1. Assessed: 2010, 2011, 2012

2. SLO 4.1: Identify and describe the impact of the global economy on business decisions. SLO 4.2: Explain and apply a global perspective in making business decisions. Goal adopted May 2009, Assessed for the first time Spring 2010 (Cycle #2); again in Spring 2011 (Cycle #3); in Spring 2012 only the second SLO was assessed.

3.  Integrated into:  Preparation for the Major Requirements  Core Courses in the BSBA Major  Advanced Courses in the BSBA Major  MGT 405: International Business Strategy & Integration  Required capstone course for all BSBA students

4. CYCLE #2 -2010  Final exams completed for the college-wide CBA capstone course (MGT 405) were examined.  Course Instructor and Director of Assessment developed a rubric after reviewing several from the global skills literature.  Rubric was widely distributed to students during the semester.  Course Instructor & Director of Assessment rated the final exams using the rubric following a training and norming session.

5.  7 Point scale from Weak to Excellent.  6-7: Exceeds Expectations  5: Meets Expectations  4: Approaches Expectations  2-3: Below Expectations  1: Fail  SLO mapped to Rubric criterion then criterion mapped to exam question.

6.  SLO #1: Identify and describe the impact of the global economy on business decisions.  Rubric Dimension: Understanding and Application of the relevant concepts and frameworks.  Exam Question: Describe the fundamental challenges faced as [a chosen case company] expands its products [internationally].

7.  SLO #2: Explain and apply a global perspective in making business decisions.  Rubric Dimension: Strategically integrate (i.e. integrate across internal and external environment; across functional areas; holistically from a firm perspective).  Exam Question: What recommendations would you offer to deal with these challenges [identified in previous response].

8. DimensionFail (1) Below (2 to Expectations 3) Approaches Expectations (4) Meets Expectations (5) Exceeds (6 to Expectations 7) #1 (mapped to SLO #1) 1234567 #2 (mapped to SLO #2) 1234567

9. CYCLE #3 -2011  Final exams completed for the college-wide CBA capstone course (MGT 405) were examined.  Course Instructor and Director of Assessment refined the Cycle #2 rubric based on mapping & experience. This resulted in SLO #2 being expanded to 2 dimensions.  Rubric was widely distributed to students during the semester.  Two independent CBA faculty members rated the final exams using the revised rubric following training and norming sessions.

10.  SLO #2: Explain and apply a global perspective in making business decisions.  2 Rubric Dimensions: ▪ Strategically integrate (i.e. integrate across internal and external environment; across functional areas; holistically from a firm perspective). ▪ Arrive at logical and well-reasoned conclusions/recommendations.  Exam Question: What recommendations would you offer to deal with these challenges [identified in previous response].

11. CYCLE #4 -2012  Final exams completed for the college-wide CBA capstone course (MGT 405) were examined.  Director of Assessment & raters post-hoc determined question asked did not adequately assess SLO 4.1 hence decision to use data only to assess SLO 4.2 in this cycle.  Rubric used in Cycle #3 collapsed to a single dimension.  “Approaches” eliminated from rubric, 3 point scale used.  Two independent CBA faculty members rated the final exams using the revised rubric following training and norming sessions.

12.  Cycle #2:Spring Semester 2010 in MGT 405 ▪Sample Size: 124  Cycle #3: Spring Semester 2011 in MGT 405 ▪Sample Size: 120  Cycle #4: Spring Semester 2012 in MGT 405 ▪Sample Size: 162

13.  BENCHMARKS:  70% of our students should meet or exceed expectations for global perspective skills  30% of our students should exceed expectations for global perspective skills

14. Cycle #2

15. 10.5% 25.8% 33.9% 29.8% “70% should meet or exceed expectations”; 36.3% actually did “30% should exceed expectations”; 10.5% actually did

16. ALL STUDENTS MGMT MAJORS STUDIED ABROADIB MAJORS Mean: 3.89 Mean: 3.95 Mean: 3.61Mean: 3.22

17. 8.1% 30.1% 37.4% 24.2% “70% should meet or exceed expectations”; 38.2% actually did “30% should exceed expectations”; 8.1% actually did

18. ALL STUDENTS MGMT MAJORS STUDIED ABROADIB MAJORS Mean: 3.96 Mean: 3.92 Mean: 3.83 Mean: 3.78

19.  Possibilities discussed after Cycle #2:  Required global/international course for all BSBA students ▪ Choice from existing courses, OR ▪ Development of a common global course ▪ Some evidence suggests that MGMT majors, who currently take a required global course perform better.  Required International Dimension for all BSBA students (students choose from menu of international experience options)  Optional Global Certificate Program ▪ Consideration – Cycle #2 evidence did not suggest that studying abroad enhanced global perspective.

20.  Decision made to reassess the goal after one year before implementation of any major curricular changes.  Optional Global Certificate Program (GEP) moved forward in the college.  Associate Dean charted global competence in the CBA based on recommendations from the AACSB taskforce on global education.

21. Cycle #3

22. 8.3% 40.8% 22.5% 28.3% “70% should meet or exceed expectations”; 49.1% actually did “30% should exceed expectations”; 8.3% actually did

23. ALL STUDENTS MGMT MAJORS STUDIED ABROAD IB Majors Mean: 4.30 Mean: 4.14 Mean: 4.28 Mean: 4.17

24. 11.7% 48.3% 15.0% “70% should meet or exceed expectations”; 60% actually did “30% should exceed expectations”; 11.7% actually did 25.0%

25. 11.7% 48.3% 15.0% “70% should meet or exceed expectations”; 51.7% actually did “30% should exceed expectations”; 11.7% actually did 25.0%

26. ALL STUDENTS MGMT MAJORS STUDIED ABROAD IB Majors Mean: 4.45 Mean: 4.36 Mean: 4.49 Mean: 4.31

27. SLO #1SLO #2 * SLO #2 dimensions combined to form single SLO measure for Cycle #3

28. Movement in a positive direction was noted between Cycle #2 & #3. This was particularly notable in moving students from approaching to meeting expectations, less so in moving students to exceeding expectations. A significant segment of students continue to fail to meet expectations.

29. Students required to take one global course (MGT majors) do not significantly outperform others. International Business majors do not outperform others but students who study abroad do perform slightly better.

30.  The AACSB taskforce on global education continues to be an important source of direction for our Global Perspective goal.  Plans to reassess again in one year to check for trends.  Proposal for the institution of a Global Perspective requirement across the college has been introduced at both the graduate and undergraduate level and is currently in the governance process.

31. Cycle #4

32. 57.4% 25.3% 14.2% “70% should meet or exceed expectations”; 82.7% actually did “30% should exceed expectations”; 57.4% actually did

33. Results of assessment in Cycle #4 produced dramatically different results than the previous cycles. Which (if any) results were valid? The assessment process requires investigation. In Cycle #4 it was determined that SLO 4.1 was not accurately assessed by the measure. If this was also true in previous cycles, findings of Cycles #2 & #3 (at least for SLO 4.1) may not be valid. Alternatively, the 3 point scale used in Cycle #4 may be inadequate to fully assess nuances of difference between responses vis-à-vis expectations.

34.  A thorough review of the assessment process – measures, rubric, and rating process is imperative.  This will be undertaken by the CBA Undergraduate Committee during the 2012-2013 academic year.  The proposed revisions to the BSBA program include the addition of a one-unit Global Perspective course.