1. What student learning outcomes were assessed this year ... filestudent learning, including program policies, independent faculty assessments of student performance in addition to

1

Central Washington University Assessment of Student Learning

Department and Program Report Academic Year of Report: 2010-2011 College: COTS Department: Psychology Program: MS Experimental Psychology 1. What student learning outcomes were assessed this year, and why? In answering this question, please identify the specific student learning outcomes you assessed this year, reasons for assessing these outcomes, with the outcomes written in clear, measurable terms, and note how the outcomes are linked to department, college and university mission and goals. The MS Experimental Psychology program is committed to a holistic and thorough review of student learning, including program policies, independent faculty assessments of student performance in addition to more traditional student learning objectives. For the 2010-2011, academic year, the MS Experimental Psychology program has decided to assess all seven of our Student Learning Objects (SLOs). Please see Appendix 1 “Psychology Student Learning Outcomes (2007-08) for a list of these SLOs and a summary of related department, college, and university mission and goals. In 2010-2011, the program allowed the changes made in 2009-2010 to take effect, including improvements to the ABA specialization program, moving the faculty assessments to an on-line format, and recruiting for the next school year. Additionally, the deadline this year was changed to December 2011. It makes more sense to talk about our program in terms of the entire academic year (Fall though Summer) because it keeps cohorts of students together. As such, this is the first assessment report that has allowed an assessment of one full academic year. We see this as an improvement and wanted to use this opportunity to get a clear one-year snapshot of the program. We commend the CWU assessment team for their willingness to make this happen. This is the first year we have used the standardized format adopted by the Psychology Department. Because we employ a number of assessment measures and because we combine assessment of student learning with policy measures that directly effect student performance, this report represents an integration of assessments. For this first assessment with the new format, we wanted to include all seven SLOs as a baseline for future assessments. Through this integration, we hope to make direct changes to the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Plan for the MS Experimental Psychology program. The Assessment Plan has not been revised since 2007-08 and therefore does not reflect some of our most useful measures of student learning (i.e. Annual Survey of Student Performance). Finally, we want to acknowledge that this report addresses program goals as well as student learning objectives. Therefore, there is much more information in this report than is required or requested by the university. However, we find it helpful to have all of the program assessments and measures of student learning integrated into the same report. For readers who are interested in focusing specifically on the assessment of student learning objectives, please see the following information:

• Annual Survey of Student Performance (p. 7) • Student Learning Objectives (Table 10, pp. 11-18) • Annual Survey of Student Performance (Faculty reports, pp. 19-20) • Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) (pp. 20-22) • What will the department or program do as a result of that information? (p. 22) • What did the department or program do in response to last year’s assessment information? (pp.

23-24)

Brief Program Overview

As a very brief overview, the MS Experimental Psychology program differs from other graduate degree programs in psychology due to two distinct specializations: General Experimental Psychology and Applied Behavior Analysis. While these specializations overlap in terms of core

2

courses, they have very different short-term and long-term goals. The General Experimental Psychology specialization typically attracts students with a primary interest in research. Although not all applicants do so, the majority apply to our program with the intention of continuing their education at the doctoral level. The range of interests within this group is extremely broad, and includes cognitive neuroscience, brain-based behavior, animal behavior (e.g. avian, canine, primate), learning and memory, health psychology, and internet-based/social media research (to name only a few). The Applied Behavior Analysis specialization is primarily a terminal degree program designed to prepare students to sit for the Board Certified Behavior Analyst exam. While some graduates may go one to doctoral-level study, the majority go on to direct employment with community service agencies, private schools and/or school districts, or with business consulting agencies. Due to these differences, our student needs vary tremendously. Because of the broad spectrum of specialty areas within the program, there is no single rubric for assessing student learning. However, the one defining feature of both specializations is the focus on empirical, scientific evidence. This focus on data and research makes the master’s thesis process one of the best mechanisms for evaluating whether students in both specializations are making meaningful progress toward developing skills that are highly relevant for their disciplines. As such, the thesis process was identified early on as having key components critical to the assessment process. Nevertheless, additional assessment methods have also been employed in an attempt to develop a clear picture of how our students are doing in their graduate training program. 2. How were they assessed? In answering these questions, please concisely describe the specific methods used in assessing candidate learning. Please also specify the population assessed, when the assessment took place, and the standard of mastery (criterion) against which you will compare your assessment results. If appropriate, please list survey or questionnaire response rate from total population. A) What methods were used? B) Who was assessed? C) When was it assessed? Please see Appendix 1 “Psychology Student Learning Outcomes (2007-08) for a summary of methods employed, which students were assessed, and when the assessments took place. A variety of methods were employed to gather relevant data on student learning. In most cases, the data were restricted to graduate students. Only those graduate students in their first or second year in the program are assessed annually. Third year students and beyond typically are working on their master’s thesis or on internship, or both. Typically they are not enrolled in formal classes; as such we simply track their progress/activity but do not include them in the GPA and grades assessments. Several sources of information were used to compile this report.

- Psychology Department Student files o Admissions materials o Courses of Study o Option Approval Forms o Independent Study and Cooperative Education forms o Miscellaneous communications

- Unofficial transcripts o Enrollment Information o Quarterly GPA o Credits and grades for individual courses

- Annual Survey of Student Progress (given to faculty at the end of every spring quarter). - MS Experimental Psychology Student Learning Objectives (see attached)

3

A. CLASS DEMOGRAPHICS: Only those graduate students in their first or second year in the program are assessed annually for demographics. Department records were used to identify the needed information in the Fall 2011.

