T
hese are areas which after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, th
e department will thoroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.


27

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

I
-
ALC.

Undergraduate Programs
-

To be completed by academic units offering degree programs.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:

Biology/School of Allied Health and Life Sciences



College:

College of Arts and Sciences



Part I
-
ALC, Summary Report
on Assessment, Academic Learning Compacts (ALC)


Program Title
a
: __

Interdisciplinary Sciences, Pre
-
Pharmacy track

______

Degree
b

__

BS

___

CIP Code: __
_
300101
_
_


a
Prepare separate summary table for each degree program.

b
For example, BA, BS, BSBA





Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ performance this year to their performance last year.




D
uplicate this section
when reporting assessments for more than one domain for a given pro
gram.




Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):

x

Content


Communication


Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)




Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)




Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this doma
in.

The assessment is to s
elect one lab report assignment
of the Biochemistry course in Spring 2010 with a group of 10
students
that emphasizes both content and project
-
management based skills.

IT measures students’ abilities to:
=
4.

I
dentify and use the
concepts, principles, and theories that constitute the core sub
-
disciplines of biological sciences.

5.

E
mploy techniques central to the analysis of biological materials.

6.

Describe discipline
-
related career paths for which recipients of the BS in Biology are qu
alified.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature of these changes.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your

department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evi
dence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the past f
ew
years. Normally assessment coordinators will present the data collected from faculty membe
rs and then open a discussion to the
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further discussi
on
on assessment was held.


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using
four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each course is to assess either one
or more SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Co
mmunications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the courses use the whole cl
ass
students to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the
faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of students being
assessed is less than half of the total umber of students in the department. Neverth
eless, even based upon the limited data we
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs to be improve
d. We
found that students who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientifi
c communication. Training to improve students’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meaningful assessment to help students’ learning, faculty made the following suggestions:

28

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


11.

Increase the
sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

12.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs, choose two or three such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

13.

Rotate the courses being
used for assessment.

14.

Redesign the assessment template.

15.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes
and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010
Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. These are areas which after 3 years of data collection, the faculty
feel
need increased concentrat
ion.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, the department will thoroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data an
d involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in the
assessment process.





Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content


Communication

x

Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)




Based on
departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this

is the first year for this assessment)




Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information abo
ut any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this domain.

The assessment is to s
elect one lab report assignment
of the Biochemistry course in Spring 2010 with a group of 10
students
that emphasizes both content and project
-
management bas
ed skills.

It measures:

7.

Project Conceptualization
:

to design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address a
problem in the biological sciences.

8.

Project Delivery
: to draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the
study.

9.

Team
-
Work Skills

or
Self
-
Regulation
: to collaborate effectively with others to execute experimental protocols and
collect empirical data.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe
(in
one or two sentences) the nature of these changes.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known).

Describe the
decisions made to improve student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.



Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any ch
anges made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.






29

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in 2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN



Assessme湴nq略s瑩潮⡳⤠瑯 扥⁡摤牥sse
d⁩渠2MNM
-
㈰ㄱ






I
-
ALC.

Undergraduate Programs
-

To be completed by academic units offering degree programs.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:

Biology/School of Allied Health and Life Sciences



College:

College of Arts and Sciences



Part I
-
ALC, Summary Report on Assessment, Academic Learning Compacts (ALC)


Program Title
a
:
_______

Interdisciplinary Sciences, Zoo Science

__

Degree
b

__
BS
______

CIP Code: ___
300101
_________


a
Prepare separate summary table for each degree program.

b
For example, BA, BS, BSBA





Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ perfo
rmance this year to their performance last year.




D
uplicate this section
when reporting assessments for more than one domain for a given program.




Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content


Communication

x

Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)




Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last
year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)




Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this doma
in.

The assessment is to s
elect one lab report assignment
of the Comparative Physiology course in Spring 2010 with a
group of 10 students
that emphasizes both content and project
-
management based skills.

It measures:

10.

Project Conceptualization
:

to design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address a
problem in the biological sciences.

11.

Project Delivery
: to draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the study.

12.

Team
-
Work Skills

or
Self
-
Regulation
: to collabo
rate effectively with others to execute experimental protocols and
collect empirical data.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature of these changes.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve student learni
ng in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the past f
ew
years. N
ormally assessment coordinators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to the
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further discussi
on
30

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

on assess
ment was held.


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each course is to assess
either one
or more SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the courses use the whole

class
students to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of students being
as
sessed is less than half of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data we
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs to be improve
d. We
found that students who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve studen
ts’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meaningful assessment to

help students’ learning, faculty made the following suggestions:


16.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

17.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs, choose two or three
such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

18.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

19.

Redesign the assessment template.

20.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any

changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. These are areas which

after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, the department will th
oroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.





I
-
ALC.

Undergraduate Programs
-

To be completed by academic units offering degree programs.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:

Biology/School of Allied Health and Life Sciences



College:

College of Arts and Sciences



Part I
-
ALC, Summary Report on Assessment, Academic Learning Compacts (ALC)


Program Title
a
:
_

Interdisciplinary
Information Technology, Bioinformation track

_ Degree
b

__
BS
___CIP Code: ___
110103
____



a
Prepare separate summary table for each degree program.

b
For example, BA, BS, BSBA





Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ performance this year to their performance last year.




