In support of the mission of St. Petersburg College, faculty committees established thirteen value statements. Three of these value statements are:
It is the intent of St. Petersburg College to incorporate continuous improvement practices in all areas. Assessment reports provide comparisons of present and past results which are used to identify topics where improvement is possible. SPC has traditionally used past results as a vital tool in achieving its commitment to continuous improvement.
Students in the Spring 2013 capstone course displayed a nearly perfect score for learning outcome 1. This is due largely to the way the assignment is completed. By that, it is meant that student groups complete a practice case on which a plethora of feedback is provided. In addition, each of the four main sections of the final paper are handed in at different points during the term and again a plethora of feedback is provided to be incorporated into the final paper. In addition, a strong set of resources and out of class support are available for the student.
Means of Assessment: Students in the senior capstone course, ISM 4915, complete a case study from the textbook. The case studies assigned reflect real-world problems that address real world information technology issues. Students are formed into groups and each group operates as a consultancy firm brought in to address the case study. The group collaborates throughout the semester on their team charter, case study, and presentation. The goal of the group consultancy is to identify, analyze, and finally recommend a solution for their chosen case study. A major piece of the required recommendations is improvement to the technology processes and operations reflected by the situation in the case study. The teams will be evaluated on the quality of their recommendations toward this improvement. The Capstone final paper and presentation are worth 50% of the final grade for the Capstone course.
Date(s) of Administration: 2014-15, 2015-16
Assessment Instrument: The paper consists of four sections. PLO #1 is worth 18 points, and is scored on the following scale:
| Performance Measure | Needs Improvement (1) | Satisfactory (2) | Outstanding (3) |
| Final Case Study | Student does not analyze and identify the major problem therein, and did not propose at least three solutions to that problem. Student did not propose solutions that provided an analyzation of evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. The student did not provide application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree. | Student analyzes and identifies the major problem therein, with limited understanding and did not propose at least three solutions to that problem. Each proposed solution was limited also in its analyzation of evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. This analysis provided application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree in a limited capacity. | Student analyzes and identifies the major problem therein, and proposed at least three solutions to that problem. Each proposed solution analyzed evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. This analysis provided application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree. |
| Final Case Study Presentation |
Student does not demonstrate a basic understanding of the case study, and the purpose of the analysis is not stated. Case study review not focused. Presentation confusing and not centered on topic. Case study review does not use appropriate visual aids. Limited understanding and usage of formal written language. Numerous grammar and spelling errors. Limited vocabulary. Difficulty conveying meaning. Extremely nervous. Poor response to questions. |
Student has Limited understanding of the case study. Does not use theories or scholarly examples to demonstrate understanding. Supporting materials are correctly referenced. Case study review has focus. Presenters have poor transition. Content present, but not presented in a logical manner. Visual aids partially support presentation content Visual aids have few illustrations. Occasional usage of awkward sentences and poor sentence structure. Occasional grammar problems, poor word usage and spelling errors. Effective vocabulary. Overuse of words, conjunctions, and transitions. Overstated ideas. Moderately nervous. Adequate response to questions (prepared for most questions). |
Complete understanding of the case study. Utilizes theories and scholarly examples to demonstrate understanding; information is relevant. Supporting materials are relevant to the subject and the assignment meets the final objectives. Case study review completely focused. Presenters transition correctly. Introduction clearly states one problem, one chosen solution is stated, supported, and is logical form. Conclusion sums up the presentation. Visual aids support the presentation content and have interest and focus attention. Demonstration of correct written and spoken language. There are no grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. Appropriate word selection, concise wording and conjunctions are not overused. Composed and comfortable. Student responds with in-depth understanding and can defend position. |
Population: Students enrolled in senior capstone course, ISM 4915
Students are considered to have successfully demonstrated PLO #1 if a score of 9 or higher is achieved out of the total 18 available points (50%).
Results via Face-to-Face
The senior capstone course, ISM 4915 is taught exclusively online and does not include face-to-face sections.
Results via Distance Delivery (Online, Blended, etc)
| PLO 1: Case Study Scores | ||||
| Year | N | Score | N Met Criteria | % Meeting Criteria |
| 2014-15 | 71 | 91.3% | 69 | 97.2% |
| 2015-16 | 112 | 92.5% | 112 | 100% |
| PLO 1: Case Study Presentation Scores | ||||
| Year | N | Score | N Met Criteria | % Meeting Criteria |
| 2014-15 | 71 | 83.4% | 69 | 97.0% |
| 2015-16 | 112 | 83.4% | 103 | 92.0% |
Case Study Project & Presentation scores clearly indicate that students are meeting the criteria for success in the Capstone course for the Technology Development and Management BAS. The results show that 97.2% of capstone students met the criteria in 2014-15 with 100% in 2015-16 for the cast study project. For the Case Study presentation, 97.0% of students met the criteria in 2014-15, with 92.0% reaching the goal in 2015-16. Students recommend contemporary technology resources that promote effective company management by:
Utilizing theories and scholarly examples to demonstrate understanding, and that the information is relevant. Provide supporting materials that are relevant to the subject.
