* Must be connected to the USCA network to access this link.
^ This is a link to an external web page.
A
CLOSER LOOK
AT PUBLIC EDUCATION IN
SOUTH CAROLINA
PART A - PERFORMANCE FUNDING REPORT IS ISSUED
BY THE S.C. COMMISSION OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN JANUARY OF EACH YEAR
PART B- INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH
CAROLINA AIKEN IN AUGUST OF EACH YEAR
REPORTS ON ACT 255 OF 1992 AND ACT 629 OF 1996
AS REQUIRED BY
THE SOUTH CAROLINA COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION
AND THE SOUTH CAROLINA LEGISLATURE
AUGUST 1, 2001 REPORT POSTED
FOR JANUARY, 2002 LEGISLATIVE REPORT
Contents:
Act 629
Institutional Effectiveness Summary Report
- Preface
- University of South Carolina Aiken
- Program Accreditation at USCA
- Courses Taught by Faculty
- Success of Students in Developmental Courses
- Involvement in Sponsored Research
- Results of Professional Examinations
Act 629
Institutional Effectiveness Summary Report
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN
Preface
When the South Carolina Legislature enacted its first higher education accountability Act in 1988, it extended and emphasized the institutional efforts already under way to more closely monitor and more consistently improve the quality of learning and teaching. In 1996, another law, Act 359, Performance Funding, carried assessment even further into an accountability mandate for improvement in 37 areas in higher education. Finally in 2001, the Commission on Higher Education working with the colleges and universities, streamlined the reporting for the 37 indicators into 14 on which institutions should focus. For over a decade, South Carolina's public colleges and universities have been about the business of assessment and accountability; consequently, many of them are national leaders consulted for advice on how to monitor and improve institutional effectiveness and higher education accountability.
The University of South Carolina Aiken is such a leader. Gaining national attention in assessment and in accountability has assisted the institution in receiving for the third straight year, the U.S. News and World Report’s Top Ten ranking for public institutions its size in the Southeast. In addition, USCA has received a rating of “Exceeds” for 1999, 2000 and in 2001 in Performance Funding, the State’s accountability report card on higher education and was only one of two teaching institutions to do so. Other distinctions for USCA include such things as being ranked #13 nationally of America's Most Wired Colleges in the Baccalaureate II category (2000), receiving initial accreditation for the USCA School of Business from the American Colleges and Schools of Business, increasing USCA Masters Levels programs to two, Education and Psychology, and obtaining permission from the Commission on Higher Education to offer a four year generic Baccalaureate Degree in Nursing.
Lastly, in 2001 USCA underwent a Southern Association Commission on Colleges re-accreditation review and received two commendations (one in planning and assessment and one in technology) and only ten recommendations (review results are still in draft form and must be voted on in Dec. 2001 for final status). This is considered an extremely favorable review by the campus and its constituents.
For more information about the University of South Carolina Aiken look at http://www.usca.sc.edu . For more information about this document, please contact Dr. Lovely Ulmer-Sottong, Director, Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, 471 University Drive, Aiken, S.C. 29801 Phone: 803/641-3338; Email: lovelyu@aiken.sc.edu for any questions or comments concerning USCA’s Performance Funding, Institutional Effectiveness and/or this report. We welcome any comments or questions about this report or any other area of interest at USCA.
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA AIKEN
INTRODUCTION
USC Aiken continues the assessment of its institutional effectiveness as a demonstration of its commitment to quality in all its programs and services. In the 2001 Southern Association for Schools and Colleges cited the institution with a commendation on its planning and use of assessment, and no recommendations in SACS Chapter 3 requirements (Institutional Effectiveness)--- a rare distinction for a university. (SACS report still in draft form until Dec. 2001). USCA faculty and staff have consistently presented at both national and state assessment conferences on institutional effectiveness in such areas as the AACSB’s Outcomes Assessment Conference; the Rising Junior Writing Portfolio; Capstone Courses and the College Student, etc.
A wide variety of methodologies are required and used to assure quality through assessment and annual performance review at USCA. Each department at USCA is required to use three forms to report assessment activities and outcomes. Form A states the unit, who is responsible for assessment within the unit, and the way the unit satisfies USCA’s computer literacy requirement. Form B entails the departmental goals/objectives and designates the methods used to measure the unit’s goals and delineates a timetable for reporting. Lastly, Form C centers on each goal of the unit, its measurement, its outcome(s) and how those outcomes were used to strengthen or reaffirm the program in general. Additionally, assessment results are required and used in each department’s annual program review to defend budget requests and charter a direction for the program.
At USCA the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment is responsible for all institution-wide assessment activities. In addition, a standing Assessment Committee of the Faculty Assembly oversees general education assessment at USCA and also reviews each academic unit’s assessment Forms every three years. The committee discusses the strengths and weaknesses of a unit’s assessment programming with the chair and/or his/her designee when that department is under review.
This following report consists of a summary of all assessment activities, outcomes and uses of outcomes in the five areas for assessment for fall 2000 through spring 2001(under the revised guidelines issued by the Commission on Higher Education on May 13, 1998.) These areas are:
1) General Education,
2) Majors and Concentrations this includes a full report for Math and Computer Science, and no interim reports for 2001,
3) Academic Advising,
4) Procedures for Student Development and
5) Library Resources and Services.
Although the Commission has designated these five areas as areas for assessment, each institution has an approved schedule of assessment under which the assessment reporting for these areas rotate. It is important to note that all the areas of the institution actual engage in assessment and self-study each year; however, the reports of the uses of assessment results and the improvements made from assessment are reported to the Commission only on a scheduled basis every two-three years depending on the institutional schedule for assessment reports. In addition to reporting, assessment planning occurs as a separate activity for each department on a yearly basis.
USC Aiken employs a multiple measure approach to assessment and encourages all units to use a mixture of assessment methodologies such as focus groups, capstone courses, senior theses/projects, interviews, surveys, portfolios, standardized instruments when appropriate, grade and course patterns, etc. The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment guides departments in appropriate research design as well as the generation and interpretation of assessment data. In addition, the Office assists the units in evaluating and improving their assessment programs with the goal of using assessment outcomes to improve the quality of the teaching and learning environment.
In 2000, the University Assessment Committee implemented a general review of all assessment procedures and outcomes in each academic major at the University. As part of the review, the Committee met with each assessment representative from each major area. Together the academic area and the committee reviewed the strengths and challenges of that department’s assessment results and uses of assessment to date. In 2001, the Committee reviewed Biology/Geology, BIS, Business, English, Mathematical Science and Visual and Performing Arts, and met with each department as appropriate.
1. GENERAL EDUCATION
The general education requirements at USCA provided below address the following goals of the USCA Mission Statement:
- Thinking critically and analytically, questioning, searching out concepts;
- Communicating effectively using numerical, notational, verbal and other symbolic systems;
- Appreciating cross-cultural perspectives;
- Exploring values openly and critically;
- Finding and examining relationships among disciplines, concepts, and areas of study;
- Developing depth of knowledge within chosen fields of interest.
In 2001, the Academic Assessment Committee continued its work on the final design for a grading rubric for USCA’s Assessment Booklet 14 which helps to assess how well USCA students 1) Explore Values Openly and Honestly, 2) Find and Examine Relationships Among Disciplines, Concepts and Areas of Study and 3) Appreciate Cross-Cultural Perspectives, which are the three major goals of USCA’s general education program. In addition to the above, all USCA students with 30 hours or less or 80 hours or more (freshmen and seniors) are required to take the ACT CAAP, a national standardized instrument which measures the strength of general education in reading, writing, mathematics, science reasoning, and critical thinking.
