Assessment Impact
University of South Alabama
Foreign Languages and Literature Department
A. Student learning - GOAL #1. To achieve the student learning objectives of the B.A. program in Foreign Languages.
Objective: OBJECTIVE 1.1 (A). Linguistic proficiency - Graduates will demonstrate a proficiency in the four linguistic skills comparable to reference level B2 (High Independent User) of the Common European Framework: "Can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussion in his/her field of specialisation. Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options." [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
1 a. French and German: placement and final exams administered at the study-abroad institutions.
1b. Russian: Test of Russian as a Foreign Language (TORFL) administered on-line to graduating seniors. A TORFL Level one certificate (above basic and elementary) is a prerequisite for entering Russian institutions of higher learning with obligatory further studies of the Russian language. (See <http://www.alte.org/members/russian/st_petersburg/level_one.cfm>.
1c. Spanish: plan the development of tests to be administered by University of Veracruz or before graduation at USA.
View Measurement Link 		a, b: 2005-2006
c. 2006-2007 		Assessment Committee
2. Portfolio containing work done in upper-level classes, including such items as audio- and video-taped oral presentations, formal and informal written material such as papers, letters, e-mail, journals, and exams, assessment by native speaker. Evaluated by the respective language section and approved by the departmental assessment committee on the basis of a checksheet for evaluating portfolios according to the desired criteria.
View Measurement Link 		2005-2006 Assessment Committee
3. Surveys of graduating seniors: self-assessment of the language skills acquired at USA and perceptions of the overall quality of the foreign language program
 2005-2006 Assessment Committee
4.Alumni survey
 2006-2007 Assessment Committee
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/12/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: Met expectations: satisfactory performance at level by all students taking these exams.
The three Russian students taking the TORFL I (Certificate) test made the following scores on the Lexicon, Grammar portion: 86%, 95%, and 85%. On the reading portion they made scores of 95%, 100%, and 95%.
The German student who studied at the Goethe Institute placed into level C.1.1, at or above the expected level, after completing LG 361 and LG 368 at USA. On completing her studies there, she took the Zentrale Mittelstufenprüfung, on which she also achieved a satisfactory result ("gut, befriedigend"). The Zentrale Mittelstufenprüfung "is an examination at an advanced level, requiring competence in all the language skills. It is recognized as fulfilling the language entry requirement for technical colleges and Studienkollegs in Germany."
Three students who studied in Dijon, France, all placed at their expected level (level four). During the second term all moved up to level five. Final exam scores were satisfactory in all cases.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/12/2006 -- The French and German sections added general language and specific oral components to LG 394 to further prepare students for the study-abroad experience: one-half hour session per week in conversation in the target language with a native informant. The French section now requires that all written work for LG 394 be done in French. Russian has added a written assignment to its section of LG 394. Spanish has added an additional assignment to LG 334, Grammar and Composition.

06/12/2006 -- This will be an ongoing concern, and linguistic skills of students should continue to be monitored from year to year. Development of Spanish exam will need to be completed.
No
06/12/2006 -- Result #2
DESCRIPTION: Portfolios met expectations. 1 French, 1 Russian, and 3 Spanish portfolios submitted in Spring 2006 were judged satisfactory by the committee using the new evaluation form for the first time. Native informants, in the required oral language evaluation in LG 480, attested to satisfactory oral performance by students with respect to participation, comprehension, vocabulary, pronuciation, and fluidity: all students received marks of "good" or "excellent" in these categories. Written skills judged satisfactory by section and department committees.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength

Related Data:
   View File - Oral_Language_Evaluation.doc
06/12/2006 -- See result. New portfolio checksheet devised and implemented for better assessment.

06/12/2006 -- This will be an ongoing concern, and linguistic skills of students should continued to be monitored from year to year.
No
06/12/2006 -- Result #3
DESCRIPTION: See also 2 above. A self-assessment covering these topics is part of 480 and the portfolio. The section and department committees found that the self-assessments in the five completed portfolios in Spring 2006 reflected adequate progress by the students in developing language skills and an appropriate level of awareness by students of their objective skill levels.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/12/2006 -- No changes recommended at this time as a result of self-assessments. But see action under Result #1.