D
uplicate this section
when reporting assessments for more than one domain for a given program.



Indicate the stu
dent learning outcome assessed (check one):

31

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Content

x

Communication


Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)


Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this doma
in.

The assessment here is based upon an oral presentation of the Genetics course with a group of 43 students.

It measures
students’ skills in:
=
4.

Organization of ideas



5.

Presentation manner

6.

Answering questions

Detailed rubrics of each of the courses can
be found in the appendixes 1.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature of these changes.



Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
th
e process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related

to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the past f
ew
years. Normally assessment coordinators will present the data collec
ted from faculty members and then open a discussion to the
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further discussi
on
on assessment was held.


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each course is to assess either one
or mo
re SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the courses use the whole cl
ass
students
to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of students being
assessed is less t
han half of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data we
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs to be improve
d. We
found that stude
nts who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve students’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meaningful assessment to help students’
learning, faculty made the following suggestions:


6.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

7.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs, choose two or three such as content,

critical thinking, and communication.

8.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

9.

Redesign the assessment template.

10.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any changes made to

assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. These are areas which

after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.

32

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, the department will th
oroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.




Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content


Communication


Project
Management

x

Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)


Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better

than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning outcomes in this doma
in.

The assessment is based on
question 31 of exam 3
of the Genetics course with a group of 43 students

in spring
2010. Question 31 of exam 3 of genetics course was designed to use a hypothetical data of a genetic experiment to
assess students’ understanding of genetic approaches and problem solving ability. Full points of question 31 are 17
points⸠ 却pdent
s= who= sco牥d= less= than= 1M= poin瑳= a牥= 牡ted= as= unsatisfacto特Ⱐ 1M
J
1P= points= 景爠 being= 牡瑥d= as=
sa瑩s晡c瑯特⁡nd‱4
J
1T⁰oin瑳⁡s⁶e特⁧oodLexcellentK
=
=
䥦⁹oubse牶ed=changes⁩n⁳tuden琠pe牦rrmance=on⁴his=measu牥⁷hen=compa物ng⁴he⁴wo⁹ea牳Ⱐbrie晬y⁤escr
ibe
=n=
one爠瑷o⁳en瑥nces⤠Fheatu牥映瑨ese=changesK
=
Comprehension ability seems to decline.
Training of improving students’ comprehension is required to
improve students’ problem solving ability and critical thinking skill.


Use of Assessment Dat
a for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve student learning in your program. Descr
ibe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the past f
ew
years. Normally assessment coordi
nators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to the
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further discussi
on
on assessment was held.


The Biolo
gy department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each course is to assess either one
or more SLOs;
the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the courses use the whole cl
ass
students to do the

assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of students being
assessed is less than half
of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data we
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs to be improve
d. We
found that students who c
omprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve students’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meaningful assessment to help students’ learning,

faculty made the following suggestions:


6.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

7.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs, choose two or three such as content,
critical

thinking, and communication.

8.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

9.

Redesign the assessment template.

10.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any changes made to
33

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

assessme
nt methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. These are areas which after 3 years of data c
ollection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration.


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, the department will thoroughly
review assessme
nt protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in the
assessment process.



Appendix 1:



Rubrics of assessing the group project of the Genetics course is listed in the table below:


Criteria



Scope and depth of the content

Introduction (0
-
8 points)


Explanation on the scientist’s specific contribution related
to:



Formation of the hypothesis/idea (0
-
8 points)



Experimental design (0
-
8 points)



The finding/result (0
-
8 points)


Discussing the impact

of this specific contribution (0
-
8
points)



Clarity of the visual display (0
-
25 points)



Reference citation (0
-
10 points)



Presentation manner

(0
-
10 points)



Question answering

(0
-
15 points)



Total (0
-
100 points)





I
-
ALC.

Undergraduate Programs
-

To be completed by academic units offering degree programs.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:

Biology/School of Allied Health and Life Sciences



34

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

College:

College of Arts and Sciences



Part I
-
ALC, Summary Report on Assessment, Academic Learning Compacts (ALC)


Program Title
a
: _______
Marine Biology
______________________ Degree
b

__
BS
______

CIP Code: ___
261302
_________


a
Prepare separate summary table for each degree program.

b
For exam
ple, BA, BS, BSBA





Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the domain(s) your department assessed, compare your
students’ performance this year to their performance last year.




D
uplicate this section
when reporting assessments for more than one
domain for a given program.




Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check one):


Content


Communication

x

Project Management


Critical Thinking


Integrity/Values


Other (describe)




Based on departmental assessments, student learning in this
domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

x

Equivalent to last year


Slightly better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)




Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess
learning outcomes in this domain.

The assessment is to s
elect one lab report assignment
of the Comparative Physiology course in Spring 2010 with a
group of 10 students
that emphasizes both content and project
-
management based skills.

It measures:

13.

Project
Conceptualization
:

to design and execute a project that incorporates a reasonable time line to address a
problem in the biological sciences.