Annually a report is completed by the USCA Office of Institutional Research and Assessment which evaluates the strength of USCA general education program as measured by the College Base (a nationally standardized test). Because this is the first year USCA has used the CAAP this annual report will not be done until USCA has at least two years of baseline data.
In addition to the above assessment activities, national presentations were given in the area of assessing general education skills through rising junior portfolios in writing, standardized speaking rubrics for communication, general education research design and implementation issues, and the development of rubrics in general education. Overall, USCA’s general education assessment program has continued to be used as a model for other small institutions nationwide that are dedicated to assessing the quality of their general education program. The SACS visiting team reaffirmed USCA’s strength of the general education in its report (draft form, final in progress).
If you have any questions about the assessment of the general education program at USCA, please contact Dr. Lovely Ulmer-Sottong, Director, Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, 803/641-3338.
2. MAJORS/CONCENTRATIONS
For 2001, the required reports for University of South Carolina Aiken are a full report from the Department of Mathematics and Computer Science. There are no interim required reports for 2001 for USCA. All reports include the school/departments mission, goals, some examples of the measurements of those goals, findings and outcomes/uses of assessment to improve or confirm the program. Complete assessment plans including Form A, Statement of Program; Form B, Statement of Goals, Criteria, Measurements and Methods; and Form C, Results and Outcomes of all departments are updated yearly and are on file at the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, USCA.
Full Assessment Report Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
The Department of Mathematical Sciences contributes to the mission of the University by encouraging students to:
(1) think critically and analytically and to search for an understanding of mathematical concepts.
(2) communicate effectively using numerical, notational and other symbolic systems.
(3) find and examine relationships among disciplines.
(4) develop depth of knowledge in the areas of mathematics, computer science and engineering.
The Department of Mathematical Sciences contributes to the goals of the University by:
(1) providing students with in mathematics, computer literacy, and (to a limited extent) oral communication (USCA Goal 1, Strategy A).
(2) using assessment results to continually improve Departmental programs (USCA Goal 1, Strategy B).
(3) maintaining high standards of excellence in hiring new faculty and staff (USCA Goal 1, Strategy F).
(4) participating in recruiting and information opportunities for high school and non-traditional students (USCA Goal 2, Strategy B).
(5) developing internship and cooperative education opportunities for mathematics/computer science and industrial mathematics students (USCA Goal 3, Strategy C).
The Department values the above goals and through its assessment process and measures them through the following examples. The Department reports its goals and the methods it uses to measure the goals each year (Form B) and also reports any changes made to the curriculum or program through this assessment process (Form C). Yearly reports are made to the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment and are used in Program Review to support budget requests from the department to the University Planning Committee (Budget Committee).
Goal: (1) Provide students with activities in mathematics, computer literacy, and (to a limited extent) oral communication (USCA Goal 1, Strategy A).
Targeted Curricula for Goal 1: General education mathematics courses (AMTH 108, 122, 118, 170 and ASTA 201) include student group problem-solving activities which involve both calculation and the use of technology. The projects will require both written and oral presentation of solutions.
Benchmark: When all sections of these courses routinely include a group work project, including both written and oral presentation of solutions.
Assessment Method #1: Department Chair will review course syllabi to ensure that all sections of these courses include the requirement for the project. Written presentations will be evaluated by the instructor and reviewed the Chair to ensure that the project represents a meaningful learning experience. Oral presentations will be evaluated by the instructor.
Assessment Method #2: Project-specific student comments on course evaluations will be monitored. Although it is difficult to establish a sound criteria for success, it is felt that student comments are an important source of feedback which needs to be utilized
Criteria for Success: A majority
of student comments regarding the projects (over 50%) should indicate a
feeling that the project is a valuable learning experience
Assessment Results: Lack of uniformity in implementing this requirement among
the various general education mathematics courses has made use of this source
of data impractical.
Use of Results: This source of information will of greater use when the Department has re-evaluated the means of implementing this requirement in the various general education courses. As stated above, this re-evaluation will begin in Fall, 2001.
Goal 2: Using assessment results to continually improve Departmental programs (USCA Goal 1, Strategy B).
Targeted Curriculum/Process Change: Significant and continuing improvements in the mathematics/computer science and industrial mathematics programs, particularly in the area of computer science. Improvements will be of such a nature as to keep the programs current with advances in computer technology
Method #1: Number and frequency of formal changes in mathematics/computer science and industrial mathematics degree programs will be reviewed annually by the department to ensure that these programs continually reflect the rapidly-occurring changes in technology.
Benchmark: While it is unreasonable to fix a certain number of changes-per-year, an academic year in which no changes have been made will be considered a matter requiring review and explanation.
Method #2: Student questionnaires, administered in AMTH 590 and AMTH 599, will be reviewed for students’ perceptions of the currency of the computer science portion of the curricula.
Benchmark: 75% favorable student comments will be considered successful.
Method #3: Alumni questionnaires will address graduates’ opinions regarding the adequacy of their preparation in the area of computer science.
Benchmark: More than 75% of responses should be neutral-to-favorable.
Interim Reports
There are no academic areas reporting from USCA on the rotation of interim reports.
3. ACADEMIC ADVISING
The Office of Academic Advisement coordinates advisement for the thirteen academic units. The mission of the Office of Academic Advisement is to assist students in the development of meaningful educational plans compatible with their life goals. The Office is located in the same space as Career Counseling and the USCA Coop Program and every opportunity is taken to connect the process of academic advising with future plans of the student whether graduate school or employment.
Advisor Training
All new faculty must complete new faculty orientation. A discussion of academic advising by the Director of Academic Advisement is one of the components of this orientation program. In addition, the Director also schedules individual appointments with new faculty members to acquaint them with policy and procedures of advising. During the semester the Office of Academic Advisement offers training sessions for all advisors, new and veteran. These sessions are two hours in length and are scheduled a few weeks before advisement and early registration for the subsequent semester. There are approximately twelve of these sessions scheduled at various times each semester. New advisors are required to attend and veteran advisors must attend every three years. It is during these sessions that current policy and procedures are reinforced and new ones are introduced. Any changes in procedure or new procedures are also communicated to the advisors by memo immediately before each advisement and registration period. Each advisor is provided with an advisement manual, as a training and a reference tool.
Veteran advisors are required to attend mandatory training sessions every three years. Of course if any major changes occur between these times, training sessions are held as needed. New advisors are trained as new faculty are hired.
New Advising Programs
One of the highlights of the upcoming academic year is the development of the First Year Advisement Program. First-generation college students, particularly minority students, attend USCA. When they arrive on campus for orientation that may very well be the first time they have seen a college campus. This is a completely new experience for them, as they have no one at home who is able to prepare them for what they are about to experience. We want them to at least have one person on campus that they will feel comfortable speaking with if they have questions or encounter any difficulties. The mission of the First Year Advisement Program is to connect each incoming freshman with a support person who will facilitate and guide the student in making the transition into higher education and becoming assimilated into the USC Aiken culture.
The goals of the program and the first year advisors are:
- To create an atmosphere wherein the student feels comfortable asking questions and sharing information.
