1. education

Minnesota State University Moorhead
2006-2007 Assessment Plan Cover Sheet
(An electronic version of this form can be accessed at http://www.mnstate.edu/assess)
Note: All programs will complete this form.
Degree Program: SLP Graduate Program
Department: Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences
College: Education and Human Services
Date: 09/05/2006
Is this assessment plan your existing plan, a new assessment plan or a revision of an existing
plan?
Existing
New
Revision
1. Name(s) of Department Assessment Coordinator and/or Assessment Committee
Members
Jane McCabe, Ph.D.
Kris Vossler, M.S.
2. List of All Student Learning Outcomes. (List and number all outcomes, placing an asterisk
(*) by the outcomes you are assessing this year.)
Students will provide:
* SLP SLO1 Evidence of acquisition of fundamental scientific information describing the
bases, nature, development and use of speech, language & hearing and total communication
processes
* SLP SLO2 Evidence of ability to synthesize and evaluate specialized information describing
the nature, etiology, assessment and management of speech, language, and hearing disorders,
adjusted for client characteristics, at student’s level of experience, i.e. “Intermediate” &
“Advanced”
* SLP SLO3 Evidence of Interpersonal/Professional Ethics and Behavior
* SLP SLO4 Evidence of writing ability; clinical and academic
* SLP SLO5 Evidence of oral communication skills
* SLP SLO6 Evidence of foundation skills necessary to conduct, convey, (evaluate) research
findings
* SLP SLO7 Evidence of students’ perception of the program’s competency for fundamental,
CFY-ready professional preparation
*SLP SLO8 Evidence of practicing professionals’ perception of the program’s competency for
fundamental, CFY –ready preparation
3. Explain how the student learning outcomes are appropriate to department or program
goals, as identified in your most recent Quality Improvement Plan. Please note if the
program is accredited by an external agency.
The academic and clinical programs are fully accredited for graduate education by the American
Speech, Language, and Hearing Association. Our curriculum and our student learning outcomes
are based upon the curriculum requirements of our national professional association as well as
the recommendations of MSUM's graduate education guidelines, and are managed within the
constraints of university funding and support.
We are currently revising our curricuclum to meet new ASHA standards for Knowledge and
Skills Acquisition (KASA) for graduate and undergraduate professional preparation, and our
assessments of student outcomes will change to reflect the requirements of the KASA forms.
The student learning outcomes for both knowledge and skill outcomes are also reflective of prior
programmatic needs of outcomes-based standards, as identified for program accreditation by
ASHA, for all graduate programs in Speech-Language Pathology / Communication Disorders
sciences.
Additionally, to address the new ASHA requirements for written and oral presentation
competence and measurement of those competencies, the department has undertaken the
development of assessment rubrics for oral and written presentations, and has incorporated those
measures into the new graduate education assessment plan.
4. Signatures
Department Chair or Program Director
Dean or Director
Required Attachments:
1. Assessment Planning Forms
2. Records of department meetings when Assessment Plan was discussed and approved.
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
1. Evidence of acquisition of fundamental scientific information describing the bases,
nature, development and use of speech, language & hearing and total communication
processes, at a competency level which is described as "Clinical Fellowship Year (CFY) Ready".
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other: Research experience
Other: Clinical experience
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
All of the coursework and clinical practicum experiences are utilized to prepared the
graduate students for professional competency and certification. After graduating with a
Master's degree, our professional accrediting body, the American Speech, Language, and
Hearing Association (ASHA) deems that students would be ready for a year of
employment under the direct supervision of an ASHA member with their own ASHA
credentials, the Certificate of Clinical Competence (CCC's or CCA). During this postgraduate year of employment the graduate is employed but continues life-long learning
and is subject to a plan of improvement, learning and supervision. To begin the 'clinical
fellowship year' the student must be CFY-ready. Our program, with its strong emphasis
in clinical preparation and coursework accreditation by ASHA, is well prepared to
provide the academic atmosphere which will accomplish this. The students have all the
curriculum requirements , and they have clinical experiences in the on-campus Speech
and Hearing Clinic, and off-campus at a wide variety of practicum sites that address all of
the settings in which they might be employed in the future. We have on-campus
specialty clinics, such as the Regional Assistive Technology Center, the Voice clinic, the
Auditory Processing Disorders Clinic, and the Parent-Child Communication Program
which are unique centers of excellence in our profession. Moreover, through their
graduate research thesis and research projects, our students have the opportunity for
extracurricular experiences, in that they often submit and present research findings at
regional and national venues. Students receive experience in the Fargo-Moorhead
community with English Language Learner testing, screening of preschool children for
communication disorders, and Cleft Palate Clinic.