14.

Project Delivery
: to draw and defend conclusions related to the results of the study.

15.

Team
-
Work Skills

or
Self
-
Regu
lation
: to collaborate effectively with others to execute experimental protocols and
collect empirical data.

If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefly describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature

of these changes.


Use of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to impr
ove student learning in your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

The assessment data usually are discussed in a faculty meeting totally devoted in assessment discussion in each of the
past few
years. Normally assessment coordinators will present the data collected from faculty members and then open a discussion to t
he
whole faculty assembly. In the spring semester 2010, a discussion was made on April 23, and then on May 21 a further di
scussion
on assessment was held.


The Biology department has six degree
-
programs. It has been using four courses including Biochemistry, Genetics, Ecology and
Comparative Physiology to assess students’ learning outcomes (SLOs) of 6 degree
-
programs. Each co
urse is to assess either one
or more SLOs; the domains being assessed since 2006 include Content, Communications, Critical thinking, Project management
and Integrity/Values. Original sample size of each course was 10 in 2006 and 2007; later some of the cou
rses use the whole class
students to do the assessment, and some still randomly choose 10. Upon the faculty meeting discussion, it is felt that the
assessment data so far cannot give us a very clear representation of students’ learning, since the number of

students being
assessed is less than half of the total umber of students in the department. Nevertheless, even based upon the limited data w
e
have, it is agreed that critical thinking and communication skills are essential if not the most important SLOs t
o be improved. We
found that students who comprehend well do well in critical thinking and scientific communication. Training to improve studen
ts’
comprehension is required to improve students’ critical thinking and communication skills.


To have a meanin
gful assessment to help students’ learning, faculty made the following suggestions:


21.

Increase the sample size of each course: use the whole class instead randomly chosen 10.

22.

Decrease the number of SLOs being assessed: instead of assessing all five SLOs,
choose two or three such as content,
critical thinking, and communication.

23.

Rotate the courses being used for assessment.

35

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

24.

Redesign the assessment template.

25.

Involve TAs to the assessment task force.


Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Proc
edures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

See Above







Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in 2010
-
2011

Domain(s)
to be examined from

department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessmen琠t污n⁩渠2M

-
2MNN

During the Spring 2010 Assessment Faculty Meeting, the faculty voted to limit the scope of assessments to three of the five
domains: Content, Critical Thinking, and Communication. T
hese are areas which after 3 years of data collection, the faculty feel
need increased concentration


Assessment question(s) to be addresse
d in 2010
-
2011

The assessment procedures will not change dramatically in 2010
-
2011. During this year, however, the

department will thoroughly
review assessment protocols to ensure validity of assessment data and involvement of a greater percentage of the faculty in t
he
assessment process.





I
-
ALP
. Graduate Programs
-

To be completed by academic units offering graduate degree programs.


Annual Report,
2009
-
2010



Department/Division:


Biology


College:

CAS


Part I
-
ALP, Summary Report on Assessment, Academic Learning Plans (ALP)


Program Title
a
:


Biology
____________________ Degree
b


MS
____

CIP Code: _
26010
______


a
Prepare separate summary table for each degree program.

b
For example, MA, MS, M.Ed.
, Ed.D.





Based on
direct measures

of student learning in the
Academic Foundations
domain(s)
your department
assessed, compare your students’ performance this year to their performance last year.

Duplicate

this
section w
hen reporting assessments for more than one domain for a given program.


Indicate the student learning outcome assessed (check on
e):


Content


Communication

X

Project Management


Critical Thinking

X

Integrity/Values


Other (describe)


Based on departmental a
ssessments, student learning in this domain was (check one):


Worse than last year

X

Equivalent to last year


Slightly
better than last year


Moderately better than last year


Dramatically better than last year


Cannot be compared (this is the first year for this assessment)


Describe the
direct measure
(s)

used to assess student learning in this domain (e.g., answers to questions included
on an exam, performance on a paper or project scored with a rubric, etc.)
. Include information about any additional
measures used to assess learning in this domain.

Produ
ction of the thesis was used as the direct measure for eight students this year. Faculty advisors assessed two
areas this past year: Integrity/Values and Project Management on a scale of Unsatisfactory (0), Satisfactory (1), or
Very Good/Excellent (2).
For Integrity/Values, advisors ranked the student’s ability to (1) apply ethical considerations
36

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

in the conduct of scientific research with humans and animals (average score


1.4) and (2) adhere to appropriate
ethical practices in their research (average s
core = 1.6). For Project Management, advisors ranked the student’s
ability to (1) design and execute a thesis project within a reasonable time frame (average score = 1.3), (2) draw and
defend conclusions related to the results of the thesis (average score

= 1.6), and (3) collaborate effectively with the
thesis committee in completing the thesis and responding to constructive feedback (average score = 1.7).


If you observed changes in student performance on this measure when comparing the two years, briefl
y describe (in
one or two sentences) the nature of these changes.