- To help the student have a clear understanding of higher education and the educational goals of USC Aiken, and reaffirm the decision to pursue higher education.
- To provide the student with needed information on academic policies, procedures, requirements, and programs.
- To aid the student in decision making and help the student learn to be an effective and confident decision-maker.
- To serve as a resource person by connecting the student with relevant support services and programs.
Evaluation and Assessment
Student Evaluation of Advising: Each year as a part of performance funding a question is asked about academic advising and the availability of academic advisors outside of the classroom, (Performance Indicator 2E2) USCA scored an “exceeds” on this indicator with an actual satisfaction rate of students of 97%. In addition to this question, all students are given a USCA advising survey after every advising session (fall and spring) and asked to return the survey to the Office of Advising where they proceed as the next enrollment step. Overall responses on this survey indicate that students are generally very satisfied with advising at USCA.
CURRENT STUDENT SURVEY
| Question | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Overall satisfaction with advising (Question added to 1998 Advising Survey) | NA | NA | NA | NA * | 98.6% | 98.3% | 99.2% |
| 2) Satisfaction with the advisement by faculty within their chosen major | 77% | 79.6% | 73.7% | 85% | Question dropped placed on Alumni Survey | Question dropped placed on Alumni Survey | Question dropped placed on Alumni Survey |
| 3) Availability of academic advisor | 97.4% P. Funding Question |
98.2% P. Funding Question |
96.2% | ||||
| 4) Overall satisfaction with the Office of Advisement Services | N/A | N/A | 89.1% | 91% | 86.7% | 91.9% | 88.3% |
* In 1997 with the advent of the CHE Performance Funding Question concerning the availability of advising both the question content, process for returns, and format of the Advising Survey changed from a random classroom administration to an all student administration which takes place during pre-registration so that all students going through the process of advising have the opportunity to evaluate it. Since many students use TIPS (automatic telephone enrollment) or Desktop Registration procedures, actual course enrollment could not be used. Because of the importance of getting students to respond to the required advising questions, the process was strengthened to get more valid response rates. In Spring 2002, another change is planned. The survey will become much shorter (7 items) and will be administered on-line if computer hook-up to enrollment can be achieved.
In addition to the above types of on-campus evaluations, alumni surveys have been conducted asking the past graduates how satisfied they were with the advisement they received by faculty within their chosen major. Alumni are surveyed three years after graduation. The following results have been found from alumni. While the satisfaction with advisement of current students is increasing, the level of satisfaction with alumni tends to be decreasing. The Office of Advisement is continuing to monitor this trend.
| ACADEMIC YEAR OF GRADUATION | PERCENT SATISFIED WITH FACULTY ADVISEMENT WITHIN THE CHOSEN MAJOR |
|---|---|
| 1989-90 | 95.0% |
| 1990-91 | 95.5% |
| 1991-92 | 92.4% |
| 1992-93 | 85.1% |
| 1993-94 | 81.1% |
| 1994-95 | 87.0% |
| 1995-96 | 84.0% |
| 1996-97 | 88.8% |
| 1997-98 | 93.9% |
4. ACHIEVEMENT OF STUDENTS TRANSFERRING FROM TWO–YEAR TO FOUR-YEAR INSTITUTIONS
University of South Carolina Columbia forwards this data for the entire USC System to the Technical Colleges. USCA does not submit this report.
5. PROCEDURES FOR STUDENT DEVELOPMENT
Purpose and Methods
Over the past three years, the Student Life and Services Division has engaged in a variety of activities to assess its programs and services. These activities have focused on (a) ascertaining if the variety and depth of support services provided to students is sufficient to meet their needs, (b) determining if students are satisfied with the services provided, (c) evaluating the extent to which students are aware of and utilize the services and programs provided, and (d) assessing the impact that programs and services have on students.
The assessment methods used included comprehensive program reviews conducted by each department annually, analysis of relevant data from campus-wide surveys, and development and/or utilization of department specific or program-specific assessment measures. In addition, during the past 3 years all departments at USCA, including Student Life and Services, have been involved in the SACS self-study process and re-affirmation visit. A great deal of assessment information was gathered and evaluated during this process.
Results
Variety and Depth of Support Services
The questions to be addressed in this area are: “Does USCA have programs/services available in all relevant areas and is the programming sufficient to meet the needs of the students?” The annual program reviews conducted by each department (which included an evaluation of USCA programs compared to the programs offered at similar institutions) and the review of USCA programs against SACS requirements were the two methods used for evaluation.
From the reviews conducted in this area, it appears that USCA provides programming in all of the areas deemed essential or important in this field. In the report submitted to CHE in 1998, four areas of weakness (or limited services) were noted. In the past three years, USCA has addressed all of these areas, as described below:
- Disability Services- A Coordinator of Disability Services (30 hrs. per week) has been hired to address the needs of students with learning, physical and psychological disabilities. The Coordinator facilitates appropriate accommodations for students, secures appropriate equipment to meet student needs, and evaluates other environmental factors that may affect the success of students with disabilities. The Coordinator recently conducted a voluntary campus-wide ADA/Section 504 Audit as recommended by the Office of Civil Rights and recommended changes as necessary.
- Alcohol & Drug Education- In fall 2000, a committee of faculty, staff and students was established to deal with a variety of health and wellness issues, including alcohol and drug education. The committee developed short and long-range plans to address this issue on campus. In addition, in the summer of 2000, the Student Life and Services Division received a grant from the South Carolina Department of Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Services under their "Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws" program. With grant funding, a social norms marketing campaign was conducted to address the issue of irresponsible drinking. Programs were held throughout the year with specific emphasis on high-risk groups (i.e. fraternities and sororities, athletic teams).
- Sexual Assault Prevention- For the past 2 years, USCA has been in a collaborative relationship with a local social service agency, the Cumbee Center to Assist Abused Persons, whereby an Education and Prevention Specialist works at USCA for eight hours per week at no charge to the University. The representative provides programs on prevention and support to victims of sexual assault. She is involved in training USCA Public Safety Officers, Peer Educators, and Resident Assistants. She also speaks with new students during Freshman Orientation.
- Greek Life- In fall 2000, an Assistant Director of Student Activities was hired with responsibilities in the area of Greek Life. A variety of programs and educational sessions were implemented last year to strengthen the Greek system. In addition, two of the sororities became affiliated with national Greek houses, providing an additional option for students.
An area that has been a concern of students and administrators for a number of years (but was not specifically mentioned in the 1998 CHE report) is the area of housing for students. Prior to June of 1999, the only on-campus housing available to students was owned and operated by a private developer. Concerns about the lack of control of behavior, the lack of educational and social programming, and policies that were not deemed to be "student friendly" were frequently raised by students and parents. In June of 1999, USCA purchased the facility and hired professional and student staff (resident assistants) to run the facility. Since that time, a comprehensive residence life program has been established, the occupancy rates have been extremely high (with significant waiting lists for fall semesters), and the need for additional housing is being studied.
