Student Learning Outcomes Report 2004 – 2005

Introduction
In 2004-05, the Faculty Chairs decided to work on updating the Rio Salado College Plan for
Assessment and Improvement of Student Learning. 35 % of the Faculty Chairs were new
to the college since the last update of this plan. Additional discussions on effective teaching, assessment and learning have become both broader and more complex and this needed to be reflected in our plan and deployment. Baseline data have been established and validated over the six year period from 1998 to 2003 and have been studied for reference for all future improvements. These data collection efforts have given us a good understanding of our students’ skills. We determined in 2003-04 to go to a three year cycle for college wide data collection so that Institutional Research staff could collaborate directly with the competency coordinators and faculty chairs as we focus on improvements in curriculum that would increase student learning. Several of the Competency Coordinators decided to examine specific subsets of the skills and behaviors that our students are demonstrating in their course work that may or may not reflect the skills that we were seeing in the baseline data collection summaries and analyses. Therefore, our efforts are becoming more focused on understanding and increasing application of skills, knowing that a high percentage of our students have these skills.


Summary of Findings From Six Years of Baseline Data Collection:
1998-2003

Six years of baseline data collection shows that Rio Salado students continue to perform well
on the five college competency assessments.

? In general, Rio Salado students demonstrate college-level skills for the five college competencies. All of the competencies use a 4 point scale where college level is a 3.
? Overall, 84.69% of our students score within the acceptable range of college-level performance on the competency assessments. Average scores remained relatively unchanged during the past three years on four of the five assessments (Writing, Critical Thinking, Information Literacy, and Problem Solving). The average score on the Reading Assessment has increased slightly during each of the past three years.
? In general, scores on the competency assessments positively correlate with the ages of the students. Overall, assessment scores, as evidence of skills, increase as students mature.


Evidence of Skill in the Writing Competency
While greater than 75% (76.2%) of students taking the Writing Assessment in 1998-1999 scored at or above college level, less than 65% (64.15%) were able to do so in 2000-2001 (data not available for 1999-2000). However, since that time, the percentage of students scoring at or above college level has increased (72.10 % in 2001-2002; 88.53 % in 2002-2003; and 83.07 % in 2003-2004). Students performed best in 02-03 when the average score was 3.27. Overall, students have improved the average score by 0.16 points from 98-99 to 03-04.

Evidence of Skill in the Reading Competency
A substantial improvement in the percentage of students scoring at or above college level in Reading is evident. In 1998-1999, just 66% of students were able to achieve this goal but over 90% (92.35%) did so in 2000-2001 (data not available for 1999-2000). College level skills have been maintained since this time with 91.72% of students in 2001-2002, 90.29% in 2002- 2003, and 93.5% in 2003-2004. Students scored best on the assessment in the most recent year, 03-04. Their average test score of 3.12 was 0.04 points higher than the average score (3.08) students received the first year the assessment was given.

Evidence of Skill in the Problem Solving Competency
Since 2001-2002 (data not available before this time), about 90% of students have scored at or above college level in Problem Solving (90.23% in 2001-2002, 91.23% in 2002-2003, and 89.95% in 2003-2004). Students’ best year came in 02-03 when the average score was 3.35.

Evidence of Skill in the Critical Thinking Competency
While 78% of students scored at or above college level in Critical Thinking in 1998-1999, the percentage of students able to do so since then has remained at or near only 50% (54.03% in 2000-2001; 45.92% in 2001-2002; 54.88% in 2002-2003; and 48.42% in 2003-2004 with no data available for 1999-2000). Students received the highest average score (3.06) in 98-99. Students’ average scores have fluctuated every year the assessment was given with the lowest average (2.31) in 99-00.

Evidence of Skill in the Information Literacy Competency
The percentage of students scoring at or above college level since 2000-2001 (data not available before this time) has remained close to 100% (97.01% in 2000-2001; 99.08% in 2001-2002; 98.7% in 2002-2003; and 99.14% in 2003-2004). The average score on the information literacy assessment has not changed greatly with a high average of 3.40 in 2000- 2001 and an average low of 3.32 in 2001-2002.

A majority of the lowest overall average scores came in the second year that the assessment was offered except for the Problem Solving assessment which had its lowest average score in the first year it was handed out.