The assessment results were very similar to results for each of the five parameters over the past two years. The
average time to graduation for this cohort was 3.4 years (note that this ave
rage is only the students assessed this
year, not all students in the program). Reasons given by some students for extended time in the program were
personal/family issues that delayed their progress or more commonly taking on an excessive teaching assist
ant load
(up to 6 labs in a semester for some students) in order to meet their living expenses. At the conclusion of their
program, the students either had been accepted into a Ph.D. program at another school or had lined up a job in their
field.





Us
e of Assessment Data for Making Decisions.

Describe
the process used in your department to evaluate
assessment evidence and make decisions (include dates of relevant department meetings if known). Describe the
decisions made to improve student learning in
your program. Describe how these decisions are related to the
assessment evidence collected by your department.

Assessment of the graduate program was reviewed the departmental faculty meeting of April 23, 2010. To ensure
that students are continuously m
aking satisfactory progress toward the completion of their degree, the faculty voted
to require that for any student to be assigned to more than three laboratory sections as a teaching, the advisor must
provide a memo to the department chair concurring wit
h the appointment. By a subsequent email vote, the faculty
also voted to require that the faculty advisor, with the concurrence of the student’s advisory committee, submit an
annual assessment of each graduate student’s progress toward completion of the d
egree. Another perennial issue is
the level of funding we are able to offer graduate students, principally in the form of teaching assistantships. UWF
compares very unfavorably compared to peer institutions in terms of graduate support provided which, in
turn, leads
to many prospective students pursuing an MS degree elsewhere. The chair has developed, and the faculty
approved, a plan to increase financial support. While the plan will narrow, but not close, the gap between UWF and
our peer institutions, i
t is hoped that the increased financial support will allow us to attract more students and allow
students in the program to progress to graduation more expeditiously by reducing the need for excessive teaching
assistant loads or other employment to meet li
ving expenses.

Use of Assessment Data for Improvement of Assessment Procedures.

Describe any changes made to
assessment methods. Explain the relation between these changes and the information obtained from previous
assessments.

At the faculty meeting of
April 23, 2010, the faculty decided to expand the scale for ranking assessment criteria from
three to four categories: unsatisfactory, satisfactory, very good, and excellent. It is thought that use of the expanded
categories will help in identifying weak
er areas in need of improvement.



Describe the Department’s Commitment to Assessment Activities in
2010
-
2011

Domain(s) to be examined from

the department’s multi
-
yea爠
assessme湴np污渠i渠
2MNM
-
㈰ㄱ

The department will continue to assess Integrity/Values
and Project Management in 2010
-
2011 using an expanded
ranking scale.

Assessment question(s) to be addressed in
2010
-
2011

In 2010
-
2011, the department will make an effort to emphasize ethical values in the responsible conduct of research
mainly through th
e three core courses required of all graduate students in the program.




Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Department/Division:

Biology



College:

CAS



Part II
-
A, Major Unit Accomplishments and Changes in Programs and Services


37

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


List major department/division accomplishments and changes in programs and services for
2009
-
2010
.
(Add lines as needed.)


1.


Creation of the Pre
-
professional Post
-
baccalaureate Preparation Program (P4)


this program
offers formal networking, student organ
izations and advising resources to students who have
earned a baccalaureate degree in an area other than science and who wish to return to the
classroom to complete the required courses for admission to professional schools. We have
already had 12 student
s enter this program since it was created last Fall.


2.

Forging of an agreement with the Alabama Medi
c
al
Education Coalition which provides 10 slots
each year for qualified UWF grads in DO schools with which AMEC is allied. AMEC provides a
range of servi
ces to support and promote the success of UWF students inte4rested in this
pathway.



3.

Creation of an MOU with American Univers
i
ty of Antigua College of Medicine to provide another
option for admission to medical school for students who don’t qualify ag
ainst the more rigorous
admission standards established by US medical schools.




4.

Creation and implementation of a Clinical Experience in Health care course that provides
students an opportunity to earn academic credit while they gain the shadowing
experiences
required for admission to many professional schools. This program is under expansion to include
experiences for pre
-
dents, pre
-
pharms, pre
-

PTs, pre
-
Dos and pre
-

vets as well as the current
opportunities available for pre
-
med students. Durin
g this year, students have filled 24 slots at
Sacred Heart Hospital, Emerald Coast Surgery Center, and Andrews Institute. Baptist will be
coming on
-
boa
r
d this coming Fall.


5.

We have developed a pre
-
professional Minor for students who are actively pursu
ing their
education at UWF in disciplines other than Biology but wishing to earn a minor while completing
these required courses.


6.

We have implemented a program for graduate student compensation and work load that will
increase the former and reduce the l
atter
and should
reduce the time to graduation for our grad
students.


7.

Creation of a Medical Scholars Honors program with FSU.




38

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Annual Report,
2009
-
2010


Department/Division:

Biology


College:

CAS


Part II
-
B, Distinguished Individual (Faculty, Staff,

and Student) Accomplishments


List college/departmental distinctions earned by faculty, staff, and students during
2009
-
2010
.


A. Faculty


1.

Promotions

Dr.
Wayne Bennett was

promoted fr
o
m Associate Professor to Professor


2.

Tenure

Dr. Hui Min Chung was awarded tenure and promoted to Associate Professor.


3.