Student academic records/files were tracked/reviewed for: 1. Number of students admitted to the program 2. Incoming GPA and GRE Scores 3. Academic/Thesis Advisor assignments 4 Number of prerequisite courses required upon entry 5. Total Number of MS Exp Psych students by year 6. Time to Completion

B. ANNUAL SURVEY OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE: All active MS Experimental Psychology students (N=32) were reviewed, by the faculty, using an on-line survey administered in Spring 2011. Of the 12 faculty invited to participate, a total of 6 faculty responded. Students could be reviewed by more than one instructor or by the same instructor more than once (for different classes). Each assessment was independent and based on one instructor for a single course. We tracked faculty ratings for the graduate students in the program on 11 different dimensions:

SURVEY ITEMS

Overall academic performance

Mastery of Content Knowledge

Analytical Skills (Quantitative)

Analytical Skills (Logical)

Comprehension Skills

Expressive Skills (Written)

Expressive Skills (Verbal)

Appreciation for Empirical Evidence

Potential Success in Program

Attitude and Disposition

C. COURSE OFFERINGS AND ENROLLMENTS: Course offerings and enrollments reported for 2010-2011 are reported for MS Experimental Psychology students only. Other students may have also been enrolled. Data are based on the Annual Survey of Student Performance.

Course Title

PSY504 Thesis Management PSY 505 Psychology Colloquium PSY 541 Adv Cognitive Psychology PSY 550 Research in Natural Environments PSY 551 Behavior Analysis PSY 553 Single-Subject Design PSY 554 Behavioral Interventions PSY 555 Design and Analysis PSY 558 Advanced Statistics PSY 52 Adv Principles of Learning

4

PSY 576 Comparative Psychology PSY 578 Applied Physiological Psychology PSY 580 Current Issues in Psychology PSY 587 Ethics in Exp Psych and ABA PSY 651 Adv Applied Behavior Analysis PSY 684 Internship in Applied Exp Psych PSY 595 Graduate Research PSY 700 Thesis

D. PROGRAM BENCHMARKS: Data are based on the Annual Survey of Student Performance. Thesis advisors identified those students who have completed the following in 2010-2011:

HSRC Approval IACUC Approval Content Coursework Completed Has taught a class Was a GTA Attended a professional conference Presented Thesis Data professionally Thesis Defense meeting

E. TIME TO COMPLETION: Data related to time to completion have been gathered on MS Experimental Psychology students since 2001. Data are based on student unofficial transcripts. F. STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES: Finally, see Appendix 1 “Psychology Student Learning Outcomes for 2010-2011” for a summary of the criteria used to assess SLOs, a list of the classes in which students were assessed. Also outline is the relationship between program SLOs, program goals, related departmental goal, related college goals and related university goals.

5

3. What was learned? In answering this question, please report results in specific qualitative or quantitative terms, with the results linked to the outcomes you assessed, and compared to the standard of mastery (criterion) you noted above. Please also include a concise interpretation or analysis of the results. Ten new students were admitted to the MS Experimental Psychology program this year. Six females and four males. Five were accepted into the General Experimental specialization; five were admitted to the ABA specialization. However, one student changed from the general experimental specialization to the ABA specialization resulting in a 4:6 split, respectively. By the end of winter quarter, three students had left the program withdrew or on-leave), resulting in a final 3:4 split between the two specializations respectively. Note that all students are included in the academic demographic. A. Class Demographics

Table 1. Average GPA and GRE scores for incoming graduate students for the last 3 years.

Academic Year GPA GRE-Quant GRE-Total

2008-2009 3.4 625 625 2009-2010 3.53 585 585 2010-2011 3.54 495 495

Table 2. Enrollments made and accepted per academic year and assignments to advisors.

Academic Advisor 2007-2008

2009-2010

2010-2011

M. Fallshore (.5) 0 0 0

K. Gabriel 1 2 1

R. Greenwald n/a 2 (-1) 1

M. Jensvold (CHCI) 3 0 0

S. Lonborg 0 2 1

M. Matheson 0 1 (-1) 0

D. Polage n/a 1 0

S. Schepman* n/a n/a n/a

E. Street† n/a n/a 3

W. Williams† 0 2 4

R. Zayac n/a 3 (-1) n/a

† ABA & Gen Exp Psy program faculty Department Co-chair

Table 3. Number of students entering the program with prerequisite courses needed.

Academic Year PSY 300 PSY 362 PSY 363 PSY 301*

2007-2008 N/A 0 1 0

2008-2009 N/A 0 1 0

2009-2010 0 0 2 0

2010-2011 1 1 1 1

6

* PSY 301 is required only for ABA specialization students

Table 4. Number of students meeting program, departmental and graduate school benchmarks

Benchmark 2010-2011 2009-2010 Total/Target Students enrolled

10 (100%)

10 (100%)

20 (100%)

Course of Study Approvals on file

10 (100%)

10 (100%)

20 (100%)

COS forms approved in 1st quarter

10 (100%)

10 (100%)

20 (100%)

Option Approval Forms on file

3 (30%)

10 (100%)

13 (65%)

Thesis Defense meetings n/a

2* (20%)

2* (20%)

Theses Accepted by Graduate School n/a

2* (100%)

2* (100%)

* One additional student from an earlier cohort also defended and had her thesis accepted by the graduate school. A total of three MS degrees were conferred in Experimental Psychology in 2010-2011.

Table 5. Number of currently active graduate students relative to total number of students initially admitted per year.

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011

1/5 4/8 10/13 10/10

7

B. ANNUAL SURVEY OF STUDENT PERFORMANCE

Table 6. Annual Survey of Student Performance Summary

Superior Good Adequate Less than adequate Poor

Insufficient knowledge

Overall academic performance

30 (57.7%)

18 (34.6%)

4 (7.7%) 0 0 0

Mastery of Content Knowledge

27 (51.9%)

21 (40.4%)

4 (7.7%) 0 0 0

Analytical Skills (Quantitative)

19 (36.5%)

19 (36.5%)

2 (3.8%)

1 (1.9%) 0

11 (21.2%)

Analytical Skills (Logical)

35 (67.3%)

13 (25.0%)

4 (7.7%) 0 0 0

Comprehension Skills

30 (57.7%)

20 (38.5%)

2 (3.8%) 0 0 0

Expressive Skills (Written)

32 (61.5%)

16 (30.8%)

2 (3.8%) 0

1 (1.9)

1 (1.9)

Expressive Skills (Verbal)

26 (50.0%)

20 (38.5%)

4 (7.7%)

1 (1.9%) 0

1 (1.9)

Appreciation for Empirical Evidence

40 (76.9%)

10 (19.2%)

1 (1.9%) 0 0

1 (1.9)

Potential Success in Program

30 (57.7%)