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
1a.GR Clinical Competencies Rating Form
1b.GR NESPA Test (a national examination for Speech-Language Pathology graduate
students, like Board examinations for other fields)
1c. GR Oral Examination Rating
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
For the Clinical Competencies Ratings, Graduate student are enrolled in SLP 646 each
semester of graduate school, for a total of five or six semesters, depending upon client
contact clock hour needs.They progress through levels of clinical competency termed
"INTERMEDIATE" and "ADVANCED" levels. (Note: some graduate students
candidates bring no prior clinical experience, and begin at "ENTRY" level, then progress
through the levels.)
The NESPA Test is typically taken by second year graduate students in the Fall
semester; they have the opportunity to re-take the examination in the Spring semester if
needed.
The graduate Oral Examination is scheduled during the last semester of their attendance
in graduate school.
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
The supervisor(s) of record of the clinical assignment provides the letter grade for the
SLP 646 course. (See level of performance information below for additional comments.)
The same supervisor also counsels each student at midterm and at end of semester
concerning each item within the competency rating form for the rating scale score they
achieve on the item and overall trends. Each subarea has room for comments; the
comments at midterm and final counseling sessions typically result in recommended
competencies to target the next semester, if they are still enrolled in school at Minnesota
State University Moorhead.
The NESPA is given by a national testing organization; the students are responsible for
the date of their examination. They enroll and pay the fee for the test. The scores are
sent to the department to view, record and monitor.
The oral examination committee for each student is reponsible for the oral examination
ratings, and judgment of the student's performance in the examination. The scores are
given to the graduate office and the departmental graduate committee chairperson, and
are also placed in their permanent file.
The department has a need to create a database, in order to systematically record and
track those objective measures of overall student performances, as well as a method for
ensuring that the measures are routinely scheduled and data entered, and a process by
which data entry and maintenance of the database will have continuity, from one
caretaker designee to the next.
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
For the skills required in the performance of clinical therapy, the graduate students are
expected to pass the semester clinical experience overall. They may have more than one
supervisor, depending upon the number of clients that are assigned to him/her. The
students are counselled at midterm and semester's end concerning their current ratings'
status, and the expected grade correlation. If multiple supervisors are used, the grades
achieved from the supervisors are weighted, dependent upon the number of clients per
supervisor. Students need a B- or above grade to maintain their clinical eligibility for the
next semester.
As a demonstration of clinical competency at the "CFY ready" level, graduate students
must have skill competencies rating scores of either 4 (described as "present most of the
time") or 5 ("consistently present for the expected level") in at least one of the two
"ADVANCED" levels' ratings in the last two semesters in Clinic.
For an acceptable level of performance on the NESPA, the graduate students are expected
to achieve a minimum score of 570 for the comprehensive examination for the MSUM
Graduate School; however, they must also achieve a minimum score of 600 for
application for ASHA credentials.
For an acceptable level of performance on the oral examination rating forms, the students
are expected to be rated by three members of the SLHS graduate faculty. There are 150
total possible points (three faculty members X 50 points possible by each rater). Five
components are rated by each examiner on a 10 point rating scale; a passing rating is 5
points for each component. Thus a minimum rating by each faculty member across the
five components should be a score of 25. The minimum score for passing the oral
examination is a total of 75 points out of 150 possible points.
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
2. Evidence of ability to synthesize and evaluate specialized information describing the
nature, etiology, assessment and management of speech, language, and hearing disorders,
adjusted for client characteristics, at student’s level of experience, i.e. “Intermediate” &
“Advanced”
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other: Clinical experience
Other:
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
The student must enroll in SLP 646, Clinical Experience. In this course the student must
put together all the core content from the knowledge base they have built, transmit this
knowledge through spoken and written interaction with clientele and faculty supervisors,
serve the clients in a professional and ethical manner while learning new therapy
performance skills, seek additional information through research literature sources, and
always be cognizant of the diverse strengths and needs of each client and family. This
requires the student clinician to use critical thinking and a reflective process to provide
the competent intervention for their client, and subsequently to foster their own self
growth. This practicum experience may be held either at the univeristy clinic or at offcampus practicum sites, such as hospital, schools, nursing homes, preschools, and private
practices.
At the level of graduate school, students soon realize that this is a life-long learning
process, which requires accreditation and maintenance of accreditation through ongoing
acquisition of Continuing Education Credits and seminar/workshop attendance, as well as
professional journal reading for CEU's offered by the American Speech-LanguageHearing Association (ASHA).
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
2a. Clinical Competencies Rating Form assessment and treatment (AT) sub-area and
screening (S) sub-area
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
Graduate student are enrolled in SLP 646 each semester of graduate school, for a total of
five or six semesters, depending upon client contact clock hour needs.They progress
through levels of clinical competency termed "INTERMEDIATE" and "ADVANCED"
levels.