Awards


four research awards from RSP and 2 nominations for distinguished teaching awards.


4.

Faculty in Biology taught 4,664 students during the past year. They supervised over 60
independent research projects for undergrad and grad students

with another 30 involved in
informal research projects
. They served
as

thesis advisors for 28 graduate students and filled 56
membership slots on thesis committee
s
. Biology faculty published 29
journal articles in
professional publications along with 7 technical reports. Faculty presented 38 presentations or
posters at regional, state, national and international professional meetings. Faculty included 114
grads or undergrads as co
-
authors on pu
blications and presentations.
29 grant applications were
submitted during the year to state and federal granting agencies for a total amount of over

$5
million. 12 grants were funded during 2009
-
2010 in the total amount of $378,351. 47 manuscripts
were r
eviewed by Biology faculty during 2009
-
2010, and faculty held 2 positions on editorial
boards

for professional journals. Faculty filled 24 slots on departmental committees and 8 served
on CAS committees and 9 on university committees. Faculty filled 12 s
lots as officers or on
committees for professional organizations and played various roles on 18 different community
level events/committees/task forces.

Collectively, Biology faculty wrote 160 letters of
recommendation for students seeking employment or,
admission to graduate or professional
schools.



5.

Dr. Wayne Bennett’s Marine High School Research Program within the
Explore Summer
Programs

was provided continuation funding by International Paper.

6.

Dr. Wayne Bennett conducted an animal dissection works
hop for 38
HS and Middle School
students f
r
o
m Santa Rosa County.

7.

Dr. Phil Darby and Jane Caffrey were both inducted into the Million Dollar Hall fo Fame bu UWF’s
RSP.

8.

Dr. Will Patterson was the recipient of Distinguished Research and Creative Activity
award for
2010 from UWF’s RSP.

9.

Dr. Kris Behan was the recipient of the Gabor Award for Excellence.

10.

Dr. Will Patterson was awarded the following grants: $294,421 from the National Marine Fisheries
Service; $59,991 from the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commis
sion; and $99,978 from the Florida
Fish and Wildlife Research Institute.




4. Other Distinctions


B. Staff


1.
Steve Celestial: Certificate of Completion
-

Course Equivalency Coordinator


2010


2. Steve
’s performance is distinctive by virtue of th
e enormous responsibilities he covers for Biology, the
incredible workload he bears and the quality of personalized service he provides each of our students.

39

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

3. Kristen Gunn, OPS secretary for Biology and graduate student in History has completed
Pcard
Ma
nager Training
,
Banner Basics

Training
,
Nolig Training

and was awarded a
Merit Scholarship

and a
Graduate Student Grant
.

4. Jim Hammond
-


an exemplary employee who goes the extra “five” miles to be proactive in dealing
with a building that is on its last
“legs”

and oversees every project involving bldgs 58 and 58A
.

Jim is a
whirlwind of activity and an incredible asset for UWF and Biology.


5. Karen Gibbs, Administrative Specialist for Biology, has a heroic workload consisting of monthly
orders that can

approach $50,000, close to 100 accounts when you add up all of the grants and
special accounts we have, and the responsibility for identifying and assigning close to 400 prep assist
and IOR slots for all of our labs during the year. She deals with these
hurdles with distinction.





C. Students


1. The SEASTARS Biology Departmental Award

went to

Shell Chemistry as a Natural Tag to Distinguish Wild from Hatchery Reared Florida Apple Snails

Kristen A. Dahl, Dr. William F Patterson III, Philip C. Darby
, Amber Garr



2.
The SEASTARS President's Award (the overall symposium winner) went to

Reef Fish Community Structure at Northern Gulf of Mexico Natural versus Artificial Reefs

Moriah Carlysle, Dr. William Patterson III, Dustin Addis, Joseph Tarnecki



3.

Undergrad pre
-
professional major Omar Moore was accepted to UF Medical School.


4. The following students were awardees at the CAS Honors convocation: Biology, Omar Moore;
Oceanography, Jane Hart; Marine Biology, Kristen Dahl; Interdisciplinary Sciences,
Paul Novotny
(Pre
-

Pharm); Health Sciences, Bechara Rahbani.


5.

Graduate student Dustin Addis was hired by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Research institute in
St. Pete (selected out of 60 applicants, several with PhDs)

6.


UWF graduate John Eme (05) is graduati
ng with his Ph.D. from the University of California
-
Irvine.

7.

Nann Fangue (UWF, 02) graduated with her Ph.D. form University of British Columbia and
accepted a position as Director of the Bioenergetics Lan at the University of California, Santa
Barbra.

8.

Josi

Taylor (UWF 05) was awarded the Ph.D. from the Rosenthal School of Marine Sciences
in Miami and accepted a postdoc at Monterrey Bay Aquarium in CA.

9.

Valentina DiSanto (UWF 09) accepted a Ph.D. position with full sacholarship anmd stipend at
Boston Univers
ity.

10.

Allison Wilkes (UWF 09) was accepted into the Ph.D. program at Texas A&M

11.