Future data will be disaggregated by individual PLO.
Students in the Spring 2013 capstone course displayed a nearly perfect score for learning outcome 2. This is due largely to the way the assignment is completed. By that, it is meant that student groups complete a practice case on which a plethora of feedback is provided. In addition, each of the four main sections of the final paper are handed in sat different points during the term and again a plethora of feedback is provided to be incorporated into the final paper. In addition, a strong set of resources and out of class support are available for the student
Means of Assessment: Students in the senior capstone course, ISM 4915, complete a case study from the textbook. The case studies assigned reflect real-world problems that address real world information technology issues. Students are formed into groups and each group operates as a consultancy firm brought in to address the case study. The group collaborates throughout the semester on their team charter, case study, and presentation. The goal of the group consultancy is to identify, analyze, and finally recommend a solution for their chosen case study. The information solutions design incorporated in the case study solution provided by the team requires them to have knowledge gleaned from prior coursework in areas such as systems analysis, network management, database management, and project management. The students are evaluated on the quality of their recommended design of information technology solutions to the problem presented in the case. The Capstone final paper and presentation are worth 50% of the final grade for the Capstone course.
Date(s) of Administration: 2014-15, 2015-16
Assessment Instrument: PLO #2 is worth 18 points, and is scored on the following scale:
| Performance Measure | Needs Improvement (1) | Satisfactory (2) | Outstanding (3) |
| Final Case Study | Student does not analyze and identify the major problem therein, and did not propose at least three solutions to that problem. Student did not propose solutions that provided an analyzation of evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. The student did not provide application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree. | Student analyzes and identifies the major problem therein, with limited understanding and did not propose at least three solutions to that problem. Each proposed solution was limited also in its analyzation of evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. This analysis provided application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree in a limited capacity. | Student analyzes and identifies the major problem therein, and proposed at least three solutions to that problem. Each proposed solution analyzed evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. This analysis provided application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree. |
| Final Case Study Presentation |
Student does not demonstrate a basic understanding of the case study, and the purpose of the analysis is not stated. Case study review not focused. Presentation confusing and not centered on topic. Case study review does not use appropriate visual aids. Limited understanding and usage of formal written language. Numerous grammar and spelling errors. Limited vocabulary. Difficulty conveying meaning. Extremely nervous. Poor response to questions. |
Student has Limited understanding of the case study. Does not use theories or scholarly examples to demonstrate understanding. Supporting materials are correctly referenced. Case study review has focus. Presenters have poor transition. Content present, but not presented in a logical manner. Visual aids partially support presentation content Visual aids have few illustrations. Occasional usage of awkward sentences and poor sentence structure. Occasional grammar problems, poor word usage and spelling errors. Effective vocabulary. Overuse of words, conjunctions, and transitions. Overstated ideas. Moderately nervous. Adequate response to questions (prepared for most questions). |
Complete understanding of the case study. Utilizes theories and scholarly examples to demonstrate understanding; information is relevant. Supporting materials are relevant to the subject and the assignment meets the final objectives. Case study review completely focused. Presenters transition correctly. Introduction clearly states one problem, one chosen solution is stated, supported, and is logical form. Conclusion sums up the presentation. Visual aids support the presentation content and have interest and focus attention. Demonstration of correct written and spoken language. There are no grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. Appropriate word selection, concise wording and conjunctions are not overused. Composed and comfortable. Student responds with in-depth understanding and can defend position. |
Population: Students enrolled in senior capstone course, ISM 4915
Students are considered to have successfully demonstrated PLO #2 if a score of 9 or higher is achieved out of the total 18 available points (50%).
Results via Face-to-Face
The senior capstone course, ISM 4915 is taught exclusively online and does not include face-to-face sections.
Results via Distance Delivery (Online, Blended, etc)
| PLO 2: Case Study Scores | ||||
| Year | N | Score | N Met Criteria | % Meeting Criteria |
| 2014-15 | 71 | 91.3% | 69 | 97.2% |
| 2015-16 | 112 | 92.5% | 112 | 100% |
| PLO 2: Case Study Presentation Scores | ||||
| Year | N | Score | N Met Criteria | % Meeting Criteria |
| 2014-15 | 71 | 83.4% | 69 | 97.0% |
| 2015-16 | 112 | 83.4% | 103 | 92.0% |
Case Study Project & Presentation scores clearly indicate that students are meeting the criteria for success in the Capstone course for the Technology Development and Management BAS. The results show that 97.2% of capstone students met the criteria in 2014-15 with 100% in 2015-16 for the cast study project. For the Case Study presentation, 97.0% of students met the criteria in 2014-15, with 92.0% reaching the goal in 2015-16. Students evaluate technical problems and plans by:
Analyzing and identifying major problems and propose at least three solutions to that problem. Students propose for each solution a well thought out analyzed solution by evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. This analysis provides application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree. The student then presents one problem with one chosen solution, along with data to support the decision of the solution.