Satisfaction with Services
The level of satisfaction that students have with the programs and services offered is assessed through evaluations conducted after individual events and through questions that are included in annual surveys conducted by the USCA Assessment Office. The evaluations administered by departments after individual events (study skills workshops, multicultural programs, leadership activities, etc.) consistently indicate that students are very satisfied with the programs and services offered. This satisfaction level is also reflected in the results of the annual student surveys. Several key points highlighted by the results of the 2000 Student Opinion Survey include:
- Satisfaction levels for the Student Services programs and services addressed by the survey (Student Activities, Counseling Center, New Student Orientation, Disability Services, Multicultural Affairs, Public Safety, Athletics, Housing, Health Services, and Intramural Sports) ranged from 95.9% (Disability Services) 68.9 (Housing), with all areas receiving satisfaction ratings of 80% or above, except for Health Services (68.8%) and Housing (69.3%). (See USES OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS section for responses to low ratings in Health Services and Housing.)
- The satisfaction rating for New Student Orientation in 2001 was 93.1% compared to a satisfaction rating of 84% in 1994. Since 1995, the program has undergone extensive review and revision to address student needs.
Impact of Programs and Services on Student Growth & Development
Evaluation of student development includes incorporating questions which relate to student growth and development into the USCA Alumni Survey administered by the Institutional Research and Assessment Office and conducting periodic evaluations of programs and services offered to determine their potential contributions to student development at USCA. Highlights of the most recent Alumni Survey include:
- Of the 1996-98 and 1997-98 graduates surveyed, 67.9% felt that their ability to appreciate cross-cultural differences increased very much or a moderate amount as a result of their experience in general education courses at USCA. Cross-cultural appreciation reflects a strong USCA general education goal (see General Education).
- 77.6% of these graduates felt that their ability to explore values openly and critically increased very much or a moderate amount as a result of their experience in general education courses. The exploration of values reflects a strong USCA general education goal (see General Education).
- 74.4% (up from 51% from two years ago) felt that their educational experiences contributed very much or somewhat to their growth in the area of caring for their physical and mental health, 93.2% felt that these experiences contributed very much or somewhat to their growth in working cooperatively in a group, 89.5% felt that these experiences contributed to their ability to organize their time effectively, and 89.5% felt that these experiences contributed to their ability to lead or guide others.
Uses of Assessment Results
During the past several years a variety of improvements have occurred as a result of the assessment of USCA student services. The following is a highlight of those changes.
- Programs have been initiated or strengthened in the areas of disability services, alcohol and drug education, sexual assault prevention, and Greek life (Detail provided in "Variety and Depth of Support Services" section of report.)
- Two years ago, the University purchased Pacer Downs, the on-campus housing complex for students, from the private development company that previously operated it. A great deal of change has resulted in this area (summarized in "Variety and Depth of Support Services" section of report) since that time. The Office of Housing and Residence Life conducts a comprehensive annual Quality of Life Survey of the residents of Pacer Downs. After the first year of operation under USCA's auspices, 89% of the residents stated that the services offered by the Office of Housing and Residence Life met or exceeded their expectations.
- The Student Health Services program, which currently consists of a contract with the local hospital to provide basic health care services to students, is being completely changed, based on student feedback. Beginning in fall 2001, students will have access to an on-campus Student Health Center. The Health Center will address minor health care situations and refer students to outside health services providers for more serious issues.
6. LIBRARY RESOURCES
For assessment methods for the period 1997/98-99/00, since the last Institutional Effectiveness Report, consist of annual surveys of undergraduate and graduate students and, faculty, classified employees and alumni; collecting circulation, attendance, inter-library loan and reference question data; soliciting comments from on-line patrons via the guest book on the Library’s Homepage; checking the collection against standard bibliographies; and comparing the Library with national standards of the Association of College and Research Libraries.
Annual survey results reveal increasing satisfaction with the Library overall for this reporting period. The satisfaction level changes dramatically with specific questions regarding the adequacy of the book and journal collection. These percentages, however, have experienced an upward trend since the last report. With the increase of electronic indexes and full-text databases offered by the publishing community and subscribed to by the Library, additional resources were made available to the USCA community through the purchase of a CD-ROM server. This server in combination with web-based subscriptions provided access across campus. The CD-ROM server was phased out with the proliferation of web-based databases, which provided a higher rate of reliability and greater ease of access.
Service quality questions all received a majority of positive responses. A number of enhancements to library services have been made as a result of student response, in particular, to the annual survey. Additional drop-in workshops were added to instruct and assist students in the use of Government Documents and a variety of new electronic databases, such as SIRS Knowledge Source. All workshops and user education sessions were expanded to include discussions of Interlibrary Loan and Government Documents.
Enhancements to the conveniences offered to patrons as a result of the annual assessments have also been made. Funds were provided to acquire a curbside book-drop for added convenience in returning library materials, a color printer was purchased, additional computer terminals have been installed, and diskettes are for sale on weekends and during evening hours when the campus bookstore is closed.
Additionally, the Library provided special collection appraisals in English, Business Administration, Nursing, Education, and the Masters in Education for their CHE program reviews; a library resource appraisal for a new degree proposal in Music Education was completed; documentation relating to library support for NCATE and AACSB accreditation was done; and the annual report to AACTE for Education was updated. Information for NLN accreditation reaffirmation was also compiled during this period. Again, needs have been addressed as funding allowed.
At the end of the 99/00 FY, the Library’s ratings according to the ALA Standards for College Libraries, were: Collection 108% (A), Staff 75% (B), Space 68.5% (C). The “A” rating on the collection is somewhat misleading. While this represents a major accomplishment for the University, areas with deficiencies have been identified using the various assessment methods and are being addressed. Space will become a critical need in the not-too-distant future and the Administration is aware of this.
In order to better assess user satisfaction with the Library and the services offered, on-going examination and revision of the survey instrument takes place. The Gregg-Graniteville Library can be proud of its effectiveness in fulfilling its purpose. Things are never static and improvement is constantly being pursued through a variety of assessment tools.
In order for all on-line readers to understand the importance of assessment at USCA the portion of the Undergraduate Catalogue requiring assessment has been reprinted below. If you have any questions about the above institutional effectiveness report or the assessment procedures used at USCA, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Lovely Ulmer-Sottong, Director, Office of Institutional Research and Assessment, University of South Carolina Aiken, 471 University Way, Aiken, S.C. 29801; telephone 803/641-3338; email lovelyu@aiken.sc.edu. Thank you for your interest in assessment at USCA.
ASSESSMENT AT USCA
(reprinted from the 2001 Undergraduate Catalogue, USCA)
Assessment, in a university or college setting, means several things. Assessment is the process of evaluating the success of a university in meeting its mission (institutional assessment), and it is the process associated with evaluating outcomes in relation to stated program goals (program assessment), and it is using course-embedded assessment activities to deliver and evaluate student learning (classroom assessment). Assessment at USCA, then, is the ongoing process of self-improvement through analyzing and evaluating all of our programs and services through a variety of methods and measurements.
The Office of Assessment assists faculty, staff and administrators in gathering data to evaluate the effectiveness of USCA programs and services. The mission of the Office is to coordinate and implement an overall academic assessment program for the University that reflects USCA's institutional mission statement, and includes the assessment of general education and the assessment of the academic disciplines. To this end, the Office seeks to:
- Assess effectively the basic skills of entering students (with between 0-30 credit hours) and exiting students (with between 85-100 credit hours), and to assess other attitudes and skills during appropriate points of a student’s undergraduate experience.
- Coordinate and monitor the assessment of academic programs.
- Serve as the primary assessment consultant to the University administration, academic units, departments/schools, and faculty committees.