The following graduate students in Biology were awarded SCAC grants by UWF’s RSP: Joel
Brown ($1,000; Dr. Chung’s student), Maria Cortes ($500; Dr. Pomory’s student); An Lam
($1
,000; Dr. Ryals’ student); Justin Speaks ($1,000; Dr. Bennett’s student); Katie Sprinkel
($1,000; Dr. Ryals’ student) and Thomas Yarbrough ($1,000; Dr. Ryals’ student).

12.

The pre
-
professional student org, AED, served
E
aster dinner at Loaves and Fishes Soup
Kitchen and Shelter and collected funds to supply Easter baskets to underprivileged children.

13.

Alex Stahura, pre
-
professional student in Biology, was accepted to the William Carey School
of Osteopathic Medicine.

14.

A new

pre
-
professional organization, the Pre
-
Dental Society was created by students this
year.

15.

Hien Nguyen, Pre
-
Professional Major in Biology, was accepted to UF Medical School

16.

Josh Cameron, Pre
-
professional major in Biology, was accepted ot U. Miami Medical S
chool.

17.

Anna Christensen, Pre
-
professional major in Biology, was accepted to USA Medical School.

18.

Eric Tauchman, recent grad of the UWF MS in Biology, was accepted to the Ph.D. program at
Colorado State University.

19.

Laura Enzor, recent grad of the MS in Biolo
gy was accepted into a Ph.D. Program at U. South
Carolina.

40

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

20.

Joni Barreda Wright will graduate form the Biology MS in 2010 and has been accepted into the
Ph.D. program at UF.

21.

Dustin Addis and Kate Shephard, recent grads of the UWF Biology MS


Patterson’s la
b, both
won the Outstanding Thesis Award from UWF’s RSP.





Annual Report,
2009
-
2010


Department/Division:

Biology


College:

CAS


Part II
-
C, Community Engagement Activities (Faculty, Staff, and Student)



List
all
college/departmental
community
engagement activities with participation on behalf of UWF

by
faculty, staff, and students during
2009
-
2010. Please include a very brief description of the Activity, the
Community Partner, and the Outcome/Impact of the activity.


Examples of community engag
ement activities include participation on community
-
based projects,
organization and/or presentation of cultural community events, faculty scholarship related to community
action, student scholarship related to community action, participation on community
organization boards,
and community
-
based student learning activities such as service learning projects, internships, and
capstone experience projects.




Activity

Community
Partner


Outcome/Impact

A. Faculty




Dr. Wayne Bennett

Dr. Wayne Bennett’s
䵡rin攠ei杨=pc桯潬=
剥o敡rc栠hr潧r慭=
睩瑨i渠n桥=
Explore
Summer Programs

was
provided continuation
funding by International
Paper.

Area secondary
schools

Recruitment and positive PR for
UWF

Dr. Wayne Bennett

Dr. Wayne Bennett
conducted a
n animal
dissection workshop for
38 HS and Middle
School students from
Santa Rosa County.


Area secondary
schools

Recruitment and positive PR for
UWF

Dr. Wayne Bennett

Wayne has been tireless
in his outreach efforts to
Middle and High School
students
throughout the
region; connecting
through these activities
with over 1,500 students
in the name of UWF

in
2009
-
2010
!

Area secondary
schools

Recruitment and positive PR for
UWF

Dr. Wayne Bennett

Wayne served as
consultant to the Marine
Area non
-
profit

Positive PR for UWF

41

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Mammal Stranding
Cen
ter

Dr. Wayne Bennett

Member of the Advisory
Board for International
paper

IP
-
local industry

Granting opps and positive PR for
UWF

Dr. Wayne Bennett

Member of the
Steering
Committee to the
Escambia County
Marine Biolog
y Institute

Area secondary
schools

Recruitment and positive PR for
UWF

Dr. Phil Darby

Dr. Darby assisted the
South Florida Water
Management District on
a major hydrology
survey and participated
in a Florida Fish and
Wildlife meeting on
habitat needs of
the
Everglades kite.

State agency

Spread the reputation of UWF
among state agencies.

Bo Davis

He volunteers as a food
distributor for the Water
Front Mission at
Thanksgiving and
Christmas.

Non
-
profit
agency

Raises the profile of UWF in
service to
non
-
profit agencies in the
community

Dr. Will Patterson

P
resented short talks on
marine biology to over
300 students at SS
Dixon Elementary
School (Career Day),

Secondary
schools

Recruitment and positive PR for
UWF.

Dr. Will Patterson

A
ppointed
representative for the
Gulf of Mexico on the
National Marine
Services National
Scientific and Statistical
Committee, was an
invited participant in this
same body’s national
meeting on estimation of
natural fish mortality,
served on this same
body’s researc
h
program review panel,

National agency

Raising profile for UWF in the
research arena at the national level.

Dr. Will Patterson

A
ppointed
representative of FIO to
the Florida Aquaculture
Coordinating Council

State agency

Raises the research profile of U
WF
with state agencies

Dr. Karen Pritchard

Group Leader on the
Galloway Running
Program

Community
group

Promotion of community health.

Dr. Karen Pritchard

Karen served as a judge
in the St. Paul Catholic
School Science fair and
in the West Annual
Panhandle Regional
science fair.