06/12/2006 -- This will be an ongoing concern, and students' self-assessments of their linguistic skills should continued to be monitored from year to year.
No
06/12/2006 -- Result #4
DESCRIPTION: Not yet completed.
TYPE: Problem / Limitation
06/12/2006 -- Not yet completed. The College of Arts & Sciences is developing an alumni survey for selected departments in 2006. When this has been completed and tested, it will be adapted for our department in future years.

06/12/2006 -- See action.
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 1.2 (A). Knowledge about the target language - Graduates will demonstrate knowledge about the target language, including major grammatical elements and discourse features, differences in varieties of contemporary usage and the major changes that have occurred in the language over time, and similarities and differences between the target language and other languages. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
1. Portfolio containing work done in upper-level classes, including such items as formal and informal papers, technology-enhanced presentations, and exams on literary and cultural topics; journal reflecting experiences during study-abroad. Evaluated by the respective language section and approved by the departmental assessment committee on the basis of a checksheet for evaluating portfolios according to the desired criteria.
View Measurement Link 		Spring 2006. Departmental Assessments Committee.
2. Content mapping: examination of syllabi by departmental assessment committee to determine their content in reference to the departmental goals and objectives.
 Spring 2006 Departmental Assessments Committee
3. Surveys of graduating seniors.
 Spring 2006 Departmental Assessments Committee.
4. Alumni Survey
 Spring 2007 Departmental Assessments Committee
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/07/2006 -- Result #1.
DESCRIPTION: Portfolios met expectations: 1 French, 1 Russian, and 3 Spanish portfolios submitted in Spring 2006 were judged satisfactory by the committee using the new evaluation form for the first time. Tests and papers included in the portfolios and judged satisfactory by the section and department committees demonstrated that students had attained this knowledge.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/07/2006 -- No changes recommended at this time concerning knowledge about the target language . The self-assessment will continue to be a part of LG 480, where small and large group discussions also contribute to the students' awareness of cultural differences.

06/12/2006 -- The portfolios of graduating seniors will need to be monitored each year to insure that this objective continues to be met.
No
06/05/2006 -- Result #2
DESCRIPTION: Assessing committee found that the content described in the syllabi met expected student learning outcome in this area. This is especially true of the advanced grammar courses in each section, and LG 110, World Languages, which is required of all majors and introduces basic linguistic concepts and analyzes similarities and differences among languages.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/05/2006 -- No changes recommended at this time concerning knowledge about the target language .

06/05/2006 -- Periodic monitoring will occur to make sure that this objective continues to be met.
Yes
06/05/2006 -- Result #3
DESCRIPTION: A self-assessment, which covers the items in Objectives 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3, and provides the information that would be given in a separate survey, is part of LG 480 and the senior portfolio. The section and department committees found that the self assessments reflected adequate progress by the students in developing knowledge about the target language, although this particular topic was not always addressed as specifically as it might have been.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/05/2006 -- It was recommended that that instructions for the self-assessment be clarified to include this topic more specifically.

06/12/2006 -- This is an ongoing concern: periodic monitoring will occur to make sure that the objective continues to be met.
Yes
06/05/2006 -- Result #4
DESCRIPTION: Not yet completed.
TYPE: Problem / Limitation
06/05/2006 -- Not yet completed. The College of Arts & Sciences is developing an alumni survey for selected departments in 2006. When this has been completed and tested, it will be adapted for our department in future years.