17 (32.7%)

2 (3.8%)

1 (1.9%)

1 (1.9)

1 (1.9)

Attitude and Disposition

24 (46.2%)

21 (40.4%)

4 (7.7%)

2 (3.8%) 0

1 (1.9)

8

C. COURSE OFFEREINGS AND ENROLLMENTS

Table 7. Course Offering and Enrollment Summary: Data derived from Annual Survey of Student Performance Course Title Offered in

2010-2011 Number of MS

Exp Psy Students PSY504 Thesis Management yes 8 PSY 505 Psychology Colloquium no 0 PSY 541 Adv Cognitive Psychology no 0 PSY 550 Research in Natural Environments yes 12 PSY 551 Behavior Analysis yes 12 PSY 553 Single-Subject Design yes 6 PSY 554 Behavioral Interventions no 0 PSY 555 Design and Analysis no 0 PSY 558 Adv Statistics no 0 PSY 562 Adv Principles of Learning yes 7 PSY 576 Comparative Psychology yes 5 PSY 578 Applied Physiological Psychology yes 9 PSY 580 Current Issues in Psychology no 0 PSY 587 Ethics in Exp Psych and ABA yes 1 PSY 651 Adv Applied Behavior Analysis yes 8 PSY 684 Internship in Applied Exp Psych no 0 PSY 595 Graduate Research yes 17 PSY 700 Thesis yes 6

9

D. PROGRAM BENCHMARKS (as reported by faculty)

Table 8. Benchmark Summary: Data derived from Annual Survey of Student Performance Benchmark Faculty

Reports (n)

Percent of Total Faculty Reports

(%) HSRC Approval 3 (5.8%) IACUC Approval 0 (0.0%) Content Coursework Completed 5 (9.6%) Has taught a class 1 (1.9%) Was a GTA 7 (13.5%) Attended a professional conference 5 (9.6%) Presented Thesis Data professionally 1 (1.9%) Thesis Defense meeting 1 (1.9%)

10

E. Time-to-Completion Table 9. Time-to-Completion data for students in the MS Experimental psychology program. Data go back to graduates from 2008. Graduates from 2010-2011 are listed at the bottom.

Student/ Advisor Program Year

Enrolled Year

Completed Time-to-

Completion Redfield (Williams)

MS Gen Exp Fall 2005

Winter 2008

2.5

Todd (Fallshore)


Spring 2008

4.75

Manjarrez (Eubanks)


Summer 2008

7.25

Tate (Stahelski)


Spring 2009

5.75

Rutledge (Gabriel)


Summer 2009

2.25

Mack (Matheson)


Summer 2009

4

Buckner (Jensvold)


Fall 2009

6.25

Stadner (Jensvold)


Winter 2010

4.5

Jones (Matheson)


Winter 2010

4.5

Sherril (Matheson)


Spring 2010

5.75

Potosky (Jensvold)


Summer 2010

4.25

Crnich (Matheson)

MS Gen Exp Winter 2009

Summer 2010

1.5

Thygesen (Williams)


Summer 2010

2.25

Puffer (Matheson)


Summer 2010

6.25

Scott (Williams) MS Gen Exp Fall 2005

Summer 2010

5.25

Metzler (Jensvold)


Fall 2010 4.25

James (Gabriel) MS Gen Exp Fall 2009

Summer 2011

2

Dodgen (Polage) MS Gen Exp Fall 2009

Summer 2011

2

Mean 4.18

11

F. STUDENT LEARNING OBJECTIVES (SLOs)

Table 10. SLO Assessment Summary

Student Learning Outcomes Criterion of Mastery Assessment Results 1. Write in the language of the discipline, using the elements of style described in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association.

GPA above 3.0 and no grade lower than a C in required core content and elective classes on student’s course of study form.

Successful completion and approval of the thesis proposal as signified by the signing of the option approval form by the thesis committee.

Successful approval of research proposals by IACUC or HSRC committees, when relevant.

Successful defense of the thesis as signified by the signing of the thesis signature pages by the thesis chair and committee.

Successful acceptance of the written thesis by the graduate school. Additional Indicators

Ten second-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.70. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.52; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.70; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.96; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Only one student attended summer school; she earned a 4.0. Ten first-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.78. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.71; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.79; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.83; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Three students attended summer school; they all earned above a 3.0; the average GPA was 3.97.

Ten second-year students (100%) and ten first-year students (100%) have approved course of study forms. In both cases, COS forms were submitted in the first quarter of the students’ first year in the program.

Faculty reported that three HSRC protocols were submitted and accepted. HSRC approvals are not maintained in student files. Therefore, we must rely on faculty reports. This item cannot be tracked independently of the acceptance of the thesis by the graduate school. Two (20%) second-year students successfully defended their theses. Of the two students who successfully defended their theses, both (100%) theses were accepted by the graduate school. A third student from a previous cohort also finished her thesis. Degrees for all 3 students were posted officially in 2010-2011. Written expressive skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. Thirty two (61.5%) of the faulty evaluations for this item were rated as superior; Sixteen (30.8%) were rated as

12

good; Two (3.8%) were rated as adequate. Only one comment (1.9%) was rated as poor.

2. Describe and perform data analyses for particular data sets such as traditional descriptive statistical analyses, inferential statistical analyses, sequential analyses, single-subject designs and/or multivariate analyses.

GPA above 3.0 and no grade lower than a C in required core content and elective classes on student’s course of study form


Successful acceptance of the written thesis by the graduate school. Additional indicators

SAME AS #1 Ten second-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.70. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.52; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.70; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.96; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Only one student attended summer school; she earned a 4.0. Ten first-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.78. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.71; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.79; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.83; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Three students attended summer school; they all earned above a 3.0; the average GPA was 3.97. SAME AS #1 Two (20%) second-year students successfully defended their theses. SAME AS #1 100% of theses submitted (N=3) were accepted by the graduate school. Degrees were posted officially in 2010-2011. Quantitative analytical skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. Nineteen (35%) of faulty evaluations were rated as superior; An equal number (36.5%) were rated as good; Two (3.8%) were rated as adequate. Only one comment (1.9%) was rated as less than adequate. Logic-based analytical skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. 100% of faculty comments were rated as adequate or better. Thirty five (67.3%) faculty evaluations were rated as superior; Thirteen (25%) were rated as good; Four (7.7%) were rated as adequate.

