University of South Carolina Sumter Annual Accountability Report

Fiscal Year 1996-1997

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA SUMTER

Introduction

This report for USC Sumter includes:

The following components will be reported on in the annotated year: General Education (2000), Facilities (1998), Procedures for Student Development (1999), Library Resources and Services (2000), and Public Service (1999).

The following components are not applicable to our institutional type: Majors or Concentrations, Performance of Professional Program Graduates on Licensing and Certification Exams, Academic Performance of Student Athletes, and Research.

CHE will report on the following components: Reports of Program Changes that have Occurred as a Result of External Program Evaluations, Success of Entering Students in Meeting College or University Admissions Prerequisites, and Minority Student and Faculty Access and Equity.

Particularly noteworthy is the work that has been done by a task force, composed of faculty and staff, to assess the effectiveness of the institution's administrative processes.

1. General Education

This component was last submitted to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1996. Based on the Institution's schedule of reporting, a report for this component will be submitted next to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 2000.

2. Majors or Concentrations

This component is not applicable to our institutional type.

3. Performance of Professional Program Graduates on Licensing and Certification Exams

This component is not applicable to our institutional type.

4. Reports of Program Changes that have Occurred as a Result of External Program Evaluations

There have been no program changes in 1997 as a result of external program evaluation.

5. Academic Advising

USC Sumter's Academic Advising Center assists students with the formation and clarification of their values, interests, abilities, and life career goals, as well as in the development of their educational plan for the realization of their goals. The Academic Advising Center is following a plan and a time-line which was developed for assessing the various components of the advising process.

Indicators: The intended outcome the Academic Advising Center is reporting on this year is:

Assessment Results: Approximately 40 percent of the students advised by the Advisement Center receive intrusive advising during a semester. The process of intrusive advising is subjective in nature, and the results are difficult to quantify. The advising staff does not believe precise tracking of the results can be done. Retention and graduation rates will reflect the success of the intrusive advising.

Use of Assessment Results: It is the consensus of the advisement staff that the intrusive advising approach currently being used is the most effective. It is personal, direct, and flexible enough to reflect the seriousness of the need and also attends to a broader scope than simply academic concerns. It is the staff's conviction that this service is a very effective retentive effort.

The Division of Arts and Letters offers three (3) Placement Tests: the Writing Proficiency Test (WPT) for English placement, the Nelson Denny Reading Test to test Reading competence, and the Foreign Language Placement Test (German, Latin, French, and Spanish) for placement in foreign language courses. The Division of Science, Mathematics, and Engineering offers Math Placement in Mathematics courses. The WPT, Nelson Denny Reading Test, and the Math Placement Test may lead to placing students in one or more developmental courses. These courses are ENGL 100, UCAM 120, and MATH 100. USC Sumter assesses the effectiveness of its placement tests and developmental courses. In addition, the Foreign Language Placement Test and the Mathematics Placement Test are provided by and assessed formally by USC Columbia. Effective Fall, 1997, USC Sumter will no longer offer ENGL 100, UCAM 120, and MATH 100.

Indicators:

Assessment Methods:

Assessment Results

The tests used for Math placement at USC Sumter were developed by the Mathematical Association of America. Students, as determined by background and major, generally take one test - either Test A or Test B.

To continue the study of the effectiveness of placement testing in Mathematics, the results of testing for Fall 1995 were reviewed. Success rates for newly admitted freshmen were examined. The sample consisted of freshmen with no previous college work who enrolled in a Math course in the Fall 1995 term. The cohort included 104 students who entered USC Sumter with the high school course work needed to satisfy entrance requirements. Students with high school AP or college-level course work in Math were not included in the study.

Beginning in Fall 1995, students at the University of South Carolina (includes USC Sumter) have been advised into MATH 100 and MATH 111 based on a revised scale.

MATHEMATICS PLACEMENT TEST

COURSE SAMPLE SIZE AVERAGE STUDENT GRADE % FINISHED W >= C NEXT MATH COURSE % TAKING NEXT MATH AVERAGE GRADE IN NEXT COURSE
MATH100 27 2.3 85% MATH111 67% 1.4
MATH111 48 2.7 92% MATH122, 170 & 221 56% 2.2
MATH122 8 3.1 88% NA NA NA
MATH115 12 1.6 67% MATH141 33% 2.0
MATH141 6 2.9 100% MATH142 33% 3.3

Readers of this document are cautioned to note that the data reported above was compiled from a selected sample of students as a test of Mathematics placement. Average GPA's and percentages of students completing Math sequences do not represent those of the student body as a whole.