06/05/2006 -- See action.
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 1.3 (A). Knowledge of target culture and literature - Viewing the target culture and its literature as dynamic systems in which cultural perspectives are reflected through practices and products, graduates will demonstrate knowledge of the target culture ranging from daily living patterns and societal structures to geography, history, religion, the media, etc.; identify the contributions of major writers, thinkers, artists, and cultural icons, the roles they play, and references made to them in the culture; demonstrate familiarity with texts in a variety of discourses; and read at the level of analysis, interpretation, and synthesis. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
1. Portfolio containing work done in upper-level classes, including such items as formal and informal papers, technology-enhanced presentations, and exams on literary and cultural topics; journal reflecting experiences during study-abroad. Evaluated by the respective language section and approved by the departmental assessment committee on the basis of a checksheet for evaluating portfolios according to the desired criteria.
View Measurement Link 		Spring 2006 Departmental Assessment Committee
2. Content mapping: examination of syllabi by departmental assessment committee to determine their content in reference to the department goals and objectives.
 Spring 2006 Departmental Assessment Committee
3. Surveys of graduating seniors: self-assessment of the literary skills and cultural knowledge acquired at USA and perceptions of the overall quality of the foreign language program.
 Spring 2006 Departmental Assessment Committee
4. Alumni survey
 Spring 2007 Departmental Assessment Committee
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/05/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: Portfolios met expectations. Tests and papers included in the portfolios and judged satisfactory by the section and department committees demonstrated that students had attained this knowledge.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/05/2006 -- No changes recommended at this time concerning knowledge about the target culture and literature. The self-assessment will continue to be a part of LG 480, where small and large group discussions also contribute to the students' awareness of cultural differences.

06/12/2006 -- This is an ongoing concern: periodic monitoring will occur to make sure that the objective continues to be met.
Yes
06/05/2006 -- Result #4
DESCRIPTION: Not yet completed
TYPE: Problem / Limitation
06/05/2006 -- The College of Arts & Sciences is developing an alumni survey for selected departments in 2006. When this has been completed and tested, it will be adapted for the Department of Foreign Languages in future years.

06/05/2006 -- See action.
No
06/05/2006 -- Result #2
DESCRIPTION: The Assessment Committee found that the syllabi of relevant courses covered the expected material. The long-standing Foreign Language Film Series was added to the syllabus of LG 480 as a requirement for the course. Students were exposed not only to the cinematic products of their target culture, but to a wide range of cultures as well.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/12/2006 -- The long-standing Foreign Language Film Series was added to the syllabus of LG 480 as a requirement for the course. Students were exposed not only to the cinematic products of their target culture, but to a wide range of cultures as well.

06/14/2006 -- This is an ongoing concern: periodic monitoring will occur to make sure that the objective continues to be met.
No
06/05/2006 -- Result #3
DESCRIPTION: A self-assessment, which covers the items in Objectives 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 and provides the information that would be given in a separate survey, is part of LG 480 and the senior portfolio. The section and department committees found that the self assessments reflected adequate progress by the students in developing knowledge about the target culture and literature.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/12/2006 -- No additional action was recommended at this time.

06/12/2006 -- This is an ongoing concern: periodic monitoring will occur to make sure that the objective continues to be met.
Yes

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 1.4.07 (A). Writing, Critical Thinking, Research - Graduates will demonstrate skills appropriate to their field in writing, critical thinking, and research. They will be able to write papers in the language of their major concentration that express a clear central point, logically develop ideas that are well-organized and supported by details, and communicate clearly. They will show a mastery of basic grammar of the target language and an ability to use more complex structures when writing letters, summaries, and papers on more advanced topics. Their research papers will demonstrate a proper use of secondary sources with bibliography and citations in the correct format. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Portfolio containing work done in upper-level classes, including such items as formal and informal papers, research papers, and exams on literary and cultural topics; journal reflecting experiences during study-abroad.
 2006-2007 Department Assessment Committee

 