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
The supervisor of record of the clinical assignment provides the letter grade for the SLP
646 course. The same supervisor also counsels each student at midterm and at end of
semester concerning each item within the competency rating form for the rating scale
score they achieve on the item and overall trends. Each subarea has room for comments;
the comments at midterm and final counseling sessions typically result in recommended
competencies to target the next semester, if they are still enrolled in school at Minnesota
State University Moorhead.
The department has a need to create a database, in order to systematically record and
track those objective measures of overall student performances, as well as a method for
ensuring that the measures are routinely scheduled and data entered, and a process by
which data entry and maintenance of the database will have continuity, from one
caretaker designee to the next.
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
For the skills required in the performance of clinical therapy, the graduate students are
expected to pass the semester clinical experience overall. They may have more than one
supervisor, depending upon the number of clients that are assigned to him/her. The
students are counselled at midterm and semester's end concerning their current ratings'
status, and the expected grade correlation. If multiple supervisors are used, the grades
achieved from the supervisors are weighted, dependent upon the number of clients per
supervisor. Students need a B- or above grade to maintain their clinical eligibility for the
next semester.
As a demonstration of clinical competency at the "CFY ready" level, graduate students
must have skill competencies rating scores of either 4 (described as "present most of the
time") or 5 ("consistently present for the expected level") in at least one of the two
"ADVANCED" levels' ratings in the last two semesters in Clinic.
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
3. Evidence of Interpersonal Skills and Professional Ethics / Behavior
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other: Clinical experience
Other:
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
The student must enroll in SLP 646, Clinical Experience. In this course the student must
put together all the core content from the knowledge base they have built, transmit this
knowledge through spoken and written interaction with clientele and faculty supervisors,
serve the clients in a professional and ethical manner while learning new therapy
performance skills, seek additional information through research literature sources, and
always be cognizant of the diverse strengths and needs of each client and family. This
requires the student clinician to use critical thinking and a reflective process to provide
the competent intervention for their client, and subsequently to foster their own self
growth. This practicum experience may be held either at the univeristy clinic or at offcampus practicum sites, such as hospital, schools, nursing homes, preschools, and private
practices.
At the level of graduate school, students soon realize that this is a life-long learning
process, which requires accreditation and maintenance of accreditation through ongoing
acquisition of Continuing Education Credits and seminar/workshop attendance, as well as
professional journal reading for CEU's offered by the American Speech-LanguageHearing Association (ASHA).
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
3a. Clinical Competencies Rating Form Interpersonal/Professional (IP) sub-area
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
Graduate student are enrolled in SLP 646 each semester of graduate school, for a total of
five or six semesters, depending upon client contact clock hour needs.They progress
through levels of clinical competency termed "INTERMEDIATE" and "ADVANCED"
levels.
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
The supervisor of record of the clinical assignment provides the letter grade for the SLP
646 course. The same supervisor also counsels each student at midterm and at end of
semester concerning each item within the competency rating form for the rating scale
score they achieve on the item and overall trends. Each subarea has room for comments;
the comments at midterm and final counseling sessions typically result in recommended
competencies to target the next semester, if they are still enrolled in school at Minnesota
State University Moorhead.
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
For the skills required in the performance of clinical therapy, the graduate students are
expected to pass the semester clinical experience overall. They may have more than one
supervisor, depending upon the number of clients that are assigned to him/her. The
students are counselled at midterm and semester's end concerning their current ratings'
status, and the expected grade correlation. If multiple supervisors are used, the grades
achieved from the supervisors are weighted, dependent upon the number of clients per
supervisor. Students need a B- or above grade to maintain their clinical eligibility for the
next semester.
As a demonstration of clinical competency at the "CFY ready" level, graduate students
must have skill competencies rating scores of either 4 (described as "present most of the
time") or 5 ("consistently present for the expected level") in at least one of the two
"ADVANCED" levels' ratings in the last two semesters in Clinic.
This aspect has some unique qualifications. By agreement, the faculty determined that
item IP.4 (Understands and applies the ASHA Code of Ethics as demonstrated in clinical
interactions) should be consistently rated at a 5 rating (Consistently present for the
expected level).
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
4. Evidence of writing ability: both clinical and academic
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other: Clinical experience
Other:
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
For method of assessment of 4a, there is a rotation of courses which have a written
component to be rated across the two year graduate experience. The department has
created a rubric for the department faculty to use while rating the written presentations.