- Serve as the primary academic assessment liaison to outside agencies and institutions.
- Conduct and analyze survey research of academic programs, as needed.
- Conduct workshops, as needed, on assessment-related issues.
Student participation in assessment activities is a university priority and obligation, and is mandatory. All students wishing to receive a baccalaureate degree from USCA must complete procedures required for the assessment of general education, and those required by their major and/or their area of concentration and other areas deemed important by the institution to measure its effectiveness. Primary responsibility for the assessment of academic programs within a major or area of concentration, including graduate programs, is with the faculty in each academic unit. Information pertinent to assessment of the major or area of concentration is provided to students by the department from which the degree will be granted.
Primary responsibility for assessing the effectiveness of our General Education curriculum and with other educational quality indicators lies with the Office of Assessment. The Office administers the assessment of general education and administers exams, interviews, focus groups, surveys, questionnaires, and/or other instruments as developed by the Office of Assessment, the academic units and/or the University Assessment Committee.
For USCA’s General Education program assessment, the Office of Assessment notifies students of times, dates and locations of required assessment procedures. Letters are sent to the student’s official home of record, and an attempt is made to telephone the student at the telephone number which the University has on file. Therefore it is important for all students to make the University Records Office aware of their current address and phone number at all times. If a student fails to participate in a required assessment activity, a “hold” will be placed on that student's record. The “hold” will indicate that the student will not be allowed to register for classes and/or that no diploma, certificate, grade report, or enrollment verification will be issued to or for the student. This “hold” will be removed after the student completes the required assessment(s). Generally, assessment tests are administered during March/April and October (around advisement but before pre-registration) and during July orientation for new students. If a student does not take the required assessment during the regularly scheduled times of administration, and wishes to complete enrollment and registration or have a diploma, certificate, grade report or enrollment verification issued, that student must pay a $50. (fifty dollars) administrative charge and arrange for individual testing with the Office of Assessment.
Although assessment is a required activity, the results of any individual assessment activity may not be used for the evaluation of any individual student’s academic progress. Assessment results are compiled and used in the aggregate form; all individual responses are kept confidential. All university assessment reports are the responsibility of the Office of Assessment. For further information on assessment at USCA, the student should contact the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment.
TABLES SUBMITTED TO
THE COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF ACT 255 OF 1992
Programs Eligible for Accreditation and Programs Accredited
Applicable to four- and two-year institutions
Due August 1, 2001
(Back to Contents)
This form includes a list of accrediting bodies for which one or more academic programs are currently accreditable in a South Carolina institution as reported on U.S. Department of Education FORM IPEDS-1C-1 (6-1-94) and/or have been approved by the Commission on Higher Education.
According to Section 59-101-350, the Commission is responsible for collecting “the number and percentage of accredited programs and the number and percentage of programs eligible for accreditation” from four- and two-year post-secondary institutions to be included in the annual report to the General Assembly. The Commission on Higher Education also uses this information as a base to fulfill requirements in Section 59-103-30 for performance funding to collect information on Instructional Quality by looking at the accreditation of degree-granting programs.
If your institution offers one or more programs listed in the Commission’s current Inventory of Academic Degree Programs (http://www.che400.state.sc.us/web/affairs.htm) that is accreditable in one or more of the following categories, you should complete the columns in the table that follows by placing an “x” in the box. For those agencies that accredit individual programs within departments, please put the number of programs in parentheses beside the “x”. An accreditable program is one that is eligible for accreditation, regardless of whether or not the institution chooses to pursue accreditation. An accredited program is one that has been granted full accreditation status by the appropriate accrediting agency.
The addition or deletion of an agency from this list is a prescribed process, administered through the Commission’s Academic Affairs Division. If an agency is added to this list the date that it is added dictates when an accreditable program should be counted “against” the institution with regard to its full accreditation. The most recent agencies that have been added to the list have their corresponding dates listed so that institutions can better calculate the time frame for accreditation. Any agencies that appear on the list without a corresponding date should be understood to have appeared prior to May 1998. For a complete set of policies and procedures regarding this process, see the Commission’s website at: http://www.che400.state.sc.us/web/Academic/accreditation%20guidelines.htm .
Institution: University of South Carolina Aiken
| ACCREDITING AGENCIES AND AREAS | Accreditable Program |
Fully Accredited Program |
Details
on Program (if program not fully accredited-do not complete if fully accredited) |
Date agency/area added to CHE List | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year program added at institution | Institution has chosen NOT to seek accreditation for this prog | Accreditation
Expected (if known) |
|||||
| American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business - International Association for Management Education | An institution
may be accredited by the AACSB or the ACBSP |
||||||
| Business (BUS)-Baccalaureate, Masters', and Doctoral degree programs in business administration and management | X | X | |||||
| Business (BUSA)-Baccalaureate, Masters', and Doctoral degree programs in accounting | |||||||
| ACCREDITING BOARD FOR ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY | |||||||
| Engineering (ENG) - Baccalaureate and master's level programs in engineering | |||||||
Engineering-related (ENGR) - Engineering related programs at the baccalaureate level. |
|||||||
| Engineering Technology (ENGT) - Assc. and baccalaureate degree programs in engineering tech. | |||||||
| ACCREDITING COMMISSION ON EDUCATION FOR HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION | |||||||
| Health Services Administration (HAS) Graduate programs | |||||||
| ACCREDITING COUNCIL ON EDUCATION IN JOURNALISM AND MASS COMMUNICATIONS | |||||||
| Journalism and Mass Communication (JOUR) - Units within institutions offering professional undergraduate and graduate (master's) degree programs | |||||||
| AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPY | |||||||
| Marriage and Family Therapy (MFCC) - Clinical training programs | |||||||
| Marriage and Family Therapy (MFCD) - Graduate degree programs | |||||||
| AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF FAMILY AND CONSUMER SCIENCES (AAFCS) | |||||||
| Home Economics - Baccalaureate prog. | |||||||
| AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSE ANESTHETISTS | |||||||
| Nurse Anesthetists (ANEST) - Generic nurse anesthesia education programs/schools | |||||||
| ACCREDITING
AGENCIES AND AREAS |
Accreditable Program |
Fully Accredited Program |
Details
on Program (if program not fully accredited-do not complete if fully accredited) |
Date agency/area added to CHE List | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year program added at institution | Institution has chosen NOT to seek accreditation for this prog. | Accreditation Expected (if known) |
||||
| AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION | ||||||
| Law (LAW) Professional schools |
||||||