13

3. Describe, assess and utilize common research designs in psychology.


Successful defense of the thesis as signified by the signing of the thesis signature pages by the thesis chair and committee. Additional Indicators

SAME AS #1 Ten second-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.70. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.52; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.70; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.96; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Only one student attended summer school; she earned a 4.0. Ten first-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.78. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.71; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.79; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.83; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Three students attended summer school; they all earned above a 3.0; the average GPA was 3.97. SAME AS #1 Two (20%) second-year students successfully defended their theses. Mastery of content knowledge was assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill requires fluency with research design. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Twenty seven comments (57.7%) rated the students’ mastery of content knowledge as superior; Twenty one (40.4%) rated them as good; four (7.7%) rated them as adequate. Comprehension was also assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill requires fluency with research design as well. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Thirty comments (57.7%) rated the students’ comprehension as superior; Twenty (38.5%) rated them as good; Two (3.8%) rated them as adequate.

4. Design, conduct, and report psychological research.

GPA above 3.0 and no grade lower than a C in required core content and

SAME AS #1 Ten second-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The

14

elective classes on student’s course of study form

Successful completion and approval of the thesis proposal as signified by the signing of the option approval form by the thesis committee.


Successful acceptance of the written thesis by the graduate school

Additional indicators

average GPA for the year was 3.70. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.52; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.70; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.96; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Only one student attended summer school; she earned a 4.0. Ten first-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.78. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.71; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.79; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.83; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Three students attended summer school; they all earned above a 3.0; the average GPA was 3.97. Proposal meetings are formally tied to the Option Approval Form which is typically signed at the end the proposal meeting. By 2010-2011, all ten (100%) of second year students had option approval forms signed. Only three (30%) of first-years students had option approval forms signed in 2010-2011. SAME AS #1 Two (20%) second-year students successfully defended their theses. SAME AS #1 100% of theses submitted (N=3) were accepted by the graduate school. Degrees were posted officially in 2010-2011. Appreciation for empirical evidence was assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill overlaps with the ability to design, conduct and report on complex scientific findings. 100% of faculty comments were rated as adequate or better. Forty (76.9%) of the faulty evaluations for this item were rated as superior; Ten (19.2%) were rated as good; One (1.9%) were rated as adequate. SAME AS #1 Written expressive skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill overlaps with the

15

ability to design, conduct and report on complex scientific findings. Thirty two (61.5%) of the faulty evaluations for this item were rated as superior; Sixteen (30.8%) were rated as good; Two (3.8%) were rated as adequate. Only one comment (1.9%) was rated as poor. SAME AS #2 Quantitative analytical skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill overlaps with the ability to design, conduct and report on complex scientific findings. Nineteen (35%) of faulty evaluations were rated as superior; An equal number (36.5%) were rated as good; Two (3.8%) were rated as adequate. Only one comment (1.9%) was rated as less than adequate. SAME AS #2 Logic-based analytical skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill overlaps with the ability to design, conduct and report on complex scientific findings. 100% of faculty comments were rated as adequate or better. Thirty five (67.3%) faculty evaluations were rated as superior; Thirteen (25%) were rated as good; Four (7.7%) were rated as adequate. Same as #3 Mastery of content knowledge was assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill overlaps with the ability to design, conduct and report on complex scientific findings. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Twenty seven comments (57.7%) rated the students’ mastery of content knowledge as superior; Twenty one (40.4%) rated them as good; four (7.7%) rated them as adequate. Same as #3 Comprehension was also assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill overlaps with the ability to design, conduct and report on complex scientific findings. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Thirty comments (57.7%) rated the students’ comprehension as superior; Twenty (38.5%) rated them as good; Two (3.8%) rated them as adequate.

16

5. Describe and contrast major theoretical and practical concepts in core content areas of research including behavior analysis, cognitive psychology, comparative psychology, and/or physiological psychology.


Additional indicators

SAME AS #1 Ten second-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.70. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.52; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.70; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.96; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Only one student attended summer school; she earned a 4.0. Ten first-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.78. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.71; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.79; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.83; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Three students attended summer school; they all earned above a 3.0; the average GPA was 3.97. Expressive Verbal Skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. The ability to understand and express oneself in class in important to describing and contrasting content knowledge. Thirty-two comments (50%) rated the students’ verbal expression as superior; Twenty (38.5%) rated them as good; four (7.7%) rated them as adequate; one (1.9% rated) them as less than adequate. SAME AS #1 Mastery of content knowledge was assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Twenty seven comments (57.7%) rated the students’ mastery of content knowledge as superior; Twenty one (40.4%) rated them as good; four (7.7%) rated them as adequate. SAME AS #1 Comprehension was also assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Thirty comments (57.7%) rated the students’ comprehension as superior; Twenty (38.5%) rated them as good; Two (3.8%) rated them as adequate. SAME AS #2 Quantitative analytical skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of

17

Student Progress. Nineteen (35%) of faulty evaluations were rated as superior; An equal number (36.5%) were rated as good; Two (3.8%) were rated as adequate. Only one comment (1.9%) was rated as less than adequate. SAME AS #2 Logic-based analytical skills were assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. 100% of faculty comments were rated as adequate or better. Thirty five (67.3%) faculty evaluations were rated as superior; Thirteen (25%) were rated as good; Four (7.7%) were rated as adequate. Same as #3 Mastery of content knowledge was assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Twenty seven comments (57.7%) rated the students’ mastery of content knowledge as superior; Twenty one (40.4%) rated them as good; four (7.7%) rated them as adequate. Same as #3 Comprehension was also assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. 100% of faculty comments rated student mastery of content as adequate or higher. Thirty comments (57.7%) rated the students’ comprehension as superior; Twenty (38.5%) rated them as good; Two (3.8%) rated them as adequate. SAME AS #4 Appreciation for empirical evidence was assessed by faculty in the Annual Survey of Student Progress. This skill overlaps with the ability to design, conduct and report on complex scientific findings. 100% of faculty comments were rated as adequate or better. Forty (76.9%) of the faulty evaluations for this item were rated as superior; Ten (19.2%) were rated as good; One (1.9%) were rated as adequate.

