When we have official notice from IHL that the PhD program has been suspended, we can remove that program from our Assessment Programs inventory.

(1)

Margie 1. Hobbs, 04:08 PM 3/15/2006, Re: Fwd: TESOL Page 1 of2 X-Sender: [email protected]

X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.1.2.0 Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:08:47 -0600

Tr'\" Holly Reynolds <[email protected]>

"-...-.11: "Margie J. Hobbs" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Fwd: TESOL

Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

X-PMX-Version: 5.1.2.240295, Antispam-Engine: 2.3.0.1, Antispam-Data: 2006.3.15.135106

Holly, I am in agreement with the rationale for requesting the move to incorporate a strong assessment component in the completely reorganized TESOL program. Your request indicated the reorganization is to begin immediately but does not provide a timeline for its completion. If the program can provide a timeline for the completion of the program reorganization and commit to providing a strong assessment plan that is developed in conjunction with the program reorganization, this office can approve the deferral of submision of an assessment plan. The assessment plan would be expected to be submitted upon completion of the program reorganization. The exact timing for submission of the first complete assessment report will depend on the timing of the first graduates of the reorganized program. So that date will need to be projected at the time of the plan's submission.

When we have official notice from IHL that the PhD program has been suspended, we can remove that program from our Assessment Programs inventory.

p~ '"'9:52 AM 3/15/2006, Holly Reynolds wrote:

~rgie,

This is our official request to postpone writing an assessment plan for TESOL for your files. Thanks

Holly

X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 15 Mar 200609:36:38 -0600

To: [email protected]

From: Glenn Hopkins <[email protected]> Subject: TESOL

Cc: [email protected]

X-PMX-Version: 5.1.2.240295, Antispam-Engine: 2.3.0.1, Antispam-Data: 2006.3.15.72107

Holly, as you know, the TESOL program will be moving from the School of Education to the College of Liberal Arts where it will be under the auspices of the Department of Modern Languages. This change means that this program will be completely reorganized.

The program will be thoroughly reviewed by the Department; that review will begin this term. There will be significant changes in the program as a completely new group of faculty with a different perspective takes ntrol of the program. We already know, for example, that this program, which offered the master's and ctorate in the School of Education, will offer only a master's program in the College, i.e., the doctorate has been eliminated. A major change, and one that affects the master's level courses as well. The department will be spending much time thinking about and organizing this new program in the College.

3/16/2006 Printed for "Margie 1. Hobbs" <[email protected]>

(2)

Margie 1. Hobbs, 04:08 PM 3115/2006, Re: Fwd: TESOL Page 2 of2 To ask them to write an assessment document based on the old program would be seen as a waste of time -- they will be assessing something that we know will not exist. And, in a very real sense, asking them to write an assessment plan for the old program while they spending much time planning the new program -'JnS the risk of trivializing assessment, something that must be avoided. Assessment has only a few ____nampions on campus, and those of us who support assessment must be able to defend our procedures.

I don't want to have to defend, and could not defend, requiring an assessment report while we are

thoroughly reviewing the structure of the program. Right now the appropriate question is not if the current program has been effective.The question now is what the program should be and how we can find

resources to make it strong. Once we have made those decisions, we will be ready to develop a plan to assess the effectiveness of the newly structured program.

GH

lI1argie Hobbs, Ph.D.

\ssociate Director of Institutional Research and Assessment rhe University of Mississippi

WO Old Public Relations Building :>.0. Box 1848

J

niversity, Mississippi 38677-1848 :>hone:662-915-7387

=ax: 662-915-5400 :' - "JFIDENTIALITY NOTE:

r

h..o email and any attachments may be confidential and protected by legal privilege. If you are not the

ntended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the email or any attachment s prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender md deleting this copy and the reply from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.

3/16/2006 Printed for "Margie 1. Hobbs" <[email protected]>

(3)

ASSESSMENT PLAN

FOR

Modern Languages - TESL

Masters

(Instructional Degree Program) (Degree Level)

September 2005-August 2007 September 14,2007

(Assessment Period Covered) (Date Submitted)

Expanded Statement of Institutional Purpose Linkage:

Institutional Mission Reference: Science, Social Science, Humanities, and the Arts. The University will continue its traditional leadership in the Liberal Arts by emphasizing existing programs of strength in: the mathematical, biological, and physical sciences; the social and behavioral sciences; the humanities and the arts; and the programs that sustain nationally important centers of research and service in these areas.

University Vision Statement (Goal) Supported: Graduate and Professional Programs. The University will provide high quality graduate and professional education in a range of disciplines and will produce research and scholarship that is nationally recognized and supports the economic, healthcare, and cultural development of the state, the region, and the nation.