A. Student learning - GOAL #2. To achieve the student learning objectives of the Alternative Master's program with certification in Foreign Languages.
Objective: OBJECTIVE 2.1 (A). Alternative Master's Degree - Improve the skills of students pursuing an Alternative Master's Degree in Education in foreign languages at the K-12 level with respect to linguistic competency in the four skills, critical thinking and research skills, and cultural knowledge (paralleling the undergraduate expectations), as well as pedagogy [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
1. Use content mapping to review USA graduate foreign-language curricula and courses pursued by students. Examine undergraduate records more closely to determine what is needed for success in the graduate program.
 Spring 2006 Departmental Assessments Committee; individual language sections
2. State Praxis exams, which are were given in 2005 for the first time, can now provide an assessment of our graduates.
 Spring 2006 Departmental Assessment Committee; individual language sections
3. Departmental Exit Exams.
 Spring 2006 Departmemental Assessments Committee; individual language sections
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/05/2006 -- Result # 1
DESCRIPTION: Through previous content mapping, the Spanish section observed that teacher trainees would be better served by an additional course in Spanish Grammar for Teachers. The current culture and literature courses were determined to provide the proper background. Examination of undergraduate courses taken at USA and elsewhere revealed that lack of certain courses was detrimental to success in the Master's program.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/05/2006 -- Spanish Grammar for Teachers is now offered on a regular basis. Rather than attempt to introduce entrance exams, the Spanish section designated a curriculum of prerequisite undergraduate courses to insure success at the graduate level: LG 336 and LG 431, and at least two from LG 432, 433, 434, and 435.

06/14/2006 -- Continue to monitor the curriculum periodically to insure that courses provide what graduates need.
Yes
06/05/2006 -- Result #2
DESCRIPTION: The cut-off score for French was 148 and for Spanish 144. Two students that had been through our graduate courses in French made a 197 and a perfect score of 200. The five students that had been through our program in Spanish made scores of 189, 177, 150, 149, and 140. This represents a passing rate of 100% for French and 80% for Spanish. (One student who took the test in German, but who has never enrolled in any of our language courses, did not make the cut-off, and an additional student in French, who has also not yet taken any of our courses, made above the cut-off score).
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/05/2006 -- The one student who failed in Spanish also failed the Department's own exit exam on the first try. The Spanish section will further investigate admissions requirements to the program.

06/05/2006 -- See action. The results of the PRAXIS test will be monitored from year to year on an ongoing basis.
No
06/05/2006 -- Result #3
DESCRIPTION: Four Spanish students took the Exit Exam. Three passed the first time; the fourth passed on the second attempt. One student who took the exam in French passed.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/05/2006 -- A recommendation was made that the Spanish section further investigate admissions requirements to the program. No changes recommended for French.

06/05/2006 -- The Spanish section should contact the College of Education to see what can be done concerning strengthening the admissions requirements to the program with respect to the content area (language, literature, and culture). All sections should record results of different sections of the exit exam to note weaknesses in specific areas: the four language skills, knowledge about the language, and knowledge about the culture.
No

 

 

A. Student learning - GOAL #3. Continue to strive for excellence in all phases of the teaching and learning process.
Objective: OBJECTIVE 3.1 (A). Study-Abroad Programs - To ensure the quality of instruction in study-abroad programs and the continued progess of the students in the target language. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Observation of study abroad experiences by instructor in LG 480, the director of the Xalapa program, and the department chair. Student self-assessment in LG 480, included in portfolio; native informant's assessment in LG 480, included in portfolio.
 2005-2006 Departmental Assessments Committee
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/12/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: The instructor in LG 480, which deals with the study-abroad experience, the director of the Xalapa program, and the Department Chair all determined that the study-abroad programs and the overall experience with respect to students' curricula and attainment of skills were successful and a valid part of the major requirement. All students completed their study-abroad programs without serious academic, emotional, or other difficulties, and all displayed the expected linguistic development and cultural knowledge as seen in the results to Objectives 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 Student self -assessments in the portfolios also bore this out.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/12/2006 -- No additional action was recommended at this time.