Academic Profile Summary: 2001 – 2004 Comparison
Three years of baseline data shows that Rio Salado Students continue to perform well on the Academic Profile Exam (AP). (See Appendix A for more detailed analysis of AP trend data)

• Every year Rio Salado students scored higher, on average, on all sections of the AP than the national comparison sample.
• In general, the difference between the overall group scores (dual, distance, graduate) on the AP is not statistically significant.
• Overall average scores seem to be relatively stable with little movement over the past four years (453 to 456).
• Rio students have performed best on the College Level Reading section when compared to the other sub-sections.
• Every year, a majority of students scored at or above the college level for the local writing section.
• Students’ average scores on the local writing section have decreased each year since 2002 (3.22 to 3.14).
• On the local writing section, “Graduate” students have outperformed the other two student groups.


Methodology from 1998 to 2003

For six academic years prior to the 2003 – 04 year, faculty-developed competency assessments for Writing, Reading, and Information Literacy and standardized competency assessments for Critical Thinking and Problem Solving were administered to students in the spring semesters to measure skill levels in these competencies across the curriculum. Baseline data were established for reference for all future improvements. Additionally, nationally norm-referenced exams, first the CAAP and then the Academic Profile (AP), were administered as multiple measures of students’ skills.

Participation in the nationally norm-referenced exams has been voluntary and participating students were given a small monetary incentive. These exams assessed skills in humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, college level reading, college level writing, critical thinking and mathematics. Students have been divided into three cohorts for analysis, students with 45 or more credits, distance learning students, and dual enrollment students. Scores were also compared by age categories. Rio Salado students were also compared to a national comparison group as part of the norm referencing process. In addition, the Academic Profile also contained a locally developed essay exam. Students were required to complete a short essay in response to one of five prompts. These essays were scored using the Rio Salado Writing Competency Rubric.

The five competency assessments (Writing, Reading, Critical Thinking, Information Literacy, and Problem Solving) have been administered to students in various general education classes. Assessments were administered in both distance learning and in-person classes. To ensure the validity of the results. Preventative measures were taken to prohibit students from selecting specific assessments.

Methodology for 2004-05

Baseline data were not collected during 2004-05 for the Writing, Reading, and Critical Thinking competencies since this was the second year into the first three-year cycle of broad data collection. Institutional Research worked with the Information Literacy Competency Coordinator to collect data on Information Literacy using a new assessment instrument. (See the Information Literacy Competency Coordinator’s report on page 10.) Problem solving was removed as a separate or independent college competency since it was determined this was really a subset of Critical Thinking. (See the Problem Solving Competency Coordinator’s report on page 12.) The Competency Coordinators continued their work on improving student skills and use of these skills by working directly with faculty chairs on curriculum improvements.

Highlights of 2004-05 Work on Teaching, Assessment and Learning

• The 6th Annual Learning Experience On Assessment and Learning for Adjunct Faculty was held, with approximately 400 adjunct faculty attending.
• Five Outstanding Adjunct Faculty were recognized for Contributions to Assessment
• A full time faculty learning goal became part of the college strategic plan.
• All full time faculty meetings were conducted with Student Assessment and Achievement as a standing agenda item.
• Five faculty chairs were involved in training for our work on a college and department level balanced scorecard (BSC).
• The VP for Academic Affairs, the faculty co-coordinator for assessment and the Associate Dean for Applied Programs participated in the regional HLC / AAHE Assessment Conference
in Chandler.
• 80% of the full time faculty participated in a workshop on integrating rubrics into course design and assessment feedback purposes.
• In May, the full time faculty end-of-the-year retreat focused on teaching, learning and assessment. (Appendix D) As a result of this retreat, monthly Learning Luncheon Brown Bag discussions started in June with the purpose of talking about research and teaching, assessment and learning issues at Rio.
• The VP for Academic Affairs approved funding for Rio Learning Outcomes Grants for department or program level teaching, learning and assessment research and improvement projects. Six grants were approved and funded in June for work to occur during the 2005-06 academic year. (See Appendix C.)
• The Rio Salado College 2004-05 Student Learning Outcomes Report was written and distributed to all full time faulty.
• A Rio Salado College 2004-05 Student Learning Outcomes Highlights Report was written and distributed to all adjunct faulty.
• More than 60% of full time faculty participated in district Assessment Forum activities.
• The college established an instructional design department to work with faculty chairs on curriculum development and revisions.