Intended Educational (Student Learning) Outcomes:

Outcome 1: Students will demonstrate advanced oral proficiency in English.

Outcome 2: Students will demonstrate an in-depth familiarity with theoretical issues related to the teaching and acquisition of English as a Second Language.

Outcome 3: Students will demonstrate the ability to teach English as a second language to learners of English in higher educational contexts.

Outcome 4: Students will have the ability to conduct original research in applied linguistics.

Faculty Involvement

How Were Faculty Involved in Developing the Assessment Plan for this Program? The Chair of the Department, the Director of the TESL and two other faculty members worked together on this report.

Submitted by:

Donald Dyer

_

(Program Assessment Representative)

Reviewed by:

Holly Reynolds

_

(Appropriate Dean's or Vice Chancellor's Office)

(4)

ASSESSMENT PLAN: OUTCOME #1

Modern Languages - TESL

(Instructional Degree Program)

FOR

Masters

(Degree Level)

September 2005-August 2007 September 14,2007

Intended Educational (Student) Learning Outcome

#1

(repeated/rom Linkage Page):

Outcome #1: Students will demonstrate advanced oral proficiency in English.

First Means of Assessment for Outcome #1:

1.1-1. Means

0/

Assessment and Data Collection Plan: Using the measures and rubrics of the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL), the faculty will administer a 20-minute SOPI (Simulated Oral Proficiency Exam) to all graduating masters students. On a word scale which tests for the levels Novice (no appreciable skills), Intermediate (basic communicative skills), Advanced (ability to extrapolate and hypothesize) and Superior (having the hallmarks of a native speaker), breaking each level into Low, Mid, and High, students will be expected to score Advanced to succeed. As set forth in The Tester Training Manual,

edited by Kathryn Buck and subsequently revised, the criteria used for judging performance on this exam at the advanced level include "being able to respond to grammatically complex content questions in [English] dealing with topics of general interest and the special fields of methodology of language teaching, second language acquisition and learning, linguistics and culture, by producing extended discourse in meaningful, appropriate utterances with near-native pronunciation and grammatically correct linguistic structures."

1.1-2. Define Criteria/or Success: Students will be expected to score "Advanced" on the ACTFL scale in order to succeed.

1.1-3. Describe Data Collected, Data Analysis, and Whether Criteria/or Success Were Met:

1.1-4. Describe How Assessment Results Were Used to Improve Instructional Program:

Second Means of Assessment for Outcome #1:

1.2-1. Means

0/

Assessment and Data Collection Plan: Students will be evaluated for their oral competence during their oral comprehension examinations with the use of an evaluation rubric that will measure student performance in five critical areas. These areas include the expression of appropriately meaningful ideas, examples that support their discussion, the organization of narratives and descriptions using a variety of linguistic structures with few errors, appropriate vocabulary and accentuation.

1.2-2. Define Criteria for Success: Each component of the rubric will be evaluated using a 1-5 scale, with 1 as 'poor" and 5 as "excellent." At least 75% of student scores for each component of the rubric are expected to be 3 or above on this scale.

1.2-3. Describe Data Collected, Data Analysis, and Whether Criteria/or Success Were Met: 1.2-4. Describe How Assessment Results Were Used to Improve Instructional Program:

(5)

ASSESSMENT PLAN: OUTCOME #2

Modern Languages - TESL

FOR

Masters

(Degree Level)

September 200S-August 2007 September 14,2007

Intended Educational (Student) Learning Outcome

#2

(repeatedjrom Linkage Page):

Outcome #2: Students will demonstrate an in-depth familiarity with theoretical issues related to the teaching and acquisition of English as a Second Language.

First Means of Assessment for Outcome #2:

2.1-1. Means oj Assessment and Data Collection Plan: Students will receive an acceptable evaluation on a final written comprehensive examination covering Methodology of Teaching English as a Second Language, Second Language Acquisition, and Linguistics, upon conclusion of graduate coursework. With the use of a rubric which measures five important areas, graduate students will be evaluated in final written comprehensive examinations. These areas include, among others, the expression of appropriately meaningful ideas, the use of examples that support their discussion, the organization of narratives and descriptions using a variety of linguistic structures with fewer errors and appropriate vocabulary, orthography, accentuation, and punctuation. 2.1-2. Define Criteria jor Success: Each component of the rubric will be evaluated using a 1-5 scale, with 1 as "poor" and "5 as "excellent." At least, 75% of student scores for each component of the rubric are expected to be 3 or above on this scale.