06/12/2006 -- Routine, continued monitoring of study-abroad programs should occur.
Yes

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 3.2 (A). Lower-level instruction: classroom observation - To continue to evaluate systematically the instruction in lower-level courses, especially those taught by part-time instructors [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Class visitation by senior instructors using evaluation form to be be developed
View Measurement Link 		Spring 2006 Section leaders, department chair
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/06/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: Form developed and used in evaluating part-time and tenure-track, non-tenured faculty. More systematic observations of faculty were carried out.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/06/2006 -- 1. A form was developed this year based on forms developed at the University of Illinois and the University of Pennsylvania and modified for our purposes. Senior faculty/instructors visited classes in all four language sections and provided reports to the section leader and chair.

06/06/2006 -- 1. Instructors will need to be evaluated on an on-going basis.
 
06/07/2006 -- 2. Based on deficiencies revealed in the teaching of some part-time instructors, the Spanish section and the Department Chair decided to require that part-time applicants give a sample teaching demonstration, a practice that has long been the case for all full-time applicants. This was carried out for two applicants in the spring semester: one of them was hired on this basis and one was not.

06/12/2006 -- 2. The practice of requiring applicants for part-time teaching positions to give teaching demonstrations will be continued in the future.
No

 

 

B. Degree completion - GOAL #4. To improve student success rates and retention in lower-division classes, especially those with low success rates and large numbers of unsuccessful students (as measured by students earning grades of D, F, or WD).
Objective: OBJECTIVE 4.1 .07 (B). Monitor Tutoring - Continue to monitor the tutoring situation, adding hours and training tutors as necessary and making any other appropriate changes to improve the help that is offered to students. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Keep records of tutoring hours and visits to tutors by students and attempt to correlate tutoring with performance and retention.
 2006-2007 Language sections, assessments committee
Objective: OBJECTIVE 4.2 (B) Study skills information - Provide study skills information in the beginning foreign language classroom. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Determine whether study skills information has been provided.
 2005-2006 Assessments Goals and Objectives Committee
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/09/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: Individual instructors devised study skills materials, distributed them in the classroom, and placed them in a special rack for that purpose in the LRC. Tutors thus had ready access to them as well when helping students. The French section implemented more computer-assisted assignments, which encouraged more students to do homework: a higher percentage tended to do the computer-assisted homework than the written homework in the workbook, because the instant feedback from the computer helps the students be responsible for their own learning.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/09/2006 -- See result.

06/09/2006 -- Now that these practices have been initiated, they will be continued on an ongoing basis, and efforts will be made to better alert weaker students to the possibilities available to them.
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 4.3 (B). Oral Exams - Give oral exams regularly, when feasible with the assistance of departmental tutors. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Determine whether exams have been instituted and given on a regular basis.
 2005-2006 Assessments Committee, Department Chair
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/09/2006 -- Result # 1
DESCRIPTION: The French section added oral exams with every chapter test; they found that their students were better prepared orally than in the past and that they find the final oral less daunting. The Spanish section reinstated semester oral exams, which had been dropped, for LG 132. The German section continued giving oral exams in LG 151 and LG 152. Although intimidating to students, the Department has found that these exams provide more of an incentive to learn than other assignments, and the sense of accomplishment in students who have completed them can have a positive motivational affect to do well in other aspects of the course and to complete it. Oral exam grades in LG 151/152 are almost never lower than the overall course average: since this is true for an assignment that is potentially more difficult, comprehensive, and intimidating than other assignments or tests, it indicates a higher amount of student preparation than average. In LG 480 native-informant tutors give a required weekly conversation section and provide an oral assessment of each student at the end of the semester.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/09/2006 -- See result.