Writing Competency Coordinator’s Update
Betsy Frank

Although a change in English Faculty Chair leadership (Writing Competency Coordinator) occurred at the end of the spring term, 2005, writing competency remains an important focus at Rio Salado College. Suggestions for Improvement and Innovations recommended in the Student Learning Outcomes Report 2003 – 2004 have been or are being implemented. For example, data collected over 2003-2004 indicated that some students would benefit from more specific directions for assignments and better organization of instructional materials in Distance Learning (DL) courses. During 2004-2005 four DL courses were revised to reflect these student needs. Two other DL courses are in the revision process. Another recommendation in the 2003-2004 report was to add learning objects to ENG 101 and ENG 102 and to incorporate more frequent use of the On-Line Writing Lab (OWL). Additions to the composition courses began in 2004-5 and will continue through 2006. The next phase will be to design an evaluation to compare improvement data to 03-04 to determine if skills were enhanced.

Another focus of 2004-2005 was to investigate the “somewhat inflated . . .” writing competency results (Student Learning Outcomes Report 2003 – 2004, 6). A plan for determining whether those results were valid was developed and presented in the 2003-2004 report. However, due to the change in the Writing Competency Coordinator a new process was implemented. This new process is described below.

In June, 2005, the English Faculty Chair (Writing Competency Coordinator) was awarded an internal grant through RioLog with the purpose of ensuring “consistency of grading in English composition courses. . . “ that serves as a “ check against grade inflation. . . “(RioLog Proposal). During the two year life-cycle of this grant, these steps will be completed: 1)the Rio Salado College Writing Rubric will be reviewed and used as the basis to 2) revise the grade rubrics used in English composition courses; 3) two adjunct faculty will participate in the revision and development of new writing rubrics and pilot the revised rubrics in their DL English composition courses; 4) based on the feedback from the pilot, the grade rubrics will be revised; 5) all DL English composition faculty will be trained in using the grade rubrics; 6) the course materials will be adjusted accordingly.

The long-range goal of the RioLog is to use the Rio Salado College Writing Rubric as a guideline for writing assignments in any content area and to train adjunct faculty in its application college-wide.

Reading Competency Coordinator’s Update
Laura Helminski

The quantitative trend data for the Reading Competency shows that over 90% of our students can read at a college level. This seems to indicate few skill problems related to students' ability to read lessons, textbook chapters, assignments, etc. This continues to be different from anecdotal qualitative data from the Instructional Helpdesk and adjunct faculty email messages. During Spring 2005, approximately 30% of the Distance Learning students exhibited the following studying and learning problems related to the use of their reading skills:
• Not reading the course syllabus.
• Comprehending textbox chapters with possibly assistance from faculty lectures than in-person courses.
• Not following directions as much as they need to for course assessments.
• Not going to or reading “linked” resources, including information about reviewing for exams.
Therefore, college level reading skills continue to be an important focus at Rio Salado College. The data categories we have been using to examine reading skills are: skill selection, identification skills, analysis skills, and independent reading skills. The concerns of the faculty seem to indicate a continuing need to focus on our students' independent use of their reading skills.

Work during 2004 – 05 included adding enhancements to our work on for our online course platform, RioLearn, that would enable faculty to see records showing tracking of student activity in the course syllabus, in course lessons, in miscellaneous files and in assessments. Data collection focused on probing deeper into the subject of how our students actually use the reading skills that they have. An intervention that was used is added statements about expectations for the use of college level reading skills and the use of study reading skills into course syllabi and course materials, particularly into directions for required textbook readings. Surveys given to 25 online adjunct faculty (with a return rate of 70%) and 200 online students (with a return rate of 28%) during Spring 2005 and Summer 2005 asked about students’ use of college level study-reading skills and these statements. (See surveys in the Appendix)