2.1-3. Describe Data Collected, Data Analysis, and Whether Criteriajor Success Were Met: 2.1-4. Describe How Assessment Results Were Used to Improve Instructional Program:

Second Means of Assessment for Outcome #2:

2.2-1. Means oj Assessment and Data Collection Plan: At least two faculty members in TESL will assess the students' familiarity with theoretical issues related to the teaching and acquisition of English as a second Language in personal interviews prior to taking the M.A. exam. Students will be evaluated for their oral competence during their personal interview with the use of an evaluation rubric that will measure student performance in five critical areas. These areas include the expression appropriately meaningful ideas, examples that support their discussion, the organization of narratives and descriptions using a variety of linguistic structures with few errors, appropriate vocabulary and accentuation. The questions asked in this section of the interview will differ from those asked on the final written comprehensive examination.

2.2-2. Define Criteriajor Success: Each component of the rubric will be evaluated using a 1-5 scale, with 1 as "poor" and "5 as "excellent." At least, 75% of student scores for each component of the rubric are expected to be 3 or above on this scale.

2.2-3. Describe Data Collected, Data Analysis, and Whether Criteriajor Success Were Met: 12.2-4. Describe How Assessment Results Were Used to Improve Instructional Program:

(6)

ASSESSMENT PLAN: OUTCOME #3

Modern Languages - TESL

FOR

Masters

(Degree Level)

September 2005-August 2007 Septem ber 14, 2007

Intended Educational (Student) Learning Outcome

#3

(repeated from Linkage Page):

Outcome #3: Students will demonstrate the ability to teach English as a second language to learners of English in higher educational contexts.

First Means of Assessment for Outcome #3:

3.1-1. Means of Assessment and Data Collection Plan: Students who successfully complete 18 hours of

graduate course work and TESL 645 are offered teaching assistantships to teach in the ESL Program. The TESL Coordinator will monitor through classroom visits, consultation and evaluation the students' knowledge of material (including lesson organization, a variety of activities in both individual work and group activities and accurate grammatical/informational content), classroom management (including on-time arrival and class dismissal, an appropriate amount of target language used in the class, succinct explanations in the target language, audio-visual/technological support and pace of class) and personal demeanor (good eye-contact, expressive body language, tone of voice and intonation).

3.1-2. Define Criteria for Success: A standard written departmental form with evaluative checklist that ranks

the students' performance from 1[poor] to 5[excellent] and has a place for commentary on each of the above items will be used by the Coordinator. At least 75% of student scores for each component of the rubric are expected to be 3 or above on this scale.

3.1-3. Describe Data Collected, Data Analysis, and Whether Criteria for Success Were Met:

Second Means of Assessment for Outcome #3:

3.2-1. Means of Assessment and Data Collection Plan: The TESL Coordinator will review ESL course

evaluation surveys from the classes of teaching assistants, assessing their continued success by the judgments of "Superior," "Excellent" or "Good."

3.2-2. Define Criteria for Success: The teaching assistants should receive nothing less than "Good" on their

evaluation surveys in order to be considered successful in their teaching skills.

(7)

ASSESSMENT PLAN: OUTCOME #4

Modern Languages - TESL

FOR

Masters

(Degree Level)

September 2005-August 2007 September 14, 2007

Intended Educational (Student) Learning Outcome

#4

(repeated from Linkage Page):

Outcome #4: Students will have the ability to conduct original research in applied linguistics.

First Means of Assessment for Outcome #4:

4.1-1.Means ofAssessment and Data Collection Plan: Students will be evaluated in their term papers written in TESL 647 and TESL 695 in five areas; accuracy of information; coherence and quality of writing; insightfulness and creativity; and evidence of having read beyond the required textbooks. Faculty will evaluate these term papers, using a checklist that ranks the students' performance from 1 [poor] to 5 [excellent] on each of the above items.

4.1-2. Define Criteria for Success: Each component of the rubric will be evaluated using a 1-5 scale, with 1 as [poor] and 5 as [excellent] on each of the above items.

4.1-3. Describe Data Collected, Data Analysis, and Whether Criteriafor Success Were Met:

Second Means of Assessment for Outcome #4:

4.2-1. Means of Assessment and Data Collection Plan: Students have the option to write a master's thesis covering issues in methodology of language teaching, second language acquisition, culture and linguistics during their course of graduate work. Five specific areas in these theses will be evaluated by the faculty: accuracy of infonnation, coherence and quality of writing, insightfulness and creativity, and evidence of having read beyond the required textbooks.

4.2-2. Define Criteria for Success: Faculty will evaluate these master's theses, using a checklist that ranks the students' performance from 1[poor] to 5[excellent] on each of the above items. At least 75% of student scores for each component of the rubric are expected to be 3 or above on this scale.