Page 73 - Radiography Flipbook

Example of Assessment Plan and Analysis Associate Level-Clinical Competency Goal

Goal I– Students will demonstrate clinical competency.
Student Measurement Timeframe – Benchmark – Actual Data Past 3 – 5 years of Data Results –
Learning Tools – A formative Should be a Results - Identify each year’s results
Outcomes – A minimum of 2 measure used score above Include the separately for comparison purposes.
measuring (while students passing. number of
tools/assessment are in the first Examples are: students
methods per year of the A percentage evaluated
student learning program), and a score,
outcome is summative A score based
required. measure used on a scale, such
(when students as a Likert score
are close to (include the
program scale)
completion
and/or
graduates) is
recommended
for best
practices.
1. Students Lab Practical Semester 2 Students will 2021 8.3 2020 9.04 n = 10
will apply Form receive a (average 2019 9.30 n = 8
radiation safety ≥ 8.0 (average score) 2018 8.80 n = 8
practices. Question #9 score) 2017 8.2 n = 8
(on a 10-point n = 8/9 2016 8.70 n = 9
scale) (number of
students
who met
score of 8.0
or higher)

Met
Clinical Semester 5 Students will 2021 9.7 2020 9.34 n = 10
Evaluation receive a 2019 9.30 n = 8
Form ≥ 9.5 n = 8/9 2018 8.80 n = 8
(on a 10-point 2017 9.33 n = 8
Question #4 scale) Met 2016 9.70 n = 9

2. Students Clinical Semester 3 Students will 2021 8.5 2020 8.40 n = 10
will obtain Evaluation receive a 2019 8.20 n = 8
radiographs of Form ≥ 8.0 n = 8/9 2018 8.53 n = 8
acceptable (on a 10-point 2017 7.41 n = 8
diagnostic Question #10 scale) Met 2016 8.70 n = 9
quality.

RADT 3320 Semester 5 Students will 2021 88 2020 94 n = 10
Final Exam receive a 2019 97 n = 8
≥ 90% n = 7/9 2018 96 n = 8
(on average 2017 87 n = 8
Questions 20 -27 of all Unmet 2016 89 n = 9
questions)

Analysis – (To include key findings, 3-5 year trending comparisons, steps to take to enhance student learning):
Goal I SLO 1: The benchmark for both the first year and second year students has been met for 2021, but data results for
the second-year students has been inconsistent for the past 6 years with no discernable trend. Discussion included
concerns with the first-year students being assessed in the laboratory setting which may not be a realistic situation, while
the second-year students are being assessed in the clinical setting by many different technologists. Data will continue to