For the method of assessment of 4b, the student must enroll in SLP 646, Clinical
Experience. In this course the student must put together all the core content from the
knowledge base they have built, transmit this knowledge through spoken and written
interaction with clientele and faculty supervisors, serve the clients in a professional and
ethical manner while learning new therapy performance skills, seek additional
information through research literature sources, and always be cognizant of the diverse
strengths and needs of each client and family. This requires the student clinician to use
critical thinking and a reflective process to provide the competent intervention for their
client, and subsequently to foster their own self growth. This practicum experience may
be held either at the univeristy clinic or at off-campus practicum sites, such as hospital,
schools, nursing homes, preschools, and private practices.
At the level of graduate school, students soon realize that this is a life-long learning
process, which requires accreditation and maintenance of accreditation through ongoing
acquisition of Continuing Education Credits and seminar/workshop attendance, as well as
professional journal reading for CEU's offered by the American Speech-LanguageHearing Association (ASHA).
For the method of assessment of 4c, the student is enrolled in either SLP 696 Research
Project of SLP 699 Thesis. Their paper is presented during the Oral Examination, and the
Oral Examination Rating Form is used to rate both the paper content and presentation.
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
4a. Graduate Written Presentation Rubric for Graduate Papers
4b. Clinical Competencies Rating Form, Clinical Writing (CW) sub area
4c. Graduate Research Project or Theses Oral Examination Rating Form
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
4a. Graduate students at each semester will have at least one course that will be rated
with the Written Presentation rubric
4b. Each semester graduate students are rated by their clinical supervisor for their
clinical writing skills across a variety of documents
4c. The graduate student chooses a project or a thesis. Either one is rated by the Graduate
faculty Oral Examination Committee.
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
For 4a, the course instructor of record is responsible for rating the written term papers
with the Written Presenation rubric.
For 4b, the supervisor of record of the clinical assignment provides the letter grade for
the SLP 646 course. The same supervisor also counsels each student at midterm and at
end of semester concerning each item within the competency rating form for the rating
scale score they achieve on the item and overall trends. Each subarea has room for
comments; the comments at midterm and final counseling sessions typically result in
recommended competencies to target the next semester, if they are still enrolled in school
at Minnesota State University Moorhead.
.
For 4c., the graduate project or thesis writing supervisor monitors and edits the document
in an ongoing manner until it is ready for presentation. In the final semester of graduate
school during the Oral Examination, the project/thesis paper is presented and rated for
content as well as presentation skills. The oral examination committee for each student
is reponsible for the oral examination ratings, and judgment of the student's performance
in the examination. The scores are given to the graduate office and the departmental
graduate committee chairperson, and are also placed in their permanent file.Committee
members also make note of any errorata in the paper; the students later make
amendments to the document until the writing supervisor certifies that all
corrections/additions have been made and it is worthy of printing for the submission to
the Graduate school and Livingston Lord Library for archiving
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
4a.The categorical description of ratings in the Written Presentation rubric include: (3)
Above Expectations (2) Meets Standard/Goal, (1)Needs Improvement, and (0)
Unacceptable . The majority of checks across the categories should be ‘2’ or above in
each of the 15 items, for a total of 30 points, minimum, out of a possible 45 (3 x 15) for
2 written presentations during the course of graduate studies.
For 4b, For the skills required in the performance of clinical therapy, the graduate
students are expected to pass the semester clinical experience overall. They may have
more than one supervisor, depending upon the number of clients that are assigned to
him/her. The students are counselled at midterm and semester's end concerning their
current ratings' status, and the expected grade correlation. If multiple supervisors are
used, the grades achieved from the supervisors are weighted, dependent upon the number
of clients per supervisor. Students need a B- or above grade to maintain their clinical
eligibility for the next semester.
As a demonstration of clinical competency at the "CFY ready" level, graduate students
must have skill competencies rating scores of either 4 (described as "present most of the
time") or 5 ("consistently present for the expected level") in at least one of the two
"ADVANCED" levels' ratings in the last two semesters in Clinic.
For 4c., for an acceptable level of performance on the oral examination rating forms, the
students are expected to be rated by three members of the SLHS graduate faculty. There
are 150 total possible points (three faculty members X 50 points possible by each rater).
Five components are rated by each examiner on a 10 point rating scale; a passing rating is
5 points for each component. Thus a minimum rating by each faculty member across the
five components should be a score of 25. The minimum score for passing the oral
examination is a total of 75 points out of 150 possible points. .
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
5a. Evidence of oral communication skills
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other:
Other:
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
For method of assessment of 5a, there is a rotation of courses which have an oral
component to be rated across the two year graduate experience. The department has
created a rubric for the department faculty to use while rating the oral presentations
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
5a. Graduate Oral Presentation rubric
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
5a. Graduate students at each semester will have at least one course that will be rated
with the Oral Presentation rubric
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
For 5a, the course instructor of record is responsible for rating the oral presentations with
the Oral Presenation rubric.