| AMERICAN BOARD OF FUNERAL SERVICE EDUCATION | ||||||
| Funeral Service Education
(FUSER) Independent schools and collegiate departments |
||||||
| AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NURSE MIDWIVES | ||||||
| Nurse Midwifery (MIDWF - Basic certificate and basic master's degree program | ||||||
| AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION | ||||||
| Construction Education (CONST) - Baccalaureate degree programs | ||||||
| AMERICAN COUNCIL ON PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION | ||||||
| Pharmacy (PHAR) - Professional degree programs | ||||||
| AMERICAN COUNSELING ASSOCIATION | ||||||
| Counseling - Masters and Doctoral level programs | ||||||
| AMERICAN CULINARY FEDERATION EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE | ||||||
| Culinary Arts (CUL) - postsecondary programs which award certificates, diplomas, or associate degrees in culinary arts and food services management | ||||||
| AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION | ||||||
| Dental Assisting (DA) | ||||||
| Dental Hygiene (DH) | ||||||
| Dental Laboratory Technology (DT) | ||||||
| Dentistry (DENT) - Programs leading to the D.D.S. or D.M.D. degree advanced general dentistry and specialty programs, and general practice residency programs | ||||||
| AMERICAN DIETETIC ASSOCIATION, THE | ||||||
| Dietetics (DIET) - Coordinated undergraduate programs | ||||||
| Dietetics (DIETI) - Post baccalaureate internship programs | ||||||
| AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION | ||||||
| Librarianship (LIB) - master's program leading to the first professional degree | ||||||
| AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION COUNCIL ON MEDICALEDUCATION AND ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN MEDICAL COLLEGES, LIAISON COMMITTEE ON MEDICAL EDUCATION | ||||||
| Medicine (MED) - Programs leading to the M.D. M.D. degree |
||||||
| ACCREDITING AGENCIES AND AREAS | Accreditable Program | Fully Accredited Program |
Details on Program (if program not fully accredited-do not complete if fully accredited) |
Date agency/area added to CHE List | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year program added at institution | Institution has chosen NOT to seek accreditation for this program |
Accreditation Expected (if known) |
||||
| American occupational therapy association | ||||||
| Occupational Therapist (OT) | ||||||
| Occupational Therapy Assistant (OTA) | ||||||
| AMERICAN PHYSICAL THERAPY ASSOCIATION | ||||||
| Physical Therapy (PTAA) - Programs for the physical therapist assistant | ||||||
| Physical Therapy (PTA) - Professional programs for the physical therapist | ||||||
| AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION | ||||||
| Clinical Psychology (CLPSY) - Doctoral programs | ||||||
| Counseling Psychology (COPSY) - Doctoral programs |
||||||
| Professional Psychology (IPSY) - Predoctoral internship programs | ||||||
| Professional/Scientific Psychology (PSPSY) - Doctoral programs | ||||||
| School of Psychology (SCPSY) B - Doctoral programs | ||||||
| AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS | ||||||
| Landscape Architecture (LSAR) - Baccalaureate and master's programs leading to the first professional degree | ||||||
| AMERICAN SPEECH-LANGUAGE-HEARING ASSOCIATION | ||||||
| Audiology (AUD) - Graduate degree programs | ||||||
| Speech-Language Pathology (SP) - Graduate degree programs | ||||||
| AMERICAN VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION | 5/1998 | |||||
| Veterinary Medicine - Programs leading to a D.V.M. or D.M.V. degree | 5/1998 | |||||
| ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGIATE BUSINESS SCHOOLS AND PROGRAMS | An institution may be accredited by the ACBSP or the AACSB | |||||
| Business (BUAD) - Associate degree programs in business and business-related fields | ||||||
| Business (BUBD) - Baccalaureate degree programs in business and business-related fields | ||||||
| Business (BUMD) - Master degree programs in business and business-related fields | ||||||
| ACCREDITING AGENCIES AND AREAS | Accreditable Program | Fully Accredited Program |
Details on Program (if program not fully accredited-do not complete if fully accredited) |
Date agency/area added to CHE List | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year program added at institution | Institution has chosen NOT to seek accreditation for this program |
Accreditation Expected (if known) |
||||
| COMMISSION ON ACCREDITATION OF ALLIED HEALTH EDUCATION PROGRAMS | ||||||
| Cytotechnologist (CYTO) | ||||||
| Diagnostic Medical Sonographer (DMS) | ||||||
| Electroneurodiagnostic Technologist (ENDT) | ||||||
| Emergency Medical Technician-Paramedic (EMTP) | ||||||
| Histologic Technician/Technologist (HT) | ||||||
| Joint Review Committee - Athletic Training (JRC-AT) | 11/1999 | |||||
| Medical Assistant (MA) | ||||||
| Medical Records Administrator (MRA) | ||||||
| Ophthalmic Medical Assistant (OMA) | ||||||
| Perfusionist (PERF) | ||||||
| Physician Assistant (PA) - Assistant to the primary care physician | ||||||
| Respiratory Therapist (REST) | ||||||
| Respiratory Therapy Technician (RESTT) | ||||||
| Specialist in Blood Bank Technology (SBBT) | ||||||
| Surgeon's Assistant (SA) | ||||||
| Surgical Technologist (ST) | ||||||
| COMMISSION ON COLLEGIATE NURSING EDUCATION (CCNE) | 11/1999 | |||||
| Nursing - Baccalaureate-degree nursing education programs | 11/1999 | |||||
| Nursing - Graduate-degree nursing education programs | 11/1999 | |||||
| COMMISSION ON OPTICIANRY ACCREDITATION | ||||||
| Opticianry (OPLT) - 1-year programs for the ophthalmic laboratory technician | ||||||
| Opticianry (OPD) - 2-year programs for the ophthalmic dispenser | ||||||
| COMPUTING SCIENCE ACCREDITATION BOARD, INC. | ||||||
| Computer Science (COMP) - Baccalaureate programs in computer science | ||||||
| COUNCIL FOR ACCREDITATION OF COUNSELING AND related education programs (CACREP) | 5/1998 | |||||
| Masters degree programs to prepare individuals for community counseling, mental health counseling, marriage and family counseling, school counseling, student affairs practice in higher education, and Doctoral-level programs in counselor education and supervision. | 5/1998 | |||||
| ACCREDITING AGENCIES AND AREAS | Accreditable Program | Fully Accredited Program |
Details on Program (if program not fully accredited-do not complete if fully accredited) |
Date agency/area added to CHE List | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year program added at institution | Institution has chosen NOT to seek accreditation for this program | Accreditation Expected(if known) | ||||
| COUNCIL ON EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH | ||||||
| Community Health Education (CHE) - Graduate programs offered outside schools of public health | ||||||
| Community Health /Preventative Medicine (CHPM) - Graduate programs offered outside schools of public health | ||||||
| Public Health (PH) - Graduate schools of public health | ||||||
| COUNCIL ON REHABILITATION EDUCATION (CORE) |
9/1999 | |||||
| Rehabilitation Counseling | 9/1999 | |||||
| COUNCIL ON SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION | ||||||
| Social Work (SW) - Baccalaureate and master's degree programs | ||||||
| FOUNDATION FOR INTERIOR DESIGN EDUCATION RESEARCH | ||||||
| Interior Design (FIDER) - 2-year pre-professional assistant level programs (certificate and associate degree); first professional degree level programs (master's and baccalaureate degrees and 3-year certificate); and post professional master's degree programs | ||||||
| JOINT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION IN RADIOLOGIC TECHNOLOGY | ||||||
| Radiologic Technology (RAD) - Programs for radiographers (Diploma, associate, baccalaureate programs) | ||||||
| Radiologic Technology (RADTT) - Programs for radiation therapists (Diploma, associate, baccalaureate programs) | ||||||
| JOINT REVIEW COMMITTEE ON EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS IN NUCLEAR MEDICINE TECHNOLOGY | ||||||
| Nuclear Medicine Technologist (NMT) - Programs for the nuclear medicine technologist | ||||||
| NATIONAL ACCREDITING AGENCY FOR CLINICAL LABORATORY SCIENCES | ||||||
| Clinical Laboratory Technician/Medical Laboratory Technician (MLTC) - Certificate program | ||||||
| Clinical Laboratory Technician/Medical Laboratory Technician (MLTAD) - Associate's degree | ||||||
| Clinical Laboratory Science/Medical Technology (MT) - Professional programs (Baccalaureate and master's level) | ||||||
| ACCREDITING AGENCIES AND AREAS | Accreditable Program | Fully Accredited Program |
