End-of-Program Review: Results from AY 13-14 to AY 17-18

Third Five-Year Review

In July 2019 a group of faculty, and staff came together in a four-day workshop to synthesize results from the third five-year period of the End-of-Program Review (2013-14 to 2017-18). A team of 21 participants worked in small groups of three to four members to summarize and present the highlights of the divisional areas (Art, Humanities, Mathematics/Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning, Natural/Physical Science, Social Science) and other learning activities (Academic Statement, Community based project/Service Learning, Critical Thinking, Information Technology Literacy, Oppression, Privilege and Difference, Sustainability, and Writing). The teams reconvened to discuss issues around the Path of Study curriculum and new accreditation cycle assessment needs. Finally, the group redesigned the survey instrument for the next five-year cycle in an effort to clarify survey language and expand the relevance and usability of resulting data.

Five-Year Period Highlights (PDF)

Workshop Summaries: 

Divisional Area Workshop Summaries:

The Art group found that the data underrepresented advanced work being done college wide, as evening and weekend courses and independent learning contracts (ILCs) are not included in the End-of-Program Review.

The Humanities continue to be taught in more Evergreen programs than any of the other four divisional areas. In this five-year period the percentage if programs that included Humanities content ranged from a low of 74% to a high of 86%.

Direct comparison of the previous five-year period 2006-11 to the current period shows increase in the number of programs reporting including any math/QSR. However, whether this increase represent an increase in the amount of math/QSR being offered or an increase in reporting is, of course, an open question.

The Natural, Physical or Computer Sciences group found a quite diverse NPCS curriculum for this five-year period. Biology and Environmental Science predominated at all levels of instruction. The breadth and depth of the NPCS curriculum available to students at the “extensive” level of emphasis was a strength of the division.

The Social Sciences group found that social sciences continue to have a strong presence in the Evergreen curriculum and provide a wide range of important skill development, career possibilities and community engagement. The top five occurrences in the field of studies are Political Economy/Science, Social Justice/Environmental Justice, Sociology, Psychology, and Anthropology.

Learning Activities Workshop Summaries:

The Academic Statement group found fairly stable levels of support for Academic Statement work (low of 62% to high of 74%) and in-class Education Advising Overall (low of 69% to high of 84%) since the pilot year of the Academic Statement (2012-2013).

The Community-based Project/Service Learning group found that the percentage of programs offered at Evergreen that included Community-based Project and/or Service Learning (CBP/SL) dropped by 10% from 30% to 20%.

The Critical Thinking group found that nearly all Evergreen programs are designed to improve some mode of critical thinking, higher percentages of programs are designed to improve analysis and synthesis than programs designed to improve modes of critical thinking that emphasize conclusion or resolution: judgment, argument, and problem-solving.

  • Information Technology Literacy Across the Curriculum (PDF) (TBA)

The Oppression, Privilege and Difference group recommended adding detail to the question by either offering faculty additional checkbox answers. They also recommended that the college provide more support for faculty who wish to include OPD in their programs. They recommended that all first-year programs incorporate OPD.

The Sustainability group found that fluctuations in the total amount of programs that included sustainability reflect fluctuations in programs including sustainability “moderately” or “a little”, as the amount of programs that included sustainability “extensively” has remained stable over the 5 years.

  • Writing Across the Curriculum

There were not enough participants to create a group for Writing Across the Curriculum, but we were able work with Ariel Birks to refine the questions addressing writing in the survey instrument.

 

Annual EPR Results AY 12-13 to AY 17-18

Each grid below provides the opportunity to explore results for a particular academic area by type of program or as an overview that summarizes information across all types of programs.

EPR 2017-18

Of the 204 undergraduate programs offered in 2017-18, 145 participated in the End-of-Program Review resulting in a 71% response rate. You can view:

Academic Area
Overview
Art
Humanities
Math/Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning
Natural, Physical, and Computer Sciences
Social Sciences
Writing
Information Technology Literacy
Critical Thinking
Sustainability
Oppression, Privilege, and Difference
Community-Based Projects/Service Learning
Student Academic Statement
Advising
Annual Interdivisionality by Program Type

EPR 2016-17

Of the 207 undergraduate programs offered in 2016-17, 158 participated in the End-of-Program Review resulting in a 76% response rate. You can view:

Academic Area
Overview
Art
Humanities
Math/Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning
Natural, Physical, and Computer Sciences
Social Sciences
Writing
Information Technology Literacy
Critical Thinking
Sustainability
Oppression, Privilege, and Difference
Community-Based Projects/Service Learning
Student Academic Statement/Advising
Annual Interdivisionality by Program Type
 

EPR 2015-16

Of the 210 undergraduate programs offered in 2015-16, 159 participated in the End-of-Program Review resulting in a 76% response rate. You can view:

Academic Area 
Overview
Art
Humanities
Math/Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning
Natural, Physical, and Computer Sciences
Social Sciences
Writing
Information Technology Literacy
Critical Thinking
Sustainability
Oppression, Privilege, and Difference
Community-Based Projects/Service Learning
Student Academic Statement/Advising
Annual Interdivisionality by Program Type

EPR 2014-15

Of the 180 undergraduate programs offered in 2014-15, 111 participated in the End-of-Program Review resulting in a 62% response rate. You can view:

Academic Area
Overview
Art
Humanities
Math/Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning
Natural, Physical, and Computer Sciences
Social Sciences
Writing
Information Technology Literacy
Critical Thinking
Sustainability
Oppression, Privilege, and Difference
Community-Based Projects/Service Learning
Student Academic Statement/Advising
Annual Interdivisionality by Program Type

EPR 2013-14

Of the 198 undergraduate programs offered in 2013-14, 141 participated in the End-of-Program Review resulting in a 71% response rate. You can view:

Academic Area
Overview
Art
Humanities
Math/Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning
Natural, Physical, and Computer Sciences
Social Sciences
Writing
Information Technology Literacy
Critical Thinking
Sustainability
Oppression, Privilege, and Difference
Community-Based Projects/Service Learning
Student Academic Statement/Advising
Annual Interdivisionality by Program Type

EPR 2012-13

Of the 198 undergraduate programs offered in 2012-13, 141 participated in the End-of-Program Review resulting in a 71% response rate. You can view:

Academic Area
Overview
Art
Humanities
Math/Quantitative and Symbolic Reasoning
Natural, Physical, and Computer Sciences
Social Sciences
Writing
Information Technology Literacy
Critical Thinking
Sustainability
Oppression, Privilege, and Difference
Community-Based Projects/Service Learning
Student Academic Statement
Advising
Annual Interdivisionality by Program Type