2022-2023 Ranching Systems Program Assessment

Annual Program Assessment Report

Academic Year Assessed: 2022-2023 College: Agriculture

Department: Animal and Range Sciences Submitted by: Carl Yeoman

Download a pdf of this information.

Program(s) Assessed:

Indicate all majors, minors, certificates and/or options that are included in this assessment:

Annual Assessment Process(CHECK-OFFLIST)

1. Data are collected as defined by Assessment Plan: YES  
2. Population or unbiased samples of collected assignments are scored by at least two faculty members using scoring rubrics to ensure inter-rater reliability. YES

3. Areas where the acceptable performance threshold has not been met are YES
4. Assessment scores were presented at a program/unit faculty YES
5. The faculty reviewed the assessment results, and responded accordingly (Check all appropriate lines)

Gather additional data to verify or refute the result.YES 

Identify potential curriculum changes to try to address the problem: YES Change the acceptable performance threshold, reassess: 

Choose a different assignment to assess the outcome: 

Faculty may reconsider thresholds: 

Evaluate the rubric to assure outcomes meet student skill level:

Use Bloom’s Taxonomy to consider stronger learning outcomes :

OTHER: The assessment committee gathered additional data to verify or refute the results of this evaluation. New instructors and challenging learning environments may have influenced the results of this data.

6. Does your report demonstrate changes made because of previous assessment results (closing the loop?        NO

1. Assessment Plan, Schedule and Data
   1. Please provide a multi-year assessment schedule that will show when all program learning outcomes will be assessed, and by what criteria (data). (You may use the table provided, or you may delete and use a different format).

b. What are your threshold values for which you demonstrate student achievement?

What was Done:

We deviated from the outlined assessment plan for the following reasons:

• There was only 1 student in the course that was designated to assess The small sample size would not have yielded conclusive evidence of program performance.
• The plan was altered to assess PLO #4, Problem Solving to coincide with the assessment plans of the other degree programs within the Department of Animal and Range A coordinated assessment offers more robust results and increases the ability of the Department to improve course offerings and teaching techniques.
• Beginning in 2024, the assessment will focus on student progression within the learning objectives from their Freshman to Senior years, similar to how the Animal Science program is conducting their assessment.

How Data Were Collected:

An assignment was selected from the RS 406 Finances and Decision Making in Ranching Systems course to serve as the medium for assessing Problem Solving in students. The assignment was to create a scientific poster summarizing the Ranch Problem they were assigned during their second summer internship. Each poster should introduce the issue of concern (problem) for the host ranch, outline the steps undertaken to address the issue, analyze and summarize the related data, and present the proposed solution to the ranch problem. A total of 2 student assignments from RS 406 were evaluated for this assessment. The low sample size is the result of Ranching Systems being a relatively new program with growing student numbers in the Senior level courses.

Assignments were collected by the instructor, and the ungraded files were shared with the evaluators who scored them according to rubrics designed to assess Learning Objective 4 – Problem Solving. Two faculty members within Animal and Range Sciences independently scored each assignment according to the rubrics.

b) Explain the assessment process, and who participated in the analysis of the

The RS 406 assignments were manually scored using the rubrics for assessment Learning Objective 4 by Jane Ann Boles and Thomas Bass. The student’s final score was calculated from an average of the scores of the 2 evaluators. The number of final scores above 2.0 were divided by the total number of scores to determine the percent of scores above 2.0.

The average score was 2.4 with a range of 2.75 – 2.0. Both students scored 2.4, resulting in 100% of the students scoring above 2.0 for Problem Solving. This exceeds the threshold of 80% of the students scoring above 2.0 for Problem Solving.

Table 1. Results of assessment for PLO #4 Problem Solving for each individual student by reviewer.

Table 2. Rubric for the Assessment of: PLO #4 Problem Solving

Threshold value = ≥80% of students will meet or exceed Level 2 competency

4. What Was Learned

2. Areas of strength – With a sample size of 2 students, the ability to draw useful conclusions from this assessment data is inadequate. Still, the average score for the assignments in both classes was greater than 0. Therefore, the students evaluated demonstrated adequate skills in problem solving. Students did exceptionally well in defining the problem and proposing and implementing solutions.
3. Areas that need improvement – A larger sample size will be critical to future assessments of the Ranching Systems Program. As the program grows and student numbers increase, more meaningful conclusions can be drawn based on assessment data.

Efforts to assess students as Freshman then again as Seniors should be the focus of the assessment. This will ensure that the Program assessment is capturing student growth and improvement, rather than a snapshot of student performance.

Specifically for PLO #4, Problem Solving: Students could improve their use of data to solve problems. The lowest scoring metrics for the students related to their ability to identify data that is relevant to the issue and how to apply the data effectively to formulate a solution to the problem.

5.  How We Responded

1. Describe how “What Was Learned” was communicated to the department, or program faculty. Was there a forum for faculty to provide feedback and recommendations?

The assessment was presented to the Animal and Range Sciences faculty during our faculty retreat and time was allotted for feedback and recommendations.

1. Based on the faculty responses, will there any curricular or assessment changes (such as plans for measurable improvements, or realignment of learning outcomes)? YES

If yes, when will these changes be implemented?

Curricular changes were discussed, including having faculty integrate the I.D.E.A. Model for Problem Solving into their curriculum. These changes could be implemented immediately (Fall of 2023).

Please include which outcome is targeted, and how changes will be measured for improvement. If other criteria is used to recommend program changes (such as exit surveys, or employer satisfaction surveys) please explain how the responses are driving department, or program decisions.

1. When will the changes be next assessed?

Changes in Outcome 4, Problem Solving will be assessed again in 2025

6.  Closing the Loop

1. Based on assessment from previous years, can you demonstrate program level changes that have led to outcome improvements? This is the first assessment of PLO #4 Problem Solving. Steps are being taken to assess incoming freshman on the PLOs and then compare to Seniors in the Program. This will provide more thorough understanding of how the Program is performing with regard to outcome improvements.