Details on Program (if program not fully accredited-do not complete if fully accredited) |
Date agency/area added to CHE List | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year program added at institution | Institution has chosen NOT to seek accreditation for this program |
Accreditation Expected (if known) |
||||
| NATIONAL ACCREDITING COMMISSION OF COSMETOLOGY ARTS AND SCIENCES | ||||||
| Cosmetology (COSME) - Postsecondary schools and departments of cosmetology arts & sciences | ||||||
| NATIONAL ARCHITECTURAL ACCREDITING BOARD, INC. | ||||||
| Architecture (ARCH) - first professional degree programs | ||||||
| NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY | ||||||
| Industrial Technology (INDT) - Baccalaureate degree programs | ||||||
| NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS OF ART AND DESIGN | ||||||
| Art & Design (ART) - Degree-granting schools and departments and nondegree-granting schools | ||||||
| NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS OF DANCE | ||||||
| Dance (DANCE) - Institutions and units within institutions offering degree-granting and nondegree-granting programs | ||||||
| NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS OF MUSIC | ||||||
| Music (MUS) - Baccalaureate and graduate degree programs | ||||||
| Music (MUSA) - Community and junior college programs | ||||||
| Music (MUSN) - Nondegree programs | ||||||
| NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS OF THEATER | ||||||
| Theater (THEA) - Institutions and units within institutions offering degree-granting and/or nondegree-granting programs | ||||||
| NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ACCREDITATION OF TEACHER EDUCATION | ||||||
| Teacher Education (TED) - Baccalaureate and graduate programs for the preparation of teachers and other professional personnel for elementary and secondary schools | X | X | ||||
| NATIONAL LEAGUE FOR NURSING, INC | ||||||
| Nursing (PNUR) - Practical nursing programs | ||||||
| Nursing (ADNUR) - Associate degree programs | X | X | ||||
| Nursing (DNUR) - Diploma programs | ||||||
| Nursing (NUR) - Baccalaureate and higher degree programs | X | X | ||||
| ACCREDITING AGENCIES AND AREAS | Accreditable Program | Fully Accredited Program |
Details on Program (if program not fully accredited-do not complete if fully accredited) |
Date agency/area added to CHE List | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Year program added at institution | Institution has chosen NOT to seek accreditation for this program |
Accreditation Expected (if known) |
||||
| SOCIETY OF AMERICAN FORESTERS | ||||||
| Forestry (FOR) - Programs leading to a bachelor's or higher first professional degree | ||||||
Total __4__ __4__
This information to be used as a base for performance indicator 3D
Institution: University of South Carolina Aiken
Courses Taught by Faculty
Applicable for Four- and Two-Year Institutions – Measured for Fall
1999
(Back to Contents)
According to Section 59-101-350, the Commission is responsible for collecting “the percent of lower division instructional courses taught by full-time faculty, part-time faculty, and graduate assistants” from four- and two-year post-secondary institutions to be included in the annual report to the General Assembly.
The Commission will use previously reported CHEMIS information for data in this table. Institutions will have an opportunity to proof this information prior to the publication of the January 2001 report. Faculty definition will be any faculty, staff or graduate assistant who teach a credit course.
Success of Students in Developmental Courses
Applicable to Four-Year Colleges and Universities Due August 1, 2001
According to section 59-101-350, the commission is responsible for collecting “the percent and number of students enrolled in remedial courses and the number of students exiting remedial courses and successfully completing entry-level curriculum courses” from four-year institutions to be included in the annual report to the general assembly. The following information will be collected from the four-year colleges and universities, but excludes the research universities, as these institutions do not offer these types of courses.
For purposes of counting students who exit developmental courses and successfully complete the appropriate entry level course, a student in more than one developmental course and completing more than one entry level course should be counted once for each developmental courses he/she exits and once for each entry level course he/she completes. Appropriate entry-level courses for which successful completion is determined will be defined by the developmental instructor as the course for which the student is being prepared.
| NUMBER
OF FIRST-TIME, FULL-TIME ENTERING FRESHMEN ENROLLED IN FALL 1999 (include first-time freshmen who enrolled either part-time or full-time in the Summer 1999 if they returned full-time in the Fall 1999) Item (1) |
NUMBER OF STUDENTS IN ITEM (1) WHO WERE ENROLLED IN ONE OR MORE DEVELOPMENTAL
COURSES IN SUMMER OR FALL 1999 Item (2) |
Number
of those students in each developmental course who successfully completed
the appropriate entry level course by the end of Spring 2001 Item (3) |
|---|---|---|
| 442 | NONE - eliminated developmental courses at USCA 1999 |
Institution: University of South Carolina Aiken
Student Involvement in Sponsored Research
Applicable to Four-Year Institutions – Measured for Fall 1999 Due August 1, 2001
According to Section 59-101-350, the Commission is responsible for collecting “the percent of graduate and upper division undergraduate students participating in sponsored research programs” from four-year institutions to be included in the annual report to the General Assembly.
The numbers included here should reflect the graduate and upper division undergraduate students who participate in sponsored research programs. Each institution that receives research dollars generated by external funding (sponsored research) should report the number of students who benefit from these dollars.
The CHE will calculate the percentage using these data and headcount enrollment data from the Fall 2001 IPEDS Enrollment Forms.
|
Number of Students Participating in Sponsored
Research (Exclude first professional students) |
|
|---|---|
| Upper Division, Undergraduate Students | 5 |
| Graduate Students | 0 |
Institution: University of South Carolina Aiken
Results of Professional Examinations
Applicable to all sectors – Measured for April 1, 2000-March
31, 2001 Due August 1, 2001
According to Section 59-101-350, the Commission is responsible for collecting “student scores on professional examinations with detailed information on state and national means, passing scores, and pass rates, as available, and with information on such scores over time, and the number of students taking each exam” from four- and two-year institutions to be included in the annual report to the General Assembly. The Commission on Higher Education also uses this information as the primary source with which to fulfill requirements in Section 59-103-30 for performance funding to collect information on Instructional Quality and Graduates’ Achievements by looking at the scores of graduates on post-undergraduate professional, graduate, or employment-related examinations and certification tests.
Past committee work and the development of performance funding have defined the collection of this information to include only first-time test takers (except the teacher education exams at four-year institutions, which include all test takers) for those students who completed an examination during the period of April 1, 2000 through March 31, 2001. The following list displays the exams that each sector has reported in the past. Please use this list as a guide for the exams you report this year on the table provided.
In addition to this information, the Commission is interested in collecting supporting data for other exams that may be used in the IE and performance funding processes. These exams were identified in a meeting with institutional, Commission staff, and State Tech Board representatives in 1999 for possible inclusion in these data collection efforts. As we continue to look closer at performance indicator 7D and through data verification efforts, we are interested in more detailed information that could affect the inclusion of these exams, or others. Please provide the information on the additional exams as requested below. Should you have suggestions for other exams to include here, please add those to the list with the appropriate information.