6. Engage in scholarly and professional activities, including presenting research at formal and/or informal professional events


SAME AS #1 Ten second-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.70. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.52; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.70; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.96; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Only one student attended summer school; she earned a 4.0.

18

Successful oral defense of the master’s thesis

100% of graduate students will submit thesis research to CWU SOURCE Conference

Minimum of 75% of graduate students will submit research proposals to a regional, national or international conference within 1 year of graduation

Ten first-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.78. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.71; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.79; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.83; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Three students attended summer school; they all earned above a 3.0; the average GPA was 3.97. SAME AS #1 Two (20%) second-year students successfully defended their theses. . No data were collected on SOURCE specifically. According to the Annual Survey of Student Progress, five graduate students attended a professional conference and one student presented their data professionally. All of the students were currently enrolled students. No data were collected from or about graduates of the program. No details were gathered on specific conferences.

7. Performing professional skills in a supervised practice setting such as research teams, internships, and graduate research courses.

GPA above 3.0 and no grade lower than a C in internships, relevant graduate research courses, and thesis work

SAME AS #1 Ten second-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.70. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.52; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.70; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.96; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Only one student attended summer school; she earned a 4.0. Ten first-year students (100%) received a 3.0 or higher overall in 2010-2011. The average GPA for the year was 3.78. • The average GPA in Fall 2010 was 3.71; only one student failed to earn a 3.0. • The average GPA in Winter 2011 was 3.79; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. • The average GPA in Spring 2011 was 3.83; all students earn a 3.0 or higher. Three students attended summer school; they all earned above a 3.0; the average GPA was 3.97.

19

Three students successfully completed supervised practice credits in PSY 694: Internship in Experimental Psychology and ABA. All three students were ABA specialization students. The three internship sites were: Elmview; the Selah School District; HeadStart.

Based on these assessment results we can draw the following conclusions: A. Class Demographics • Overall admission goals for incoming students continue to be met. Undergraduate GPA and GRE scores generally exceed our minimum requirements. One exception was due to a miscommunication on the part of the special Education program. Their website has been corrected and we do not anticipate more such exceptions. • Whereas some faculty tend to accept at least one incoming student annually, there are others who accept many more. This is typical for Drs. Street and Williams who are the primary advisors for the ABA program. Dr. Williams accepts animal behavior students in experimental psychology as well. TAs the ABA program grows, at least one more BCBA faculty will be needed to manage the student-advising load. • Some faculty do not accept students every year. This suggests additional recruiting efforts may be needed. • Prerequisite courses do not appear to be a problem, except for students applying to the ABA specialization from degree programs other than psychology, such as Education. Advanced statistics (Psy 363) is also a course that occasionally appears as a needed prerequisite. Identification of prerequisites earlier in the admission process would allow incoming student to consider summer school as an option. • Program, departmental and graduate school benchmarks are generally being met; however, the goal to have an option approval form completed by the end of the first year may be overly ambitious. Recommend continuing to watch this one item for trends. • Three students graduated in 2010-2011. Our remaining graduate student base is heavily weighted toward the most recent two years. This is a huge improvement relative to previous years. A large backlog of Nth year students have completed the program (or withdrawn). However, it is important to note that 2011-2012 will be the first year where ABA students will engage in internships off-site. This may slow the 2-year process down for them; three years may be a more appropriate goal for them. • The average time to completion since 2008 is 4.18 years. However, it is important to note that this year two of the students completed the program in 2 years. Both were general experimental psychology students. With recent changes to the program, it will be important to continue to track time to completion in order to find ways to help students through the thesis process. B. Annual Survey of Student Performance (Faculty reports) • In the areas of overall performance, mastery of content knowledge, analytical skills (logical) and comprehension, the faculty reported 100% of the graduate students in their courses were reaching adequate or better achievement. • In the area of analytical skills (quantitative and logical), faculty reported that 93% and 100% of the students assessed (N=41) had reached adequate or better levels of mastery, respectively. Only 3 and 4 student reports fell below the good/superior range, respectively • In the area of expressive skills, written skills appear to be slightly stronger than verbal skills but most student assessments fall above the level of Adequate. More effort may need to made to help students develop their verbal skills (e.g. class presentations, teaching, conferences). • The highest assessment rating was for Appreciation of Empirical Evidence. 100% of those assessed, rate as adequate or higher. More than 75% of the assessments reached the superior range. Another 19.2% were rated as good. • Although limited to only a few observations, there is a concern that several students may not succeed in the program. However, three first-year students, and one second-year student have already left the program or taken an extended leave of absence. One of the students for whom a concern was raised has left the program. The other student remains for whom concerns were raised. She has now completed her coursework with

20

3.321 GPA and is on ABA internship (off site) as of Fall 2011. As with many in her ABA cohort, she has yet to complete a thesis proposal. A meeting with her thesis advisor and/or the program director is warranted. • An overwhelming majority of observations by faculty suggest the development of good/superior development of dispositions appropriate to Experimental Psychologists among the 2 student cohorts. • We would like our students to present course content and/or original research in classes or professional conferences. Conference attendance is low than we would like, but having the opportunity to teach is even lower. C. Course Offerings and Enrollment

• Some classes are offered in alternate years to ensure adequate enrollments. This is critical for both ensuring adequate class size for both FTE and experiential reasons. • Whereas some enrollments appear to be slightly lower than others, many such courses are service/required courses for other psychology graduate programs, and/or for other graduate programs on campus. So the reported numbers only identify the number of MS Experimental Psychology students enrolled in a course, they do not reflect total enrollments. • All ABA courses are offered every year to ensure that students can leave Ellensburg for their 1-year internship.

