ASSESSMENT PROCEDURES

There shall be procedures for assessing and documenting the extent to which each professional public health, other professional and academic degree student has

Commented [E39]: Need to get the number.

Commented [E40]: Link to full report (still needs to be

finalized).

demonstrated achievement of the competencies defined for his or her degree program and area of concentration.

Interpretation. A school of public health shall award or recommend the award of a degree only

when the student has demonstrated mastery of necessary theories, concepts and content, and demonstrated competence in the skills defined in the competencies. Procedures for measuring attainment of competencies may include evaluation of performance in practice placements, written project reports or theses, comprehensive examinations and professional credentialing examinations, as examples. Neither grades alone nor the successful completion of a set of required courses should be considered sufficient evidence that a student has mastered the necessary content or demonstrated proficiency in the application of skills. A curriculum is more than a set of required courses. Judgment about the success of an individual student in achieving the competencies should include an assessment about the student’s ability to select theories, methods and techniques from across the content matter of a field, to integrate and synthesize knowledge and to apply it to the solution of public health problems. The manner in which this assessment is done may differ between professional and academic programs, among degrees and among specializations.

Schools should be taking steps to ensure graduation rates as high as the school can reasonably attain, but no lower than 70% for baccalaureate and master’s degrees and 60% for doctoral degrees. If the school cannot demonstrate graduation rates that meet or exceed these thresholds, the school must demonstrate that its graduation rates are higher than the average graduation rates for other degrees at the same level offered by the institution.

Job placement rates must also be monitored and should also be as high as the school can reasonably attain, but no lower than 80% by degree among graduates who can be located. If the school cannot demonstrate job placement rates that meet or exceed this threshold, the school must demonstrate that its job placement rates are higher than the average job placement rates for other degrees at the same level offered by the institution. Note: “job placement” includes both employment and pursuit of additional education through enrollment in educational or training programs.

Required Documentation

2.7.A. Description of the procedures used for monitoring and evaluating student progress in achieving the expected competencies, including procedures for identifying competency attainment in practice or research, as applicable, and in culminating experiences.

Data Templates 2.6.1a and 2.6.1b show where and how each competency is assessed in each program. GSPH fully integrates student and program assessments. That is, each student is assessed on each competency; some of these assessments are returned to the student as feedback, and some are used at a program level to evaluate whether students in general are achieving competencies. Program-level assessments are reported annually as a part of the Middle States accreditation process.

As shown in Data Templates 2.6.1a and 2.6.1b, the first line of student achievement evaluation includes assessments within courses and, to some extent, overall course grades. We believe that course grades and component evaluations within courses provide a good assessment of basic 80 |

knowledge-based competencies. Courses are designed to help students achieve specific required competencies, and course assessments are specifically designed to assess them. For MPH core courses, evidence of this is provided by the CPH exam. GSPH has paid for all interested students to take the CPH exam since the February 2012 exam, with about one-half to two-thirds of MPH students taking the exam each year.

Higher-level and integrative competencies are generally assessed in qualifying and

comprehensive exams, evaluations of practice experiences, thesis/dissertation defenses, and in the MPH capstone course, as described below and as detailed in tables 2.6.1b. Each of these experiences is evaluated on appropriate forms, which explicitly rate the student on relevant competencies. A few example forms are shown in the electronic resource file.

• MPH and DrPH practicum experiences and competencies are assessed by preceptors and faculty advisors.

• All essays/theses/dissertations are reviewed by committees; theses and dissertations must be orally defended.

• Generally near the end of the first year, MS students take a comprehensive exam that assesses their basic competencies (which vary by program).

• Doctoral students take a preliminary exam around the end of the first or second year to assess basic competencies. A comprehensive exam and dissertation proposal (separately or combined) around the third year assess more advanced competencies involving research and communication skills.

• Students are expected to achieve a B or better in MPH core courses, and all students are expected to maintain a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Detailed policies are available in the academic handbook. Each semester, any student who receives a grade of B- or below in a core course, who has a term or cumulative GPA below 3.0, or who meets one of several other criteria of concern, is discussed by the EPCC, which decides on appropriate actions and communicates with the student’s program director.