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
5a.The categorical description of ratings in the Oral Presentation rubric include: (3)
Above Expectations (2) Meets Standard/Goal, (1)Needs Improvement, and (0)
Unacceptable . The majority of checks across the categories should be ‘2’ or above in
each of the 19 items, for a total of 38 points, minimum, out of a possible 58 (3 x 19) for
at least 2 oral presentations during the course of graduate studies.
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
6. Evidence of foundation skills necessary to conduct, convey, (evaluate) research
findings
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other:
Other:
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
SLP 696 Research Project or SLP 699 Thesis
Moreover, through their graduate research thesis and research projects, our students have
the opportunity for extracurricular experiences, in that they often submit and present
research findings at regional and national venues.
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
-Graduate research projects or Theses will be assessed with the Oral Examination Rating
Form
- The actual Numbers of research presentations at regional and national conferences will
be recorded into a database.
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
Second year graduate students are assessed. The graduate Oral Examination is scheduled
during the last semester of their attendance in graduate school.
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
At this time the department has the office personnel enter the data into the database.
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
For an acceptable level of performance on the oral examination rating forms, the students
are expected to be rated by three members of the SLHS graduate faculty. There are 150
total possible points (three faculty members X 50 points possible by each rater). Five
components are rated by each examiner on a 10 point rating scale; a passing rating is 5
points for each component. Thus a minimum rating by each faculty member across the
five components should be a score of 25. The minimum score for passing the oral
examination is a total of 75 points out of 150 possible points.
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
7. Evidence of students’ perception of the program’s competency for fundamental, CFYready professional preparation
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other: self knowledge
Other:
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
This is a summary assessment , concerning their perceptions of all the coursework and
clinical practicum experiences, as far as preparing them for the Clinical Fellowship Year
(CFY) of their first year of employment.
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
Exit Surveys for Graduate Students
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
Graduate Students are given the surveys shortly before commencement
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
Assessment committee chairperson and any faculty member teaching an upper level
graduate course during spring semester (for mechanism to hand students the survey as
they leave class). At this time the department has the office personnel enter the data into
the database.
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
No level of student performance is expected; it is more of a self reflection concerning
their overall acquisition of knowledge as well as acquisition of clinical competencies
prior to "real world" work. The department as a whole reviews the information to
determine student perceptions of departmental strengths and needs. The information can
also be reviewed in a side by side comparison of percpetions by alumni with years of
work experience and more objectivity concerning the requirements of the work place.
Minnesota State University Moorhead
Assessment Planning Form
Instructions: Complete and print a copy of this page for each student learning outcome
being assessed during the following two year period.
Academic Program: SLP Graduate Program
1. Identify Student Learning Outcome in the box below:
8. Evidence of practicing professionals’ perception of the program’s competency for
fundamental, CFY –ready preparation
2. Which MSUM mission goals are addressed by this learning outcome? (check all
that apply)
Knowledge/content
Intellectual development
Talents
Critical thinking
Oral communication
Written communication
Mathematics
Multiculturalism/diversity
Information literacy
Lifelong learning
Service
Citizenship
Responsibility and ethics
Global understanding
Other: Self-knowledge
Other:
3. How is this learning outcome addressed in the program’s curriculum? Identify
the courses or extra-curricular opportunities that address this outcome.
This is a summary assessment , concerning their perceptions of all the coursework and
clinical practicum experiences, as far as preparing them for the work force and their
profession.
4. What methods of assessment will be used for this outcome? (Specify instrument
and submit electronically plan.)
8.a Alumni Surveys for former Graduate students
5. Who is assessed? When are they assessed?
Alumni. They are given these surveys after at least two years employment, and they
volunteer to undertake the survey.
6. Who is responsible in the department for this assessment?
Assessment committee chairperson. At this time the department has the office personnel
enter the data into the database.
7. What is level of student performance is expected for this outcome?
No level of performance is expected; it is more of a self reflection concerning their
overall acquisition of knowledge as well as acquisition of clinical competencies prior to
"real world" work. The department as a whole reviews the information to determine
alumni perceptions of departmental strengths and needs. The information can also be
reviewed in a side by side comparison of perceptions of new master's level graduates,
concerning the requirements of the work place and their preparation at MSUM.