D. Program, Departmental and Graduate School Benchmarks.

• Enrollment has not increased in the last year. • Students are meeting with faculty early in the first quarter to complete the Course of Study form. This is especially important for students relying on financial aid. • Course of study forms are being approved in a timely manner as well. • Option approval forms are not being submitted as quickly as planned. It may well be that the goal to complete a proposal and the option approval form by the end of the first year is overly ambitious. • HSRC and IACUC approvals are not documented formally. This dependent measure is obtained only indirectly. • Our MS Experimental Psychology graduate students are not getting an opportunity to teach. • We would like our students to present course content and/or original research in classes or professional conferences. But conference attendance is lower than we would like, and having the opportunity to teach is even lower. • Thesis defense meetings are very difficult to track. There is no formalized procedure for documenting the meeting in the student’s departmental file. Measurement of this criterion is indirect and needs to be addressed. • Two second-year students earned their degrees. Two additional students from previous years also had their theses accepted by the graduate school.

E. Time to Completion

• Although the General MS Experimental program is only 48 credits, the mean time to completion is 4.18 years. • It appears that progress through the thesis process (e.g. proposal, HSRC/IACUC approval, data collection and thesis defense) requires more than 2 years. • No ABA students have finished the program but 2 students have been in the program for 4 years, and two have been in the program for 3 years. Three are expected to finish in 2011-2012. One student is working without having completed his thesis and appears to be making no progress. • An adjusted expectation of 2-3 years for the ABA program seems appropriate.

F. Student Learning Objectives (SLOs)

1. Write in the language of the discipline. • It appears that nearly all of our students are acquiring the necessary writing skills based on GPA, proposal/option approval completion, thesis completion and faculty assessments. • For both first- and second-year students in the program, GPAs remain well above the 3.0 requirement.

21

• No students earned less than a C in their coursework. • All second year students have completed a proposal and option approval form. (Correction to SLO needed) • Four students completed the writing of their theses, defended and had their papers accepted by the graduate school. No students failed to have their thesis approved. • Progress through the thesis process continues to be slow in general. Lack of writing/organizational skills may be part of the problem. The new Psychology Colloquium class may help offset this challenge as thesis management techniques may be moved into the PSY 505 course in the future.

2. Describe and perform data analyses • Students are acquiring the quantitative and logical skills as expected. A few students continue to need more experience (namely thesis work) to achieve mastery. • For both first- and second-year students in the program, GPAs remain well above the 3.0 requirement. No students earned less than a C in their coursework. It may be necessary to consider research and design courses independently for this goal to see if improvements can be made there. • For many students, assessment occurs before the analyses of their own thesis data. As such, an entrance/exit exam for research design and statistics may be a viable way to assess mastery.

3. Describe, assess, and utilize research designs. • Students are acquiring the necessary research design skills based on GPA, thesis completion and faculty assessments. • By the end of the fall quarter of their second year, most General Experimental Psychology specialization students have mastered research design sufficiently to propose a thesis. This time line may be delayed 1-yr in the ABA specialization due to the internship requirement.

4. Design, conduct, and report psychological research. • Students are acquiring the necessary skills needed to design, conduct and report on research, based on GPA, proposal/option approval completion, thesis completion and faculty assessments. • All students showed adequate to superior appreciation for empirical evidence- a hallmark of the field. • Three quarters of the students were rated as superior.

5. Content Area Mastery

• Students are demonstrating high levels of mastery in experimental psychology content courses, based on GPA, proposal/option approval completion, thesis completion and faculty assessments. • Students have earned GPAs over 3.0 in all course work. • Faculty rank all students as adequate or higher for content mastery, comprehension, expressive (verbal) skills, logic based analytical skills, and appreciation of empirical evidence. All of these are crucial to the ability to contrast theoretical and practical concepts within the field. • Over 70% of students were rated good to superior on quantitative analytical skills. For those who score below the adequate range, a post-thesis exit exam may establish late mastery.

6. Scholarly and Professional Activities. • Students are required to participate in a minimum of two professional meetings: the thesis proposal and the thesis defense. Adequate performance is required for completion of the degree. • The program has set a goal of having 100% of graduate students present their thesis research at the CWU Source conference. Two important problems are apparent. First, Source occurs once per year. Students graduate throughout the year. They may not longer be local residents when Source occurs. Many students have relocated and may not consider the travel worthwhile or affordable. We are challenged to make this goal a priority for our students before they leave. Second, we did not gather data specific to SOURCE. this needs to addressed in the Annual Survey of Student Performance. • The program has set a goal of having 75% of graduate students present their thesis research at regional, national or international conferences within one year of graduation. We did have 5 students attend a professional conference but only one presented thesis data. The same issue of travel applies here as well. Even regional conferences can be located at extremely distance sites. Cost and timing are a real limiting factors.

7. Perform Professional Skills in Supervised Practice Settings.

22

• Graduate students in the Applied Behavior Analysis specialization are required to complete 12 credits of supervised Cooperative Education credits as part of their program. As such, 100% of students in this program complete this objective. • Although General Experimental Psychology students have taken advantage of this option in the past, in 2010-2011, none of the Students in the Gen Exp Psy specialization completed an internship or Cooperative Education requirement.

4. What will the department or program do as a result of that information? In answering this question, please note specific changes to your program as they affect student learning, and as they are related to results from the assessment process. If no changes are planned, please describe why no changes are needed. In addition, how will the department report the results and changes to internal and external constituents (e.g., advisory groups, newsletters, forums, etc.).

• The MS Exp Psy Program Committee will meet early in January 2012 to develop a plan to revisit and revise the SLO Assessment plan and the mastery criteria. This should be done annually. • Greater attention needs to be paid to narrowing the assessment measures for each SLO to those specific courses that related directly to the learning objectives. • Mastery criteria for each SLO need to be reconsidered and revised to ensure relevancy and accessibility of the data. •Additional measures for each of the SLO need to be considered. Presently, the assessments are tied too closely to course work and Graduate school benchmarks.

- Add items from the Annual Faculty Survey of Student Progress - • Active recruiting is critical for the health of the MS Experimental Psychology program.