Area secondary
schools


science fairs

Recruitment and positive PR for
UWF.

42

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010


Dr. Jane Caffrey

She serves as an expert
consultant with the
FDEP on nutrient criteria
for estuaries and coastal
waters, and on sea
grass monitoring, which
called for her
participation in
workshops, preparation
of reports or monitoring
activities.

State agency

Raises r
esearch profile for UWF
with state agencies

Dr. Jane Caffrey

She serves as a
member of the National
Water Quality Monitoring
Council.

National agency

Raises UWF research profile with
national agency.

Dr. Wade Jeffrey

Served as a volunteer at
the Greater

Gulf Coast
Art Festival.

Cultural entity

Promoting UWF’s profile with the
cultural community

Dr. Wade Jeffrey

He has served on both
local and regional
science fairs as a judge
and a Lead judge

Regional
secondary
schools

Recruitment and positive PR for
UWF.

Dr. Joe Lepo

H
e serves on the
Environmental Advisory
Board for the City of
Pensacola
.

Area agency

Promotes UWF’s research profile
and reputation among area
agencies.

Dr. Joe Lepo

He serves on

the
Escambia Soil and
Water Conservation
Board

Area agency

Promotes UWF’s research profile
and reputation among area
agencies.

Dr. Joe Lepo

He serves on the
Escambia County
Citizen’s Environmental
Advisory Board.

Area agency

Promotes UWF’s research profile
and reputation among

area
agencies.

D r. Joe Lepo

Joe has
established active
consultative or
collaborative
relationships with the US
Department of
Agricultural and
Consumer Services,
Florida Department of
Community Affairs,
Florida State
Department of
Environmental
Protecti
on, UF Institute
of Food and Agricultural
Science, USDA and
Oak Ridge Institute for
Science and Education.


Federal and
state agencies

Promotes UWF’s research profile
and reputation among state and
federal agencies.

B. Staff




43

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Jim Hammond

He
provides weekly
services to his church
and is very active in his
community at a variety
of non
-
profit agencies.
He is well known in the
City of Jay as a person
who freely provides his
services for the poor, the
elderly and the
community at
-
large

Multiple
religious and
non
-
profit
agencies

Promotes UWF’s profile and
reputation throughput the area.

















C. Students




AED


pre
-
pro org

S
erved Easter dinner at
Loaves and Fishes Soup
Kitchen and Shelter and
collected funds to supply
Easter baskets to
underprivileged children.


Community non
-
profits

Boosts UWF’s profile among
community non
-
profits and provides
students with community service.

All student orgs

All of our student orgs
engage in charity work
for a variety of
organizations in the
community. These kinds
of activities are written
into th
e charter of these
orgs.

Community non
-
profits

Boosts UWF’s profile among
community non
-
profits and provides
students with community service.


















Annual Report,
2009
-
2010


Department/Division:

Biology


College:

CAS


Part III
-
A, Strategic
Planning Goals/Objectives

for
2010
-
2011 and 2010
-
2015

(specify time frame; e.g.,
2010
-
2011, 2010
-
2015).


List strategic plan goals/objectives and planned method of assessment (if applicable).


Strategic Goal/Objective
a

Related UWF
Strategic Goal
b

Method of

Assessment
c

2010
-
2011



To acquire a MB faculty to support a major
initiative to
significantly improve
recruit
ment

and ret
ention of Marine Biology students.
• Increase
enrollment to
at
least
All goals set for 2010
-
2011 are
proposals for specific actions
which can be easily assessed
44

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Critical for increasing our enrollment numbers
for this degree.

12,000 by
2012.


by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Biology.

2010
-
2015
To acquire re
placements
of
one vehicle/year over the next 6 years

within the Biology fleet of 6 vehicles, all
of which have over 100,000 miles and
require constant maintenance.
These
vehicles are critical to our ability to
transport students for field courses and
rese
arch.

Increase
enrollment to
at least
12,000 by
2012

All goals set for 2010
-
2011 are
proposals for specific actions
which can be easily assessed
by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Bi
ology.

To acquire needed space for office,
conference room, teaching and
research laboratories by integrating
these needs with those of the health
-
related programs of the School of
Allied Health

and Life Sciences into a
single facility designed to house all
School units and programs.


• Construct
and maintain
new high
-
quality,

student
-
focused
buildings, to
replace

outmoded
facilities.

• Monitor
existing
campus
structures for

needed
improvements

to facilitate
optimal

working
conditions.


All goals set for 2010
-
2015 are
proposals for specific actions
which can be easily assessed
by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Biology.

To

build the program in biotechnology
so that it effectively serves the region
and provides students with skills that
are directly marketable in the biotech
industry. This effort will be tied in with
our articulation arrangement with PJC
in biotechnology an
d will support the
joint PJC/UWF effort to seek funds
from NSF and other granting agencies
and in collaboration with area high
schools in an effort to build a seamless
path in biotech training and education
• Develop and
sustain
partnerships
and

cooperative
agreements
with
institutions

of higher
education in
Northwest
Florida.