Collected survey data showed the following:
Adjunct Faculty Survey: Students' use of College Level Reading Skills
1. I believe that my students use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
0% strongly disagree 10% disagree 80% agree 10% strongly agree
2. I believe that adding a specific statement requiring the use of college level reading skills increases the likelihood that my students will use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
10% strongly disagree 30% disagree 30% agree 30% strongly agree
3. I believe that adding links to study reading skills websites or other information
about these specific college level reading skills will help my students increase
their use of the skills because students will go to these links for this information.
0% strongly disagree 40% disagree 50% agree 10% strongly agree
Student Survey: Students' use of College Level Reading Skills
1. I believe that I use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
0% strongly disagree 20% disagree 20% agree 60% strongly agree
2. I believe that adding a specific statement requiring the use of college level reading skills increases the likelihood that I will use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
0% strongly disagree 30% disagree 60% agree 10% strongly agree
3. I believe that adding links to study reading skills websites or other information
about these specific college level reading skills will help me increase
my use of these skills because I will go to these links for this information.
70% strongly disagree 0% disagree 20% agree 10% strongly agree


A summary and analysis of the qualitative responses from these surveys will be shared with the Faculty Chairs in 2005 – 06.
Reading adjunct faculty members who reviewed survey comments indicated seeing the same patterns of student study skills and reading skills behaviors as in the past and as trend data indicated. Students are more likely to deliberately use college level reading skills at critical points in the coursework, for example when a high percentage of grade points are given for exams. However, it takes time to consciously apply college level reading skills and many students wrote about their “busy lives” and limited time for their reading requirements. Students also stated that they rarely take the time to think about “how” they are doing their work (self-assess) or to review their work to see if they are doing work at the level they are capable of. This is an opportunity to increase critical thinking skills as well since part of our work on critical thinking is evaluation, which includes self-assessment. More than half of the comments in this survey indicated that the expectation about using study reading skills needs to be stated in expectations or directions.


Plans for the 2005-06 academic year include increasing collaboration with the Gen Ed Faculty Chairs in order to consider integrating the expectation statements for the use of college level reading skills and the use of study reading skills into course syllabi, course materials and assessment directions. Based on students’ comments, these interventions need to be written as steps that are related to the amount of “time needed.” Specific goals, measures and targets need to be developed and used. One outcome that may motivate students is that effective study reading and deliberate use of college level reading skills will increase their recall of key concepts and information for transfer and application for exams and for application outside of the course. Other plans include developing reading study skills rubrics and integrating critical thinking skill into reading tasks and emphasizing following directions, in both reading and writing tasks. These skills overlap and need to be considered as collective skills rather than separate skills. In addition, since assessment rubrics are effectively displayed in RioLearn, rubrics will be studied to see if reading should be a category for feedback to the students. One student wrote the following comment on his returned survey, “Positive feedback from the instructor, when she can see that you have used college level reading skills, is what motivates me to keep it up.”