• Reviews of student progress also take place at the departmental level by program directors and/or within academic/curriculum committees.

2.7.B. Identification of outcomes that serve as measures by which the school will evaluate student achievement in each program, and presentation of data assessing the school’s performance against those measures for each of the last three years. Outcome measures must include degree completion and job placement rates for all degrees (including bachelors, masters and doctoral degrees) for each of the last three years. See CEPH Data Templates 2.7.1 and 2.7.2. If degree completion rates in the maximum time period allowed for degree completion are less than the thresholds defined in this criterion’s interpretive language, an explanation must be provided. If job placement (including pursuit of additional education), within 12 months following award of the degree, includes fewer than 80% of the graduates at any level who can be located, an explanation must be provided.

Commented [E41]: If time allows, add data on correlation

between CPH scores and core course grades.

Commented [E42]: Link to a few examples. We may still

need to collect these. Practicum evaluation forms are linked above in the practicum section.

Commented [E43]: link

Outcome measures at the program and school level include the detailed measures described in 2.7.a, and the higher-level measures described in criterion 1. Graduation data are shown in

Tables 2.7.1A-E. Employment data are shown in 2.7.2A-E. Both graduation and employment

rates are well above the specified cutoffs for all programs and all years with the exception of the DrPH program which can sometimes fall below cutoffs due to small numbers.

2.7.C. An explanation of the methods used to collect job placement data and of graduates’ response rates to these data collection efforts. The school must list the number of graduates from each degree program and the number of respondents to the graduate survey or other means of collecting employment data.

All graduating students are required to complete an exit survey in the semester of graduation. The survey does request placement data, however many graduates do not have employment secured at that time. Since 2011, the school has collected placement data from recent graduates during the fall. The Recent Grad Survey is sent via e-mail to all graduates from the preceding December, April, June, and August graduating cohorts. The response rate has been

approximately 50 percent for the past three years of survey administration. Following the survey, a request is made to departmental staff and faculty to assist in collecting employment status information for those recent grads not completing the survey. The Office of Student Affairs further supplements this data with social media and Internet searches, resulting in a final “response” rate of approximately 90 percent. The final data set is compiled into the ASPPH annual report and the school’s Graduate Outcomes Report released by the Career Services office. Outcomes reports are accessible on the school’s website and Intranet for prospective and current students to view.

2.7.D. In fields for which there is certification of professional competence and data are available from the certifying agency, data on the performance of the school’s graduates on these national examinations for each of the last three years.

A large percentage of our MPH students and some other students take the CPH exam each year. Pass rates are given in table 2.7.3.

Table 2.7.3. CPH Exam Pass Rates

# GSPH students taking the CPH exam*

GSPH pass rate National pass rate February 2012 62 87% 84% October 2012 14 86% 82% February 2013 49 80% 85% October 2013 7 100% 76% February 2014 48 85% 79%

Commented [KME44]: Links?

*Includes those graduating within 9 months prior to the exam

Genetic counseling students take a board certification exam. Pass rates for the past three years are 8/9 in 2011, 10/10 in 2012, and 9/9 in 2013.

2.7.E. Data and analysis regarding the ability of the school’s graduates to perform competencies in an employment setting, including information from periodic assessments of alumni,

employers, and other relevant stakeholders. Methods for such assessments may include key informant interviews, surveys, focus groups and documented discussions.

These assessments and results are discussed in section 2.6f.

2.7.F. Assessment of the extent to which this criterion is met and an analysis of the school’s strengths, weaknesses, and plans relating to this criterion.

Strengths | Assessment of both students and programs is well-integrated into the culture; it is a regular part of every program annually.

Weaknesses | Direct assessment of students’ abilities to apply competencies in the workplace is difficult. Meaningful input from employers, and even alumni, is difficult to gather.

Plans | Formal tracking of student competency achievement at the individual level is not planned. We do however, plan to improve our database for tracking competency achievement at the program level.