All goals set
for 2010
-
2015 are
proposals for specific actions
which can be easily assessed
by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Biology.

45

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

from PJC to UWF to the industry. We
have identif
ied specific industrial
partners to provide internships and will
be developing those contacts and
opportunities to benefit our students
and position the program for
meaningful assessment of student
learning outcomes.


• Engage
business, K
-
12, non
-
profit
and

other
community
partners in
the region
and

beyond to
support
economic,
cultural and

educational
growth.

• Integrate the
needs of
UWF
community

partners in
our
curriculum
and program

planning.

• Increase
focus on
critical
disciplines

needed to
support
regional
workforce

needs (
e.g.
,
STEM
disciplines of
science,

technology,
engineering
and
mathematics

and health
care).


To look for and capitalize on
opportunities for partnerships with
other secondary and post
-
secondary
ed institutions, and community entities
• Engage
business, K
-
12, non
-
profit
and

A
ll goals set for 2010
-
2015 are
proposals for specific actions
which can be easily assessed
by the Department. This
46

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

in developing new programs that serve
the region, promote the reputation of
the University and help UWF fulfill its

mission and goals.


other
community
partners in
the region
and

beyond to
support
economic,
cultural and

educational
growth.

• Integrate the
needs of
UWF
community

partners in
our
curriculum
and program

planning.


assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Biology.

To continue development and effective
advertising of all of our programs and
to review the success of these
programs every year with an eye
toward eliminating all that have not
been supported by enrollment. This
will include annual updating of our
departmental catalog and placing this
and oth
er key advertising materials in
the hands of guidance counselors at
secondary schools, advisors at junior
colleges and establishment of bridge
courses and bridge programs such as
the ones currently in place in marine
biology with Washington H.S. and in
bio
technology and Zoo Science with
PJC and Santa Fe Community
College.


• Ensure
continuous
improvement
of the

UWF
experience
through
systematic

assessment
of academic
program
quality.


All goals set for 2010
-
2015 are
proposals for specific actions
which can
be easily assessed
by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Biology.

To work effectively in helping to
develop the proposed downtown
Maritime Museum, Marine Sciences
Research Center and aq
uarium. This
is a long
-
term project and requires
long
-
term commitment.


• Engage
business, K
-
12, non
-
profit
and

other
community
partners in
All goals set for 2010
-
2015 are
proposals for specific actions
which can be easily assessed
by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
47

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

the region
and

beyond to
support
economic,
cultural and

educational
growth.


Biology.

To develop the Marine Biology
program into a world
-
class operation
with a full

complement of faculty in all
of the areas of the field necessary for
preparing students for jobs in the
marine
-
related industries and for
acceptance into graduate programs
around the world. This will require
hiring of at least 2 additional faculty in
cri
tical areas of modern marine
biotechnology/field biology over the
next 5 years to keep abreast of trends
in the field and continue to provide our
graduates with a competitive edge in
seeking employment in the marine
sciences industries and academia.


• D
evelop and
sustain
partnerships
and

cooperative
agreements
with
institutions

of higher
education in
Northwest
Florida.

• Engage
business, K
-
12, non
-
profit
and

other
community
partners in
the region
and

beyond to
support
economic,
cultural and

educational
g
rowth.

• Integrate the
needs of
UWF
community

partners in
our
curriculum
and program

planning.


All goals set for 2010
-
2015 are
proposals for specific actions
which can be easily assessed
by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full
faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Biology.

To continue to seek opportunities for
• Engage
All goals set for 2010
-
2015 are
48

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

international field studies and research
in Marine Biology. This will include
expanding the current efforts in our
research and teaching program in
Indonesia, C
osta Rica and pursuing
opportunities that have presented
themselves in Belize and Honduras.


students
purposefully
to develop

intellectually
through
project
management

opportunities
and other
types of

active
learning (
e.g.
,
research with
faculty,

internships,
volunteerism
and other

co
-
curricular
experiences).

• Ensure
continuous
improvement
of the

UWF
experience
through
systematic

assessment
of academic
program
quality.


proposals for specific actions
which can be
easily assessed
by the Department. This
assessment process involves
the full faculty in faculty
meetings and the Chair of
Biology.




a
Add lines as needed.

b
Insert Focus/Goal number/letter from the
UWF Strategic Priorities and Measurable Achievements, 2008
-
2012
.

c
If applicable.





49

Annual Report, 2009
-
2010

Annual Report,
2009
-
2010


Department/Division:




College:




Part III
-
B, New Degree Program
Projections


This section
to be completed only by the Dean

for the college
-
level annual report.

NOTE: This information is shared annually with the UWF Board of Trustees and is used to complete the
Board of Governors Work Plan.


List new degree programs and

specializations under consideration and planned year of implementation.


Program Title

Level
a

New Degree
b

New
Specialization
c

Implementation
Year

Yes

No

Yes

No







































































a
For example, BA, BSBA, MEd.

b
For degrees not currently offered as stand
-
alone programs; will require submission of requests to Faculty
Senate and Board of Trustees.

c
For new specializations within an existing degree program; will require submission of
request to Faculty
Senate but not to Board of Trustees.