Our target of 6 general experimental students and 6 ABA students has yet to be achieved. • A discussion regarding a pretest/posttest related to research and analytical methods is warranted. • Given the highly variable nature of thesis results, the timing of graduate program completion, and the constraints on professional travel for students who have already graduated, it may be appropriate to consider a more reasonable goals for professional presentations. • Efforts need to be made at the instructor level to give GTAs and other graduate students an opportunity to teach a class so we can more directly assess Verbal Expressive Skills and provide a forum for professional presentations. • Internships for non-ABA students need to be explored directly by the faculty in those fields. • The program needs support from department faculty, the college dean and the university provost to add an additional BCBA-trained faculty member to replace Dr. Zayac. Presently, we are searching for Dr. Libby Street’s replacement, as she will retire at the end of 2012. DR. Zayac’s position was never replaced and the program requires a minimum of three fulltime, tenure track faculty to be truly viable. R. Williams is not a BCBA, and cannot even consider retraining leave without 2 fulltime BCBA colleagues. • With the addition of 1-2 new ABA faculty, it is possible that a pretest-posttest can be developed for the ABA students. It should be based on the content needed for the BACB exam, and it should be given upon arrival in the program and again shortly before program completion. • Surveying internship supervisors may be a good measure of how well our students have mastered the SLOs. • It would be helpful to survey graduates of the program over time. This is particularly true for the BCBA students who will eventually sit for the BCBA exam. Having those data will be invaluable.

23

5. What did the department or program do in response to last year’s assessment information? In answering this question, please describe any changes that have been made to improve student learning based on previous assessment results. Please also discuss any changes you have made to your assessment plan or assessment methods. 1. What student learning outcomes were assessed this year, and why? Score: 2/4 Feedback: This program measured ten (10) student learning outcomes and a number of program goals for the MS in Experimental Psychology. These student outcomes were written in clear, measureable terms and assessed knowledge, skills and attitudes. The last item has been expanded upon from previous reviews. It would be helpful if student learning outcomes were more overtly linked to department, college and university goals in the actual report itself. A simple table could be used to show what student learning goals were measured in that year and how it relates to the overall dept., college, and university goals. An effort to move to a tabled based format was implemented this year. For the time being, adding department, college and university goals in the actual report is beyond the scope of this process. A summary table has been attached but the addition of this content in the body of the report would be arduous and redundant. 2. How were they assessed? Score: 3/4

What methods were used? Who was assessed? When was it assessed? Feedback: The program should be commended for continuing to move away from student grades as a tool of student learning. The use of quarterly surveys was the main method of assessment this cycle. The program would be highly encouraged to also use direct measures (rubrics) in the future. Standards of mastery were provided for the survey data. . The program’s movement to an electronic system of assessment is positive and should prove fruitful in the coming years in terms of tracking and record-keeping. The MS Experimental Committee has discussed the possibility of more direct assessments. This is difficult with a field like experimental psychology. Student interests range from neurocognition, to animal behavior, to applied behavior analysis, to human sexuality and women’s issues, to social psychology, electronic media influences on human behavior; the list is endless. Trying to find or to develop a standardized test or rubric for all content areas is challenging at best: there is no licensing exam or governing body for general experimental psychology. It is possible that a pretest-posttest could be develop related to research methods and various analyses since these are part of the core curriculum. The ABA specialization students will be required to pass the BACB exam but it is not taken until after the student has completed the master’s degree program and 1500 hours of practicum – long after they leave CWU. Discussions with ABA faculty members suggest that a pretest-pottest may be possibly for these students. Also, we have considered tracking our ABA students to keep records on those who do or do not pass the BCBA exam. The electronic assessments were reduced to once a year, due to time constraints. Still the data gathered at the end of the academic year, provides us with the chance to survey faculty who have had with repeated exposure to the students in a variety of venues. This enhances the opportunity to see a broader range of behaviors, skills and dispositions. 3. What was learned (assessment results)? Score: 4/4 Feedback: Results are well organized, explicitly linked to outcomes and compared to an established standard of mastery. However, the program’s use may be narrower in scope and application as a result of the reliance on only survey information. Again, more focused and related direct assessments (project scores, exams, etc.) might provide results that lend themselves to greater continuous improvement and change. Our biggest changes occurred in 2008-2009 with the addition of the on-line survey of faculty. Through this survey, we have learned a great deal about how our faculty perceive our students strengths and weaknesses. We have continued to refine the survey instrument.

24

The undergraduate psychology program has begun a student work portfolio process. The MS Experimental Psychology committee has agreed to observe that process as they work out the kinks. At that point, we plan to revisit the portfolio possibility (possibly next year). It would give us another, more direct measure of student learning. But it does require evaluation of the portfolio – the assessment process needs to be efficient. How that labor is divided will also need to be addressed. Finally, the switch to the new assessment format will help track progress from year to year. 4. What will the department or program do as a result of that information? Score: 2/2 Feedback: The report evidences the consideration of assessment results. The review also notes numerous examples of identified curricular and pedagogical decisions as related to results. The department should be congratulated for continuing to seek improvement with identified challenges. The use of program handouts at conferences is a novel method of communicating with external groups. Possible inclusion of national standards through an association would also provide a needed framework for dissemination of ideas. The program is also encouraged to continue in its efforts to communicate it results with other internal and external groups. 5. How did the department or program make use of the feedback from last year’s assessment? Score:

2/2 Feedback: The review notes continued attention to feedback from assessment results and a strong interest in the assessment process. Again, the program is encouraged to continue to build upon this strong assessment culture as it can be very helpful in the placement of graduates in various educational/professional situations. This feedback from employers and other graduate programs could only strengthen the program and make it more attractive to potential students. Again, the program is encouraged to continue building on the foundation laid in the previous two years and continue to refine the assessment process. Overall, the program has gone to great length to evaluate itself in many ways. The program faculty should be commended for such an effort. The focus on student learning was a part of the overall report (see pages 20-26) completed and relied heavily on survey (indirect) evidence of student learning. The program is encouraged to continue the survey approach while adding more direct evidence in the process. This will provide additional and more focused information by which to make change and improvement. The program is congratulated on its improvement and continued focus on quality. A new program website was constructed for the General Experimental Psychology specialization last year that provide course content; requirements and a list of faculty. The MS Experimental Psychology website is new. The ABA website was updated revised (this will be done again this winter). A graduate handbook for MS Experimental Psychology was created for incoming students. A handbook for the ABA program was also created. Both handbooks provide students with ethical codes (APA and BACB), as well as important administrative information, and codes of conduct. The recommendations regarding national standards are relevant only to the ABA specialization. Information on BACB requirements for coursework, internship hours, academic content allocations, and areas of mastery required for the National Exam are included in the ABA Handbook as well. These two program-specific handbooks were included in the larger Graduate Student Handbooks provided at our new Student Orientation meeting in the fall. The program is also preparing to submit the required application materials for BACB Program Certification as soon as Dr. Street’s replacement has been hired. Program Certification with the BCBA includes being listed on their website as an approved program. This will redirect students to our program website. 6. Questions or suggestions concerning Assessment of Student Learning at Central Washington University:

NA

25

Appendix 1: Psychology Student Learning Outcomes (2007-08) Program: MS Experimental Psychology

Student

Learning Outcomes

Related Program

Goals

Related Departmental

Goals

Related College Goals

Related University

Goals

Method(s) of

Assessment

Who Assessed

When Assessed

Standard of Mastery/ Criterion

of Achievement 1. Write in the language of the discipline, using the elements of style described in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association.

Goal 1. Facilitate student progress to advanced levels of knowledge and practice in the methods and ethics of experimental psychology.

Goal 5. For appropriate students, provide a foundation of knowledge and skills that supports competence in applied behavioral science positions.

Goal 2.

Promote excellence in learning to prepare students for careers and advanced study.

Goal 5. Support involvement of undergraduate and graduate students in psychological research.

Goals I & II: Maintain and strengthen an outstanding academic and student life at all sites.

Goal III: Provide for outstanding graduate programs that meet focused regional needs and achieve academic excellence.

Goal V: Build partnerships with private, professional, academic, government, and community-based organizations.


Goal V: Achieve regional and national prominence for the university.

Assigned papers or projects in various classes.

Thesis proposal

HSRC or IACUC proposals, if relevant.

Thesis document

Graduate students

During each academic term of enrollment.

At time of presentation of thesis proposal.

At the time of HSRC or IACUC submission.

Thesis defense

Thesis submission to graduate committee and to the graduate school.


Successful completion and approval of the thesis proposal as signified by the signing of the course of study form by the thesis committee.

Successful approval of research proposals by IACUC or HSRC committees, when relevant.


Successful acceptance of the written thesis by the graduate school.

26

Student Learning Outcomes

Related Program

Goals


Goals


Related University

Goals

Method(s) of

Assessment

Who Assessed

When Assessed


of Achievement 2. Describe and perform data analyses for particular data sets such as traditional descriptive statistical analyses, inferential statistical analyses, sequential analyses, single-subject designs and/or multivariate analyses.

Goal 1. Facilitate student progress to advanced levels of knowledge and practice in the methods of experimental psychology.


Goal 2. Promote excellence in learning to prepare students for careers and advanced study.




Goal V: Build partnerships that with private, professional, academic, government, and community-based organizations.



Assigned papers or projects in various classes, course examinations, and thesis work.

Graduate students

PSY 550, 553, 555, 558; 595, 700




27


Related Program

Goals


Goals


Related University

Goals

Method(s) of

Assessment

Who Assessed

When Assessed


of Achievement 3. Describe, assess and utilize common research designs in psychology.

Goal 1. Facilitate student progress to advanced levels of knowledge and practice in the methods of experimental psychology.









Graduate students

PSYC 550, 553, 555. 558, 595, 700



28


Related Program

Goals


Goals


Related University

Goals

Method(s) of

Assessment

Who Assessed

When Assessed


of Achievement 4. Design, conduct, and report psychological research.

Goal 1.Facilitate student progress to advanced levels of knowledge and practice in the methods of experimental psychology.


Goal 2.

Promote excellence in learning to prepare students for careers and advanced study.








Graduate students

PSY 550, 555, 553, 558, 595, 700

GPA above 3.0 and no grade lower than a C in selected design and analysis classes on student’s course of study form.

Successful completion and approval of the thesis proposal as signified by the signing of the course of study form by the thesis committee.



29


Related Program

Goals


Goals


Related University

Goals

Method(s) of

Assessment

Who Assessed

When Assessed


of Achievement 5. Describe and contrast major theoretical and practical concepts in core content areas of research including behavior analysis, cognitive psychology, comparative psychology, and/or physiological psychology.

Goal 2. Provide a foundation in core areas of experimental psychology that supports the development of competence across a variety of sub-disciplines.

Goal 3.Provide a foundation in areas of research specialization in collaboration with at least one faculty member with interest and expertise.



Goals I & II: Maintain and strengthen an outstanding academic and student life at all sites





Assigned papers or projects in various classes, course exams, and thesis work.

Graduate students

PSY 541, 562, 553, 554, 576, 578, 588.


30


Related Program

Goals


Goals


Related University

Goals

Method(s) of

Assessment

Who Assessed

When Assessed


of Achievement 6. Engage in scholarly and professional activities, including presenting research at formal and/or informal professional events.


Goal 4. Encourage the development of professional competence.









Assigned presentations in various courses, and the oral thesis defense.

Required submission of research to CWU SOURCE Conference.

Submission of research to a regional, national or international conference within 1 year of graduation.

Graduate students

Various required content and elective courses on the course of study, and

PSY 700.

SOURCE submission deadlines before graduation.

External conference submissions within 1 year of graduation.


Successful oral defense of the master’s thesis

100% of graduate students will submit thesis research to CWU SOURCE Conference.

Minimum of 75% of graduate students will submit research proposals to a regional, national or international conference within 1 year of graduation

31


Related Program

Goals


Goals


Related University

Goals

Method(s) of

Assessment

Who Assessed

When Assessed


of Achievement 7. Performing professional skills in a supervised practice setting such as research teams, internships, and graduate research courses.


Goal 4. Encourage the development of professional competence.









Internships,

supervised field experiences, graduate research courses, and thesis work.

Graduate students working in applied settings.

Psy 684, 595, 700

GPA above 3.0 and no grade lower than a C in internships, relevant graduate research courses, and thesis work.

Documents

1. What student learning outcomes were assessed this year ... filestudent learning, including program policies, independent faculty assessments of student performance in addition to