06/09/2006 -- This is an ongoing concern, and oral exams will continue to be offered in introductory courses, and the oral component will be continued in LG 480..
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 4.5 (B). Class size - Reduce class size in introductory language sections. Classes are currently capped at 28 (with overrides occasionally taking some initial enrollments to 30), realizing that they tend to settle out after a few days at 25. Because of this large number of students, it is difficult to give students the active practice in the four skills or the individual attention that they need, and the successful completion rate is probably lower as a result. The Association of Departments of Foreign Languages policy statement says "that the maximum class size for foreign language instruction where all four skills are equally stressed should not exceed 20. We hold that the optimum class size is 15." [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications: This would involve the cost of hiring new instructors. In the fall of 2005 we taught 35 introductory sections in the four major languages plus Latin, with an average enrollment of 24.7 per section on the second day of class. If we reduced the average to 20 students per section, we would need to add 8 sections. To hire part-time instructors with M.A. degrees, this would cost $16,200 for the fall semester. Involving full-time faculty in introductory sections adds to the health of the program and student success: hiring two full-time instructors with a 4-4 load would cost approximately $70,000 plus benefits.
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Measure reduction in class size.
 When feasible. Department Chair.
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/09/2006 -- Result # 1
DESCRIPTION: This was not carried out this year because of the cost. An additional full-time instructor was hired on a one-year temporary basis for 2006-2007, but this will lead more to reduction in the number of part-time instructors than in class size.
TYPE: Problem / Limitation
06/09/2006 -- See result.

06/09/2006 -- The feasibility of pursuing this will need to be monitored in future years.
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 4.6 (B). Graders - To provide instructors with graders so that written homework is collected frequently and returned in a timely manner. Active practice of language skills is important for successful learning to occur, and frequent feedback on students' performance helps them gauge the development of those skills: instructors would be better able to provide more of each if they had graders to assist them with regular homework assignments. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications: Money would have to be budgeted for graders, most likely upper-level students or native speakers who would be paid $7.00/ hr. If 800 introductory students received additional assignments each week, and graders spent 5 minutes per student-assignment, 67 hours per week or 938 for 14 weeks would be needed, for a total of $6566 per semester.
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Determine whether graders are hired.
 When feasible. Department Chair.
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/09/2006 -- Result # 1
DESCRIPTION: None were hired, except for a few tutors that were used when they happened to have free hours when students were not seeking help.
TYPE: Problem / Limitation
06/09/2006 -- See result.

06/09/2006 -- The feasibility of pursuing this will need to be monitored in future years.
No

 

 

C. Research - GOAL #5. To continue to pursue and maintain excellence in research and professional development.
Objective: OBJECTIVE 5.1 (C). Research. - To continue the level of respectable scholarly activity. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Faculty productivity to be assessed at the end of spring semester 2006 and compared with the activity of the previous year in terms of publication of refereed articles and books, other articles, presentations at scholarly conferences, editorial activity, book reviews, and other recognized forms of scholarly activity.
 Spring 2006 Departmental Chair
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/06/2006 -- Result # 1.
DESCRIPTION: The faculty in the department performed at or above the five-year average in all but one category, even though two faculty members were on one-year appointments and not expected to be active in this area (see attached document). This year's figures with the previous five-year average in parentheses, are as follows:
Books 1 (.8), refereed articles 6 (3.4), other articles 3 (1), reviews 2 (2.75), conference papers 11 (9.4), external grants 1 (.2), internal grants 4 (2.4). The external survey taken at the outset of the previous 5-year period showed the department to rank favorably with those in peer institutions.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength

Related Data:
   View File - FLL_Research.doc
06/06/2006 -- Results distributed to faculty who were encouraged to continue to take advantage of grant and travel-funding opportunities and to remain active in their scholarship and professional contacts.

06/06/2006 -- This will of necessity be an on-going process. It will be desirable to conduct another survey of faculty research at peer institutions in the next two years.
No

 

 

D. University service - GOAL #6. To continue to meet the needs of the university community by engaging in profession-related service activities appropriate to the discipline.
Objective: OBJECTIVE 6.1 (D). Service - To continue the level of respectable profession-related service in the department, college, university and community. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
To measure the degree of success faculty productivity will be assessed at the end of spring semester 2006 and compared with the activity of the previous year.
 Spring 2006 Department Chair
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/06/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: The faculty served on slightly fewer committees than in the previous year but remained close to the average of the previous five years in many areas (see attached document). The results are as follows, with the previous five-year average in parentheses:
Departmental committees 37 (36.8), college and university committees 20 (24), professional organizations 1 (1), community 5 (8.2), other 4 (1.4), student club sponsorships 5 (4).
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/06/2006 -- The results were distributed to the faculty, who were encouraged to continue their service contributions at various levels.