Exit Questionnaire
Graduate Student
Speech/Language/Hearing Sciences Department
Please rate how well you believe you have learned information and developed skills in the following
areas. Try to consider your overall learning experience in each area while obtaining your degree. Use the
following 7 point scale for items 1-12:
7 ↔ I STRONGLY AGREE with this statement about my learning
6
5
4 ↔ I NEITHER AGREE NOR DISAGREE with this statement about my learning
3
2
1 ↔ I STRONGLY DISAGREE with this statement about my learning
PLEASE INDICATE YOUR GRADUATE SEMESTER AND YEAR ____________________________
_____ 1. I learned to function as a
competent professional speech
language pathologist
_____ 7. I have learned how to use the
library and other reference
resources
_____ 2. I had quality supervised offcampus practicum experiences in
assessment and management
_____ 8. I have developed the clinical
competencies required to plan and
implement intervention programs
_____ 3. I developed the ability to analyze
and interpret the results of research
in Speech/Language/Hearing
sciences
_____ 9. The degree of faculty accessibility
enhanced my learning experience
_____ 4. I developed adequate knowledge
and skills in speech-language
diagnostic and assessment
techniques
_____ 5. I feel assured that my written and
oral communication skills are
appropriate for what is expected of
an independent functioning
professional
_____ 6. I have developed adequate report
writing skills
Exit Questionnaire – Graduate Student
Page 1 of 2
_____ 10. Faculty support and advisement
on my project or thesis enhanced
this learning experience
_____ 11. Myself and other students were
prepared for the national exam
(ASHA)
_____ 12. Overall I have developed a strong
knowledge and skill base in my
discipline
13. What did you see as the strengths in the S/L/H Sciences graduate program?
14. What did you see as limitations, if any, in the S/L/H Sciences graduate program:
15. What improvements, if any, should be made in the S/L/H Sciences graduate program?
16. Is there anything else you would like to say to the S/L/H Sciences Department?
Exit Questionnaire – Graduate Student
Page 2 of 2
Full Rubric for Oral Presentation Competence
Majority of checks for each category should be ‘2’ or above for 2 oral presentations during graduate studies, for a total of 38 points, minimum (2 x 19).
Category
3 Above Expectations
2 Meets Standard/Goal
1 Needs Improvement
0 Unacceptable
Clarity
of
purpose
immediately
Has
an
introduction
which
reveals
Introduction
leaves
listener
unsure
Presentation
lacks main thesis. If
Content
evident in introduction
purpose, but not immediately within
of topic direction at first
one is present, it is very weak.
Quality:
first or second utterance
Depth of topic & topic detail
Ideas/ topics expanded with
Limited ability to provide
Addressed some components
Analysis,
appropriate to topic; speaker could
details most of the time;
appropriate breadth or depth or
needed in presentation but details
Synthesis,
both expand & provide ample
information, much less integrate topic were incomplete or lacking. Topics
Rationale(s) information.
information;
addressed at a concrete level.
An interesting & original
Information was accurately
A few inaccuracies of
Analysis of information is very
interpretation of little known
explained or interpreted or critiqued
information dissemination occurred
limited and /or largely inaccurate.
information was given
effectively.
during presentation, but overall
accuracy was adequate
Not only did the student
A clear understanding was
The student explained the
Reasons, examples or details are
demonstrate a clear understanding of
demonstrated of the relevance of
relevance of a few components or
lacking or inappropriate. Most
the relevance of the components, but
components; backed by factual
provided facts for some, but not all
generalizations were completely
also a rationale for choice of data
information. The conclusions were
those offered. Or, he/she left out a
unsupported by fact or supported
interpretations, research information,
correct, either in part or in whole.
critical component that should have
with other redundant generalizations.
or therapy efficacy, etc. was given,
been addressed.
and a conclusion was deduced from
the interpretations which was
scientifically critical/accurate or
intriguing.
Main points & sub points easily
Organization is satisfactory for
Intro, body, and summary lack
. Disorganized for content or
Organization
discerned without listener effort, with needs; lends itself to topic focus,
summary; however, information
organization and/or focus.
precise topic focus & succinct
dissemination, & summary
covered topics adequately.
summation
Main points logically arranged;
Student was clearly prepared for
Student created presentation but did
Preparation incomplete or even
progression of ideas appropriate;
presentation; sequencing and delivery not consider progression of ideas and totally lacking
obviously prepared/practiced delivery effective most of the time
did not practice delivery
Transitions segúed seamlessly
Topic transitions were present and
Transitions were either
Information ‘jumped’ from one
adequate, but not always smooth.
intermittent or related to topic in a
topic to another without signaling,
tangential manner
leaving listener confused
Audience
interest
was
maintained
Diction
and
vocal
quality
are
Diction
is
lack-luster
and
Diction sounds immature, with
Delivery
by exceptional verbal skills; speech
adequate, and appropriate for
sometimes inappropriate; use of
some articulatory imprecision or
Style:
rate, intonation, stress, loudness of
register; with some typical
speech rate, intonation patterns or
omissions of word endings; voice is
voice resulted in optimal conveyance hesitations, but not especially lively
loudness levels resulted in diminished monotonous.