From a sample tracking of students who have taken the Writing Proficiency Test, it is evident from a review of grades received in their English courses (ENGL 100, ENGL 101, and ENGL 102), that students are being properly placed.

WRITING PROFICIENCY

COURSE SAMPLE SIZE WPT SCORE AVERAGE STUDENT GRADE % FINISHED W >= C NEXT COURSE % TAKING NEXT COURSE AVERAGE GRADE COURSE
ENGL100 42 1 2.3 88% ENGL101 88% 2.3
ENGL101 55 2 2.6 87% ENGL102 84% 2.2

The Foreign Language Tests are taken by students who expect to take a foreign language at USC Sumter. The sample study of students who have taken the test and enrolled in courses at USC Sumter reveals the tests work well in placing students. There are very few discrepancies and oddities which would indicate the tests have placed someone improperly.

FOREIGN LANGUAGE PLACEMENT TEST

COURSE SAMPLE SIZE FL SCORE AVERAGE STUDENT GRADE % FINISHED W >= C NEXT COURSE % TAKING NEXT COURSE AVERAGE GRADE COURSE
SPAN109 17 S1 2.7 94% SPAN110 77% 2.4
SPAN121 8 S2 3.6 100% SPAN122 63% 3.5
FREN109 13 F1 2.0 77% FREN110 85% 1.8
FREN121 4 F2 3.4 100% FREN122 75% 3.8

Use of Assessment Findings: As reported in 1995, USC Columbia has revised the scores necessary on Test B for entry level placement into MATH 111. Beginning in Fall 1995, students at the University of South Carolina (includes USC Sumter) have been advised into MATH 100 and MATH 111 based on a revised scale. The full impact of that revision will be seen when the data is available for future cohorts.

Generally speaking, two or three students in an academic year approach the Chair of the Division of Arts and Letters querying the appropriateness of a WPT score. Several mechanisms have been implemented to respond to these problems:

  1. Students were encouraged to enroll in the course they placed in and then do a diagnostic test, marked by the instructor of the course, to determine whether replacement was needed.

  2. The students' tests were reevaluated by other readers and then discussed by the Division Chair, with the student, to explain why the score was as it was. (Most of the cases are resolved at this level, once it is clear to the student why the score was received.)

  3. In several instances, these concerns were easily resolved with an explanation of the marking mechanism and a clarification of the criteria used in marking WPTs. This is done either in person or on the phone.

  4. In rare instances where the student can demonstrate that illness, or other mitigating and overwhelming circumstances caused them to write a very poor test, and where it is deemed fitting by the Division Chair to allow some laxity in treating a case of this nature, students are invited to re-sit a WPT so that the test and placement can be done again.

7. Success of Entering Students in Meeting College or University Admissions Prerequisites

This component is not applicable to our institution type.

8. Achievement of Students Transferring from Two to Four-Year Institutions

As indicated in the 1997 Institutional Effectiveness Plan Update dated December 5, 1996, this indicator was not scheduled to be reported on until 1998. The information is provided in response to a last minute request from CHE staff. This component will be more fully discussed during the indicated reporting year.

9. Analysis of Undergraduate Retention and Attrition

More than 60 percent of the students who begin or transfer at USC Sumter have the attainment of a baccalaureate degree as their educational goal. USC Sumter is a two-year associate degree awarding institution and does not have the authority to award baccalaureate degrees. USC Sumter students must change to another system campus or transfer to another institution at some point. Any analysis of retention rates and/or graduation rates must be appraised with this element in mind. USC Sumter's goal is to retain students as long as feasible and to prepare them to continue their education at a four-year institution.

Indicators:

Assessment Methods: Assessments and comparative analysis were made on data collected from the Retention of Full-time New Freshmen report dated 3/16/97 and the 1994 Retention Follow-up Report dated 5/10/95 from USC Columbia Institutional Planning & Research.

