Program Goals and Learning Assessment

List of Program Learning Objectives

  1. The student will demonstrate knowledge of the developmental norms for speech and language acquisition.
  2. The student will demonstrate competent use of common research and clinical methods used in the field.
  3. The student will discuss current technological advances and illustrate their use for clinical problem solving.
  4. The student will demonstrate knowledge of appropriate procedures to assess and remediate speech and language disorders.
  5. The student will demonstrate essential skills for generating professional written reports.
  6. The student will explain how individual, cultural, and linguistic differences contribute to our understanding of language and communication.
  7. The student will apply critical thinking and problem-solving skills to issues in communication sciences and disorders.

Learning Objectives Selected for Assessment

Assessment of student performance on class assignments pertaining to the selected objectives is summarized in the following manner: exemplary performance is indicated by a score of at least 90% of the total points for the assignment, acceptable performance is indicated by a score of 80-89%, and developing performance is indicated by a score of 70-79%. A target has been set to have at least 80% of students performing at the exemplary or acceptable level.

Objective #1:

The student will demonstrate knowledge of the developmental norms for speech and language acquisition.

Assessment data: Six measures (two assignments and selected test questions pertaining to normative speech and language development on four exams), from four different CSD courses, were evaluated for 2014-15. In Fall 2014 and Spring 2015, student performance on each assignment met the target of 80% or more of students performing at the exemplary or acceptable level. Students appear to be successful in these assignments demonstrating their ability to articulate language and speech developmental norms, as approximately 92% of students earned a score of 80% and above on assignments across both semesters. Student performance on selected test questions in Fall 2014 and Spring 2015 were near the target, with over 70% of students performing at these levels. The targets were not met for most exams. Generally, fewer students scored at an exemplary or acceptable level on exams compared to homework assignments/projects. This may be due to the differing natures of the types of assessment.

Objective #2:

The student will demonstrate competent use of common research and clinical methods used in the field.

Assessment data: Five assignments, one each from five different CSD courses, were evaluated for 2012-13 and 2013-14. In Fall 2012 and Spring 2013, student performance on each assignment met the target of 80% or more of students performing at the exemplary or acceptable level, with the exception of one assignment. This assignment was the most notable example of a general trend across assignments, such that there were lower proportions of students in the exemplary category vs. the other categories in the Spring semester compared to the Fall semester. The assessment committee decided to collect data for these assignments again in 2013-14.

In 2013-14, performance for 7 out of the 10 assignments (5 classes over 2 semesters) met the target of 80% or more of students performing at the exemplary or acceptable level. Two of the remaining assignments were near the target, with over 70% of students performing at these levels. The remaining assignment showed an upward trend in Spring 2014 and that trend is expected to continue, with recent changes to the course.

Objective #6:

The student will explain how individual, cultural, and linguistic differences contribute to our understanding of language and communication.

Assessment data: In both Fall 2013 and Spring 2014, student performance on each assignment met the target of 80% or more of students performing at the exemplary or acceptable level, with the exception of one assignment. The instructor and assessment committee hypothesize that 2013-14 was a deviation from the usual pattern in this course, but will continue to monitor these measures. Overall, students appear to be successful on these assignments demonstrating their ability to articulate the role of individual, cultural, and linguistic differences in language and communication.

Learning Assessment Update

Review the entire Learning Assessment Update Communication Sciences and Disorders.

CSD Student Rating of Teaching Effectiveness 2014-2015

The Student Rating of Teaching Effectiveness (SRTEs) are Penn State's locally developed instrument for gathering feedback from students at the end of the term. The SRTEs were approved by the University Faculty Senate in 1985 and are administered by the Office of the Vice Provost of Academic Affairs. For more information, please see: http://www.schreyerinstitute.psu.edu/srte.

Fall 2015 courses Average Quality of Course Average Quality of Instructor
CSD 100's 5.87 5.75
CSD 200's 6.39 6.48
CSD 300's 5.39 5.62
CSD 400's 5.90 6.03
Spring 2015 courses Average Quality of Course Average Quality of Instructor
CSD 100's 6.54 6.69
CSD 200's 6.36 6.52
CSD 300's 5.90 6.08
CSD 400's 5.93 6.13