Form or
of information with professional
or interesting;
communication or nonprofessional
“Voice”
expository style of register.
affect
Confident; uses notes occasionally
Presenter is able to ‘talk through’
Very dependent, or must rely
Reads presentation instead of
most of presentation but somewhat
upon notes
talking to audience
dependent upon notes
The speaker skillfully uses specific
The speaker conveys meaning
Errors or omissions in word
Frequent errors of word choice
(or scientific) vocabulary to convey
with reasonable clarity but may lack
choice result in vagueness or lack of
and omissions result in restricted,
meaning effectively. Words express
specific vocabulary item usage.
clarity.
inaccurate, or clearly errored
J McC 11/1/2005
the speaker’s intended message in a
meaning.
precise and engaging manner.
Delivery
Mechanics:
Format &
Reference
Conventions
J cMC 11/1/2005
©2005 Minn.St. Univ.
Moorhead;
SLHS Dept
Sentences are well constructed
with varied structure. Sentences are
grammatically correct and
demonstrate mastery of complex
sentences and/or variety code
switching techniques for audience
demographics.
Speaker engages the audience
participation with his/her contagious
enthusiasm & genuine interest in
topic, as expressed nonverbally.
Appearance is appropriate for
collegial presentation with
professional attire & grooming.
Questions were answered
knowledgeably, thoroughly, clearly,
& concisely; either cites research or
relates response back to presentation
Sentences are usually
grammatically correct and reflect a
grasp of syntactic variety and
complexity required to support topic
concepts.
Sentences may be illogical or
inappropriate for the audience.
Sentences display less than expected
level of complexity or variety, but no
verbal mazes.
Use of eye contact, facial
expression, and gestures is natural &
appropriate; performed in a relaxed
manner. Attire & appearance are
passable or “casual” for this
presentation; typical of peer, not
collegial/professional, gatherings.
Speaker answers questions
satisfactorily; demonstrates topic
knowledge; will provide some details
or uses references in response.
Use of eye contact is sporadic,
gestures are contrived, facial
expressions are tense or minimal.
Appearance is not suitable for this
activity.
Answers questions & validates
audience comprehension of response
to questions; is aware of effectiveness
of own response to questions raised
by audience
Material content was adjusted to
background knowledge of the
audience. Terminology was
appropriate for topic; no
colloquialisms nor slang; professional
jargon was qualified
Presentation paced effectively
Asks for audience questions and
will adjust own response to audience
queries; clarifies satisfactorily
Does not ask for audience
participation or does not clarify in
response to audience question
Material presented was
unnecessarily complex for either
topic or audience; yet jargon was
qualified or explained
Material content was offensive to
audience by its simplicity. Speaker
often used colloquialisms, jargon,
and slang
Material presented did not target
the audience that was present. Slang
usage was present
Pace: time on topic required minor
adjustments because of misallocation
of time, yet adequate overall
Handout covered content
adequately but did not add to
presentation or integration of info.
Technology used in presentation,
yet different/more types of AV were
likely needed
Pace: overran time allotment or
stalled to fill up time
Pace: did not cover topic in
allotted time
Little or no adjustment for
listener’s needs for AV support
AV not used when needed to
convey information
Bibliography made available;
references are sufficient in number
and type but may not be varied or
current. Sources used are easy to find
but credible.
Quality of materials poor. Over
dependence upon internet ‘articles’/
info, narrow focus when broad is
needed & vice versa; references are
flawed in at least one of the
following areas: number, type and
relevance. Inadequate use of
sources; inadvertently plagiarized.
Review of literature lacking or
incomplete at best; reference citations
are severely restricted and/or have
serious omissions. Sources may be
inappropriate for topic or not
accurately documented in desired
format, or blatantly plagiarized.
Handout for audience arranged in
same order as presentation; clear,
succinct, with sufficient content
A/V or Demos appropriately used
technology; speaker perceived
audience needs and type of
information and adjusted AV use
accordingly
Reference material is varied, with
cutting-edge and/or seminal articles;
bibliography made available.
Both text and graphics sources are
credible and reflect rigorous search.
Response to questions is
confusing; answers are given, but are
lacking in detail or not complete.
Directs audience to reference list.
Handout was confusing, crowded
or scant
Most sentences are simple
sentences. They are likely illogical or
badly constructed, with verbal mazes.
Gestures, eye contact, facial
expressions are too much, too little or
used inappropriately. Portrays a
‘cavalier’ attitude. Appearance is
completely inappropriate for a
professional activity (i.e. jeans or
unclean clothing & person, etc.).
Speaker has no clear answers for
audience because of very weak
knowledge of topic. Either provides
irrelevant information or does not use
references to support response.
Disregards question or ends
presentation discussion
inappropriately; no awareness of
audience puzzlement
No handout available if needed.