Assessment Results:

RETENTION RATES FRESHMAN TO SOPHOMORE

YEAR 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
FULLTIME NEW FRESHMEN 168 200 153 185 207 177 156 157
# SOPHOMORE 105 137 118 128 97 114 156 104
% SOPHOMORE RETAINED 62.5% 68.5% 77.1% 69.2% 46.8% 71.3% 100% 66.3%

ASSOCIATE DEGREE GRADUATION RATES

YEAR COHORT #GRAD 2 YRS % GRAD 2 YRS #GRAD 3 YRS %GRAD 3 YRS
1986 156 19 12% 51 33%
1987 183 17 17% 55 30%
1988 168 25 15% 60 36%
1989 200 27 14% 68 34%
1990 153 13 9% 42 31%
1991 185 11 6% 52 28%
1992 207 17 8% 58 28%
1993 177 7 4% 35 20%
1994 156 11 7% NA NA

BACCALAUREATE DEGREE GRADUATION RATES

YEAR FALL FT COHORT #GRAD WITHIN 4YRS %GRAD WITHIN 4YRS #GRAD WITHIN 5YRS %GRAD WITHIN 5YRS #GRAD WITHIN 6YRS %GRAD WITHIN 6YRS #GRAD WITHIN 7YRS %GRAD WITHIN 7YRS
1,986 156 0   25 16% 72 46% 124 80%
1,987 183 0   18 10% 59 32% 111 61%
1,988 168 0   23 14% 71 42% 130 77%
1,989 200 0   31 16% 35 18% 101 51%
1,990 153 2 1.3% 25 16% 70 46% NA NA
1,991 185 0   17 9.2% 41 22% NA NA
1,992 207 0   34 16.4% NA NA NA NA

Use of Assessment Findings: As indicated in the 1997 Institutional Effectiveness Plan Update dated December 5, 1996, this indicator was not scheduled to be reported on until 1998. The information is provided above in response to a last minute request from CHE staff. This component will be more fully discussed during the indicated reporting year.

10. Minority Student and Faculty Access and Equity

Ratio of Black Full-Time (F.T.) Faculty
to Total Full-Time Faculty

Fall Semester Total F.T. Faculty Black F.T. Faculty Number Black F.T. Faculty Percent
1992 46 3 6.5
1993 45 3 8.5
1994 44 3 6.8
1995 46 3 6.5
1996 42 1 2.4

11. Academic Performance of Student Athletes

This component is not applicable to our institutional type.

12. Procedure for Student Development

This component was last submitted to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1996. Based on the institution's schedule of reporting, a report for this component will be submitted next to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1999.

13. Library Resources and Services

This component was last submitted to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1996. Based on the institution's schedule of reporting, a report for this component will be submitted next to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 2000.

14. Administrative and Financial Processes and Performance

Administrative processes are multiple and intricately interwoven with each other. They work in concert and support the mission and objectives of the University. These processes include, but are not limited to, reporting, coordination, data management, policy making, and communication. This report examines the process of communication at the administrative level at USC Sumter. Future reports will examine other administrative processes. In addition, this report examines the financial processes at USC Sumter.

Indicators:
Administrative Processes

Financial Processes

Assessment Methods:
Administrative Processes

Financial Processes

Assessment Results:
Administrative Processes

The following recommendations were a result of the study of the communication processes at USC Sumter:

Financial Processes
An internal audit was performed by the USC Auditor during Fiscal Year 1994-95. A total of twelve specific findings were noted in the audit report.

The Budget Planning Committee has become an integral part of the planning and assessment process at USC Sumter. A need to more fully integrate the long range planning process and the budget planning process has been identified.

Use of Assessment Findings:

Administrative Processes - A number of the recommendations resulting from this assessment have been addressed. Three campus wide meetings will be held by the Dean to support the planning and budgeting process and to exchange dialog on topics of interest to the faculty and staff. A process developed for the evaluation of Assistant and Associate Deans was forwarded to the Dean for his consideration. A core of faculty and staff are doing preliminary work on a comprehensive calendar. An outline of a USC Sumter faculty handbook has been produced and forwarded to the administration. The office of the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs is in the process of organizing a new faculty orientation program. An off-campus meeting emphasizing free discussion, exchange of ideas, and team building activities has been preliminarily planned by faculty, staff, and students and is in the hands of the Dean. Other recommendations are being discussed.

Financial Processes - USC Sumter has satisfactorily responded to the findings of the audit and has taken the necessary corrective actions. A specific effort to unite the budget planning and long range planning processes is currently underway at the executive level.

15. Facilities

This component was last submitted to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1994. Based on the institution's schedule of reporting, a report for this component will be submitted next to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1998.

16. Public Service

This component was last submitted to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1995. Based on the institution's schedule of reporting, a report for this component will be submitted next to the Commission on Higher Education in July, 1999.

17. Research

This component is not applicable to our institutional type.