Critical Thinking Competency Coordinator’s Update
Janine Adkins

Summary of Outcomes and Implementations for 2004-05

• Janine Adkins, Rio Salado Humanities Faculty Chair, presented a four-hour pre-conference workshop at the Sloan-C International Conference on Asynchronous Networks—The Power of Online Learning: From Innovation to the Mainstream in November, 2004. Material covered who is doing the majority of the cheating and why, deceptive practices attempted, e-cheating consequences and reactions, dealing with students who are caught cheating, key features of plagiarism detection, and strategies to reduce cheating. In terms of the latter, one focus is on composing assessments that do not lend themselves to easy access cheating (e.g., traditional research papers). Create assignments with narrow, specialized topics, for instance, and gradually build toward mastery of course competencies demonstrating critical thinking components such as summary and evaluation. There were approximately fifty faculty and administrators in attendance.
• Janine Adkins, Rio Salado Humanities Faculty Chair, presented a half-hour presentation titled “Decreasing E-Cheating and Plagiarism and Increasing Critical Thinking in RSC Humanities Courses” at the January, 2005 MCCCD Spring Assessment Forum. Over one hundred faculty in the Maricopa District attended. Areas reviewed included detecting and combating plagiarism, developing an online faculty and student support page, and strategies for reducing cheating as well as increase critical thinking.
• Information was disseminated to faculty chairs and instructors to better educate instructors about critical thinking. Information was provided in-person at all-faculty meetings and online via free-of-charge workshops for instructors. Emphasis was placed on the work of two leaders in the International Critical Thinking movement, Richard Paul and Linda Elder, including their text Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life.
• A specially designed critical thinking definition and a critical thinking rubric, developed by Janine Adkins and Thomas Lombardo, were provided at the college level, in materials and posted online. The college’s nursing program, with the majority of program requirements available via online coursework, made particular use of this rubric and modified it to meet programmatic needs.
• Steady improvements were made in assignment development (e.g., to create more reflective assignments with a steady development and utilization of critical thinking components). Course developers and faculty chairs were provided with information and given guidance in utilization of critical thinking components, such as access to courses and assessments (e.g., exams that combine subjective and objective parts) that are models for development. The demonstration of problem-solving skills (inference, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning) was a focus across the disciplines, from mathematics courses to natural science labs.
• Gradual improvements were made in grading criteria across academic disciplines (e.g., clear expectations provided for critical evaluation of course material, specific amount of points awarded for demonstration of critical evaluation).
• Instructors made appropriate recommendations for students to consult with qualified writing and ESL (English as a Second Language) tutors who could contribute to enhanced reasoning capacities, help students better understand assignment directions and organize thoughts, and the like. Instructors also made recommendations for students to make up deficiencies by taking courses such as Critical and Evaluative Reading.
• Work with dual enrollment instructors, in particular, focused on making improvements in the delivery of material and assignment development. The goal was to see if incremental changes were forthcoming in the critical thinking outcomes for dual enrollment students. This is expected to remain a challenge since critical thinking mastery is tied, in part, to maturity. This effort was particularly prominent when dual enrollment instructors have classroom visitations by Rio Salado chairs and/or their designees. At that time, assessments were thoroughly reviewed, as were the scoring criteria encompassing the evaluation of critical thinking components.
• During the fall 2005 semester, a new college mini-grant program known as “RioLogs” will be implemented. Two RioLog programs will focus on significant critical thinking components. Decision-making for effective communication will be the thrust for Introduction to Communication and Interpersonal Communication students, with strategies for evaluation being key. Developing and measuring real world views of open-mindedness will be the emphasis for Introduction to Sociology students. Assessments will take into account critical thinking components, particularly a set of skills to process and generate information and beliefs, and the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior.

Information Literacy Competency Coordinator’s Update
Hazel Davis
History of the Information Literacy Competency

Information literacy was added as a college-wide competency at Rio Salado College during the 2000-2001 school year. Because no tested, standardized instrument to measure Information Literacy was located, an “in-house” instrument was faculty-developed.

The instrument was administered to a pilot group of distance learning students in the spring 2001 semester (N=134). The overall mean was 3.40, with a standard deviation of 0.21. The extremely high scores achieved in all sections of the instrument were very surprising; however, it was felt that the instrument was appropriately rigorous, having been developed and reviewed with input from several librarians.

The instrument was slightly revised before being administered again during the fall 2001 semester. Additional questions were added, and some language in existing questions was modified to provide for more even testing across the four subsections. The resultant instrument was slightly more rigorous than the pilot version. Again, the instrument was administered only to distance learning students, although to a larger group (N=260). A comparison of the data gathered in fall 2001 with spring 2001 showed essentially the same result, with students scoring at high levels across all subsections of the instrument. The overall mean was once again, 3.40, with a standard deviation of 0.21.

In spring 2002, 2003, and 2004, the information literacy competency was incorporated with the other core competencies at the college and tested across a broader population of students, both distance and in-person. The results were substantially the same.

For 2005, the decision was made to administer a different information literacy instrument, as part of the national Project SAILS initiative. Project SAILS originated out of Kent State University with the following stated goals:

The purpose of the Project for Standardized Assessment of Information Literacy Skills (SAILS) has been to develop an instrument for programmatic level assessment of information literacy skills that is valid and thus credible to university administrators and other academic personnel. We envisioned a tool to measure information literacy that:
- Is standardized
- Contains items not specific to a particular institution or library
- Is easily administered
- Has been proven valid and reliable
- Assesses at institutional level
- Provides for both external and internal benchmarking
Source: http://sails.lms.kent.edu/projdescription.html
The instrument was administered to online students in a wide selection of courses, selected by the Institutional Research department. These online courses were the same as had been used for all competency instruments in previous years. Because Project SAILS limits participation to students 18 and over, a dual enrollment cohort was not used. The SAILS instrument (which resided on the Kent State server where Project SAILS was housed) was switched on for online courses starting February 7, 2005, and switched off on May 26th. A total of 521 completed surveys were received by Project SAILS, who then sent unique identifier information for these students to us. Institutional Research returned the required demographic information to the SAILS project for analysis on June 2nd. SAILS has notified us that we will receive our report by mid-September. Therefore, there is no data on which to report at this time.
Rio Salado joined Project SAILS in phase III of its administration. Given the consistency of the data produced by our college instrument over the past several years, the chance to join Project SAILS was seen as an excellent opportunity to compare our previous results with those from the Project SAILS instrument which was in the process of being standardized and validated. This was the final year of this three-year grant-funded research project. Organizers plan to study the data collected to assess whether the SAILS instrument measures information literacy skills in a useful way. Once this has been determined, the future direction of the project will be decided. Although the stated aim of the project was to develop a standardized, tested instrument to measure information literacy, it is currently not certain that this outcome will be met.

Plans for future information literacy assessment and interventions for 2005-2006 will depend upon the outcome of the Project SAILS data. In addition, preliminary work has begun on revising the student library CD which was developed in 1999 and teaches information literacy skills in addition to providing an orientation to library services. A version for adjunct faculty will also be developed using a RioLog grant.

Problem Solving Competency Coordinator’s Update
John Jensen

An analysis of the trend data on problem solving reveals that nearly 90% of the cohort assessed performs at the college level on the skills measured. Longitudinal statistics indicate that the means in all areas have remained relatively stable. Both measures (metacognition and motivation) rose slightly in the Spring 2004 study from the previous year for distance learning students and both have declined slightly for dual enrollment students. The combined cohort shows a slight decline in both measures.

There are a few noteworthy observations about the data:

• Metacognition and motivation scores are measurably higher for distance learning students than for dual enrollment students. More to the point, the scores continue to rise with the rise in age. One conclusion is that such skills naturally improve with age and experience. The temptation is to conclude, as well, that they can be affected little by direct interventions. However, the skills measured here (planning, self-checking, effort and self-efficacy) are in good part a function of habit, and while experience might hone such habits, they may also prove responsive to curricular tasks that promote or require such activities.

• The metacognition means were uniformly lower than the motivation means. Whether this is an idiosyncrasy of the instrument or an indicator of some real difference, is unknown. However, it is also noted that differences between metacognition and motivation scores were more pronounced in the younger age students.

While the data suggest that the cohort is performing at a high and predominantly college level, there are still some potential target areas for improvement:

• Promoting both metacognition and motivation in our dual enrollment students. By working with our dual enrollment faculty, we can promote more thorough problem solving habits and more frequent opportunities to exercise and develop these habits. Promoting metacognition especially through structured planning and self-checking in course work would have a positive effect on this. It is not too risky to propose that many of the 10% of the cohort that fell below college level problem solving skills were among the dual enrollment cohort. Such efforts could have a direct effect on the metacognition and motivational skills of this cohort.

• In our distance learning classes, problem solving can still be promoted using similar strategies to those employed in dual classes. Structured learning experiences and regular exhortation to apply the skills of problem solving stand to improve what are already very impressive scores.

Although these statistics did not prove sensitive to efforts to raise awareness in both dual and distance instructors, the treatment bears repeating. It is also advisable to review the instrument to determine whether it is appropriate for the students and programs we offer and whether there are any new instruments that may help us measure these attributes more effectively.

During the 2004-5 academic year, it was determined that the area of Problem Solving no longer needed to be assessed on a yearly basis as part of this report. Our work on Problem Solving has been folded into our work on Critical Thinking. There are several reasons for this decision:

1. The Critical Thinking report encompasses problem solving components and does so more thoroughly. In fact, the scores by age level, as well as among distance and dual enrollment students, are very nearly parallel and reflect the same kind of sensitivity to parameters such as age. Thus, the assessment seems redundant.
2. During the past two years, several attempts were made to find an instrument that more genuinely measured skills or attainments in the area of problem solving. This has proven fruitless. Part of the difficulty is in the fact that there is no stable or widely agreed upon definition of what constitutes ‘problem solving’; nor is there general consensus about the disciplines in which these skills might reside.
3. Since the areas of Critical Thinking and Problem Solving were felt to be quite similar, it was decided that efforts would be more appropriately directed at initiatives and treatments that could effect improvements in one of them rather than conflating the measures of both of them.