The Commission will request national and state pass rates and any additional information for these examinations, as it is available, from national and state agencies to be used in the report to the General Assembly. These national and state agencies can be found in “A Closer Look.”
| Name of Exam | Date(s) Administered | # of Examinees | # of 1st Time Examinees | # of 1st Time Examinees who Passed | % 1st Time Examinees Passing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
National
Council Licensure Exam. (NCLEX) - Registered Nurse |
Scheduled on Individual bases | 70 | 70 | 55 | 78.6 |
| PRAXIS Series II: Core Battery Professional Knowledge | |||||
PRAXIS Series
II: Principles of Learning & Teaching (K-6) |
2000/04/29 | 0 | -- | 0 | |
| 2000/06/24 | 1 | -- | 1 | ||
| 2000/09/23 | 0 | -- | 0 | ||
| 2000/11/18 | 2 | -- | 1 | ||
| 2001/01/20 | 1 | -- | 0 | ||
| 2001/03/10 | 2 | -- | 1 | ||
PRAXIS
PLT (0522) Total |
6 | -- | 3 | 50% |
| Name of Exam | Date(s) Administered | # of Examinees | # of 1st Time Examinees | # of 1st Time Examinees who Passed | % 1st Time Examinees Passing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PRAXIS Series II: Principles
of Learning & Teaching (5-9) |
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
| PRAXIS
Series II: Principles of Learning & Teaching (7-12) |
-- | -- | -- | -- | -- |
| PRAXIS Series
II: Specialty Area Tests |
2000/04/29 | 13 | 10 | ||
| 2000/06/24 | 28 | 26 | |||
| 2000/09/23 | 9 | 9 | |||
| 2000/11/18 | 16 | 14 | |||
| 2001/01/20 | 2 | 1 | |||
| 2001/03/10 | 21 | 19 | |||
| PRAXIS Specialty
Area Exams Total |
89 | 79 | 88.76% | ||
| total educaiton
licensure exams |
95 | 82 | 86.3% | ||
| total licensure
pass rates usca education and nursing |
165 | 137 | 83.0% |
Additional Examinations Due August 1, 2001
The exams below represent additional examinations identified through Fall 1999 institutional meetings. Please provide the following information for these exams. Feel free to add others that may reflect the degree programs at your institution and measure the success of your students on professional examinations.
| Exam | Degree(s) leading to this exam at your institution |
# Graduates completing these degree(s) (April 1, 1999 – March 31, 2000) |
# Tested (If known) |
Dates Tested (If known) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| American Association of State Social Work Boards (AASSWB) – Basic Level | ||||
| AASSWB – Intermediate Level | ||||
| AASSWB – Advanced (Independent) Level | ||||
| Fundamentals of Engineering | ||||
| Fundamentals of Geology |
PLACEMENT DATA ON GRADUATES
Name of Institution:
Academic Year for Graduating Students:
Act 255 of 1992 requires public institutions of higher learning are required to report placement data on graduates. By including the placement data as part of the alumni follow-up survey, institutions will be reporting biannually on graduates three years prior. Please indicate the number of responses to each item and the percentage in the appropriate columns. (Individual percentages are rounded to the next highest number).
How many graduates did you survey?
|
402 |
|
How many surveys were returned?
|
99 |
|
Survey Based on (circle one):
|
Sample |
Total Group |
What percent of your graduates does this represent?
|
92 |
|
What is the survey response rate?
|
25 |
| # of Responses | % of Total | |
|---|---|---|
| a. Prior to leaving college | 32 | 34% |
| b. Less than one month | 18 | 19% |
| c. 1 to 3 months | 12 | 13% |
| d. 4 to 6 months | 10 | 11% |
| e. 7 to 12 months | 7 | 7% |
| f. Over 12 months | 6 | 6% |
| g. Have not obtained a full-time job | 2 | 2% |
| h. Did not seek a full-time job | 8 | 8% |
| Total | 95 | 100% |
| # of Responses | % of Total | |
|---|---|---|
| a. Continuing my education full-time | 3 | 3% |
| b. Employed and continuing my education | 16 | 17% |
| c. Employed full-time | 60 | 63% |
| d. Employed part-time | 5 | 5% |
| f. Serving in Armed Forces | 1 | 1% |
| h. Unemployed seeking work | 4 | 4% |
| i. Unemployed seeking work | 3 | 3% |
| j. Other | 4 | 4% |
| Total | 96 | 100% |
| # of Responses | % of Total | |
|---|---|---|
| a. Highly related | 59 | 62% |
| b. Moderately related | 12 | 13% |
| c. Slightly related | 9 | 9% |
| d. Not related | 10 | 11% |
| e. Not employed | 5 | 5% |
| Total | 95 | 100% |
| # of Responses | % of Total | |
|---|---|---|
| a. Highly related | 54 | 62% |
| b. Moderately related | 18 | 21% |
| c. Slightly related | 4 | 5% |
| d. Not related | 10 | 11% |
| e. Not employed | 1 | 1% |
| Total | 87 | 100% |
| # of Responses | % of Total | |
|---|---|---|
| a. South Carolina | 64 | 67% |
| b. Southeast, outside of South Carolina | 21 | 22% |
| c. Outside the Southeast | 5 | 5% |
| d. Not employed | 5 | 5% |
| Total | 95 | 100% |
RESULTS OF INSTITUTIONAL ALUMNI SURVEYS
Name of Institution: University
of South Carolina Aiken
Year: 1997-98
Listed below are the common questions to be used by all public institutions and the requested aggregate data for your institutions should be placed in the appropriate columns.
| How many students were surveyed? | 402 |
|||
| What percentage of students responded? | 25% |
|||
| Was this population a sample or the total group? | Total |
|||
| # Of Responses to Survey | % Very Satisfied | % Satisfied | % Somewhat Satisfied | % Somewhat Dissatisfied | % Dissatisfied | % Very Dissatisfied | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 MAJOR Program of Study | 98 | 61 | 30 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 0 |
| 1.2 INSTRUCTION in the major | 98 | 58 | 34 | 6 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| 1.3 GENERAL EDUCATION program of study (non-major requirements | 97 | 31 | 54 | 14 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 1.4 INSTRUCTION in general education | 97 | 37 | 52 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 1.5 OVERALL ACADEMIC EXPERIENCE | 97 | 55 | 42 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| # Of Responses to Survey | % Weekly | % Monthly | % Annually | % Less Often | % Never | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.1 Career-related advanced education or training. | 97 | 21 | 27 | 37 | 7 | 8 |
| 2.2 "Lifelong learning"/personal enrichment studies outside career area(s) | 97 | 24 | 23 | 22 | 21 | 11 |
| 2.3 Professional or service organizations | 96 | 9 | 31 | 25 | 16 | 19 |
| 2.4 Volunteer, public or community service | 96 | 20 | 21 | 23 | 20 | 17 |
| 2.5 Social/recreational organization | 97 | 35 | 15 | 9 | 27 | 13 |
| 2.6 Support or participation in the arts | 96 | 6 | 13 | 23 | 31 | 26 |
| # Of Responses to Survey | % Strongly | % Moderately | % Somewhat | % None at all |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 98 | 10 | 42 | 32 | 16 |
| # Of Responses to Survey | % All | % Most | % Some | % Few | % None |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 98 | 52 | 29 | 7 | 2 | 10 |