MATHEMATICS DEPARTMENT
ASSESSMENT REPORT 2000 – 2001
Accepted 3-14-02
  

Assessment data from this period includes faculty ratings of student performances in capstone courses and a report on student scores on the E.T.S. Major Field Test required of all senior majors.

Curriculum:  Overall, the faculty ratings show that student performances fell in the good to excellent range on all items.  These evaluations are consistent with the overall performance of the students on the Major Field Test.  On the latter, MSUM students performed better in more advanced topics.  In particular, on non-routine problems the group ranked at the 87^th percentile and in abstract and linear algebra they ranked 75^th percentile.  We note that although the MSUM students ranked only at the 38^th percentile in calculus, more than half of the students did not take their calculus at MSUM since they were transfer students.

Overall, the department is pleased with the performance of this group.

Budgeting:  The results cited have no particular implication for the department’s budget.  However, changes in delivery systems (technology), curriculum, and materials could require future budgetary support if implemented.

Retention:  For purposes of public relations, recruitment and retention, these results, particularly the ETS scores, should serve well to demonstrate that the Department accomplishes its goals insofar as student learning is concerned.

Possible Assessment Plan Revisions:  None are contemplated at this time but the Department will closely monitor the results of this process and the chair will solicit suggestions for improvement.  We would like to include results of surveys concerning the effectiveness of the major insofar as post-graduate efforts are concerned, but these have been excluded by previous Assessment Committees.

Obviously, revisions in major requirements could produce corresponding revisions in the Assessment Plan.

NOTES:  

1. One student essentially scored zero in this test.  We conjecture that some error in                            scoring occurred since the student involved is very capable.  If that score is removed                       from the group, the overall ranking rises above the 80^th percentile.
   

2. The highest ranking individual scored at the 90^th percentile.
   

3. The fall semester student group was too small to generate group rankings.

The following are summary data for this time period.  Mean ratings with standard deviations are listed for each outcome.  Herein 8 =  24 and the scale used is shown below.  We also note that some students took more than one capstone course.