Brief Rubric for Written Language Competence
Majority of checks for each category should be ‘2’ or above
Category
Content
Organization
Style
Mechanics
3 Above Expectations
Purpose of writing is clear and based
upon a relevant thesis.
Main ideas are developed with
logically compelling reasons and/or
highly persuasive examples.
The writer effectively expresses
complex ideas including well-developed
insightful arguments. Analysis of the
information is relevant, accurate, and
interesting.
Conclusions are logical, persuasive,
and effective.
The organization showcases the
central idea. Paragraphs follow a logical
order and exhibit unity and coherence.
Both topic and component transitions
were informative, smooth and effectively
placed.
The order, structure and presentation
of ideas are compelling and move the
reader through the text.
Words express the writer’s intended
message in a precise, interesting, and
engaging way.
The writer skillfully uses sentence
variety and precise vocabulary to convey
meaning effectively.
Grammar & Usage:
Sentences are well constructed with
varied structure.
2 Meets Standard / Goal
A thesis clearly states the author’s
purpose although some sentences may not
relate to that purpose.
Main ideas are developed and
supported with relevant reasons or
examples.
The writer provides competent
analysis of complex ideas. Information is
accurate and relevant but may not hold
the reader’s attention throughout.
1 Needs Improvement
Writing lacks a clear thesis statement.
If main ideas are expressed, there is
little support for them.
0 Unacceptable
Writing many lack thesis. If one is present,
it is very weak.
Reasons, examples or details are lacking or
inappropriate.
The essay does contain some reasons,
details, or examples but they may not be
relevant to the generalizations expressed.
Most generalizations are completely
unsupported or supported with other mostly
redundant generalizations.
The conclusions drawn are generally
effective.
Paragraphs generally follow a logical
order. They are unified and coherent most
of the time.
Some transitions are present but either
not informative or misplaced.
Analysis of information is either
limited or inaccurate.
Paragraphs may relate to the thesis, but
they are usually underdeveloped, vague,
lacking in coherence.
Some transitions are absent or out of
place and not informative.
Analysis of information is very limited and
/or largely inaccurate.
The writer lacks a clear sense of direction.
The organizational structure is strong
enough to move the reader through text
without undue confusion
Word choice is adequate but not
especially lively or interesting.
The overall organizational structure
including progression of ideas is
confusing and hard to follow.
Word choice is lack luster and
sometimes inappropriate.
The writer conveys meaning with
reasonable clarity but may lack sentence
variety; specific vocabulary.
Grammar & Usage:
Demonstrates satisfactory control of
sentence structure.
Vocabulary errors or lack of sentence
variety result in vague references or lack
of clarity.
Grammar & Usage:
Mechanics are flawed in either
sentence structure or grammar.
Most sentences are grammatically
correct and demonstrate mastery of
complex sentences.
Sentences are usually correct
grammatically and reflect some grasp of
variety and complexity.
Writer does careful editing. Errors in
punctuation, capitalization, usage,
spelling, paragraphing etc. are rare.
Less than careful editing. Some errors
in capitalization, usage, spelling or
paragraphing, but they do not seriously
interfere with meaning. Some errors may
affect clarity.
Format & Reference:
One formatting ‘specific’ has minor
errors; such as, margins, APA style use,
or amount of text.
References are sufficient in number
and type but may not be current or varied.
Sentences may be illogical or
inappropriate for the audience. They
show less than expected level of
complexity or variety.
Errors in punctuation and usage
sometimes interfere with meaning.
Format & Reference:
Format is correct including margins,
APA style use, and appropriate amount of
text.
References are varied, current and of
the appropriate type.
Both text and graphics sources are
comprehensive and highly relevant for
this paper.
Sources used are relevant but not
comprehensive for this topic.
© 2005 Minnesota State University Speech-Language-Hearing Sciences Dept.
Format & Reference:
One or more formatting specifics
show some errors or omissions.
References are flawed in at least one
of the following areas: number, type and
relevance.
Sources used may be inadequate or
inappropriate.
Ideas, details, and events are strung together
in a loose or random fashion.
There is no identifiable internal structure.
Word choices sound immature.
Frequent errors and omissions result in
restricted meaning.
Grammar & Usage:
Mechanics are seriously flawed in at least 1
of following: sentence structure, grammar;
language usage.
Most sentences are simple sentences. They
are likely illogical or badly constructed.
Errors in punctuation and usage seriously
interfere with meaning.
Format & Reference:
Formatting specifics are ignored in one or
more areas: margins, etc.; APA style use; or
amount of text.
Reference citations are severely restricted
and/or have serious omission.
Sources are either inappropriate or not
accurately documented in desired format or
both.