06/06/2006 -- This will necessarily an on-going process.
No

 

 

M. Use of technology - GOAL #7. To continue to improve the use of technology in the instructional process.
Objective: OBJECTIVE 7.1 (M) Materials - To purchase additional materials as needed. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications: The cost of the items purchased fell within the LRC fund (152067) that is funded by student fees, and future purchases will be budgeted to remain within the amounts available in this fund.
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Monitor purchase of equipment and materials.
 2005-2006 LRC Director, Technology Committee, Department Chair
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
06/08/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: The following equipment and materials were purchased: 21 computers; large screen television; a subscription to TiVo; two boomboxes; French audio program; language tutorial programs for Russian, German, Spanish, and French; multiple foreign films, language interest films, and books.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
06/08/2006 -- Purchased materials were placed into use.

06/08/2006 -- This will be an ongoing process, since outmoded equipment will have to be replaced and the LRC should keep pace with the latest developments and learning materials.
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 7.2 (M). Technology in the Classroom - To incorporate media- and computer-assisted technology more effectively into classroom instruction and student assignments. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Gather information about latest developments and usage through conferences and practices at other institutions. Monitor the use of this technology in instruction through discussions at meetings of the Audio-visual/Technology Committee and the Department as a whole.
 2005-2006 LRC Director, Technology Committee, Department Chair
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
07/10/2006 -- Result #1
DESCRIPTION: LRC Director attended three language learning technology conferences and visited four other university Language Resource Centers (Brigham Young, Georgia State, Middle Tennessee State, and College of Charleston.) Two department members presented papers at the last two conferences to inform faculty at other institutions about practices in use at our LRC. Communicated conference findings and language-learning trends to the Department. Media and computer-assisted technology usage increased in classroom instruction and student assignments. Also student traffic in and usage of Language Resource Center increased.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
07/10/2006 -- See result.

07/10/2006 -- This will be an ongoing process since the Language Resource Center should keep pace with the latest developments and student usage should continue to be encouraged..
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 7.4 (M). Usage of LRC - To evaluate the usage of the Language Resource Center by having students log in the purpose of their visit. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications:
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Collect data on student usage of Language Resource Center and distribute information weekly to faculty for analysis.
 2005-2006 LRC Director, Technology Committee, Department Chair
Results
Result Action Follow-Up Resolved
07/10/2006 -- Result # 1
DESCRIPTION: Data were collected and the purpose of each student's visit to the Language Resource Center was chronicled. See also Objective 7.5 Result #1 and Objective 4.1 Result #1.
TYPE: Distinction / Strength
07/10/2006 -- Installed user log-in software in Language Resource Center to survey spring and summer semester users.

07/10/2006 -- This will be an ongoing process since information gathered will be compiled for pinpointing trends, strengths and weaknesses.
No

 

Objective: OBJECTIVE 7.5 (M). Community of learners - To aid in retention and expand language interest by promoting a community of learners in the Language Resource Center through the creation of a supportive educational environment. [Hide Objective Detail]
Academic Year: 05-06
06-07
Start Date:
End Date:
Status: Open
Budget Ramifications: Purchase of equipment, materials, and furnishings, as well as the employment of student tutors. All can be financed through the student fees collected for this purpose by the department. The cost of any items purchased will be budgeted to fall within the amounts available in the LRC fund (152067) that is funded by student fees.
Assessment Methods
Method Criterion Schedule Feedback Loop
Determine the extent to which the various LRC functions are implemented and oriented toward this goal. Have faculty employ usage data (see Objective 7.4) to assess LRC use in general and especially with respect to low-performing students as compared to other students.
 2005-2006 LRC Director, Technology Committee, Department Chair