Appendix A. Academic Profile Trend Data Summary
Appendix B. Reading Competency Surveys (Student and Adjunct Faculty)
Appendix C. RioLog: Learning Outcomes Grants

Reading Competency Surveys (Student and Adjunct Faculty)

Student Survey

Rio Salado College has a college level Reading Competency as one of the learning outcomes for our students:
Students will be able to demonstrate comprehension of written materials through application of specific critical reading techniques appropriate to the type of materials and purpose of the reading task.

90% of our students score at college level on multiple measures. We are now interested in collecting data about how you, our students, actually use the reading skills that they have.

We have added the following statement to all reading assignments in this course:
It is expected that you will use college level study-reading skills for this work. This includes previewing the chapter, identifying and defining key vocabulary words, taking notes on key concepts, and organizing and summarizing important information to help you understand, learn, and remember this information.

Part I.
Please respond to the following statements using the indicated scale:

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree

1. I believe that I use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree
If you answered 1 or 2, indicate why you think you do not use college level reading skills:__________________________________________________
2. I believe that adding a specific statement requiring the use of college level reading skills increases the likelihood that I will use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree
If you answered 1 or 2, indicate why you think the statement will not increase your use of college level reading skills:_________________________________________________________

3. I believe that adding links to study reading skills websites or other information
about these specific college level reading skills will help increase my
use of the skills because I will go to these links for this information.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree

If you answered 1 or 2 indicate why you think you would not go to these websites in order to increase your college level reading skills:________________
________________________________________________________________
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬Part II.
A. Question: what do you think your teacher will say is evidence that you are using or are not using college level reading skills when you are reading the course textbook chapters?
_________________________________________________________________

B. Question: what can your teachers do to increase your use of college level reading skills, which teachers believe is necessary in order for students to effectively study and learn their course content?
_________________________________________________________________


Adjunct faculty Survey

Rio Salado College has a college level Reading Competency as one of the learning outcomes for our students:
Students will be able to demonstrate comprehension of written materials through application of specific critical reading techniques appropriate to the type of materials and purpose of the reading task.

90% of our students score at college level on multiple measures. We are now interested in collecting data about how our students actually use the reading skills that they have.

We have added the following statement to all reading assignments in these courses:
It is expected that you will use college level study-reading skills for this work. This includes previewing the chapter, identifying and defining key vocabulary words, taking notes on key concepts, and organizing and summarizing important information to help you understand, learn, and remember this information.

Part I.
Please respond to the following statements using the indicated scale:

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree

1. I believe that my students use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree
If you answered 1 or 2, indicate why you think they do not use college level reading skills:_________________________________________________________
2. I believe that adding a specific statement requiring the use of college level reading skills increases the likelihood that my students will use college level study-reading skills for the required reading of the textbook chapters for this course.
1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree
If you answered 1 or 2, indicate why you think the statement will not increase their use of college level reading skills:_________________________________________________________

3. I believe that adding links to study reading skills websites or other information
about these specific college level reading skills will help my students increase
their use of the skills because students will go to these links for this information.

1 = strongly disagree 2 = disagree 3= agree 4= strongly agree

If you answered 1 or 2 indicate why you think student would not go to these websites in order to increase their college level reading skills:________________
________________________________________________________________
¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬Part II.
A. Question: what is evidence that your students are using or are not using college level reading skills when they are reading the course textbook chapters?
_________________________________________________________________

B. Question: what can we do to increase students’ use of college level reading skills, which we believe is necessary in order for students to effectively study and learn their course content?
_________________________________________________________________

Appendix D. May 2005 Faculty Retreat PowerPoint
The 2004- 2005 Student Learning Outcomes Report

Rio Salado College
Summer 2005