Future data will be disaggregated by individual PLO.
Students in the Spring 2013 capstone course displayed a nearly perfect score for learning outcome 3. This is due largely to the way the assignment is completed. By that, it is meant that student groups complete a practice case on which a plethora of feedback is provided. In addition, each of the four main sections of the final paper are handed in sat different points during the term and again a plethora of feedback is provided to be incorporated into the final paper. In addition, a strong set of resources and out of class support are available for the student.
Means of Assessment: Students in the senior capstone course, ISM 4915, complete a case study from the textbook. The case studies assigned reflect real-world problems that address real world information technology issues. Students are formed into groups and each group operates as a consultancy firm brought in to address the case study. The group collaborates throughout the semester on their team charter, case study, and presentation. The goal of the group consultancy is to identify, analyze, and finally recommend a solution for their chosen case study. Significant requirement in providing the case study solution is to identify, quantify, and synthesize a workable solution to the information requirements presented by the case. The students are required to apply material learned in prior coursework such as systems analysis and design, programming, and network design among others. The Capstone final paper and presentation are worth 50% of the final grade for the Capstone course.
Date(s) of Administration: 2014-15, 2015-16
Assessment Instrument: PLO #3 will be measured as 24 points, and is scored on the following scale:
| Performance Measure | Needs Improvement (1) | Satisfactory (2) | Outstanding (3) |
| Final Case Study | Student does not analyze and identify the major problem therein, and did not propose at least three solutions to that problem. Student did not propose solutions that provided an analyzation of evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. The student did not provide application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree. | Student analyzes and identifies the major problem therein, with limited understanding and did not propose at least three solutions to that problem. Each proposed solution was limited also in its analyzation of evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. This analysis provided application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree in a limited capacity. | Student analyzes and identifies the major problem therein, and proposed at least three solutions to that problem. Each proposed solution analyzed evaluating technical feasibility, financial impact, and impact on the business. This analysis provided application of the material learned over the breadth of the degree. |
| Final Case Study Presentation |
Student does not demonstrate a basic understanding of the case study, and the purpose of the analysis is not stated. Case study review not focused. Presentation confusing and not centered on topic. Case study review does not use appropriate visual aids. Limited understanding and usage of formal written language. Numerous grammar and spelling errors. Limited vocabulary. Difficulty conveying meaning. Extremely nervous. Poor response to questions. |
Student has Limited understanding of the case study. Does not use theories or scholarly examples to demonstrate understanding. Supporting materials are correctly referenced. Case study review has focus. Presenters have poor transition. Content present, but not presented in a logical manner. Visual aids partially support presentation content Visual aids have few illustrations. Occasional usage of awkward sentences and poor sentence structure. Occasional grammar problems, poor word usage and spelling errors. Effective vocabulary. Overuse of words, conjunctions, and transitions. Overstated ideas. Moderately nervous. Adequate response to questions (prepared for most questions). |
Complete understanding of the case study. Utilizes theories and scholarly examples to demonstrate understanding; information is relevant. Supporting materials are relevant to the subject and the assignment meets the final objectives. Case study review completely focused. Presenters transition correctly. Introduction clearly states one problem, one chosen solution is stated, supported, and is logical form. Conclusion sums up the presentation. Visual aids support the presentation content and have interest and focus attention. Demonstration of correct written and spoken language. There are no grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors. Appropriate word selection, concise wording and conjunctions are not overused. Composed and comfortable. Student responds with in-depth understanding and can defend position. |
Population: Students enrolled in senior capstone course, ISM 4915
Students are considered to have successfully demonstrated PLO #3 if a score of 12 or higher is achieved out of the total 24 available points (50%).
Results via Face-to-Face
The senior capstone course, ISM 4915 is taught exclusively online and does not include face-to-face sections.
Results via Distance Delivery (Online, Blended, etc)
| PLO 3: Case Study Scores | ||||
| Year | N | Score | N Met Criteria | % Meeting Criteria |
| 2014-15 | 71 | 91.3% | 69 | 97.2% |
| 2015-16 | 112 | 92.5% | 112 | 100% |
| PLO 3: Case Study Presentation Scores | ||||
| Year | N | Score | N Met Criteria | % Meeting Criteria |
| 2014-15 | 71 | 83.4% | 69 | 97.0% |
| 2015-16 | 112 | 83.4% | 103 | 92.0% |
Case Study Project & Presentation scores clearly indicate that students are meeting the criteria for success in the Capstone course for the Technology Development and Management BAS. The results show that 97.2% of capstone students met the criteria in 2014-15 with 100% in 2015-16 for the cast study project. For the Case Study presentation, 97.0% of students met the criteria in 2014-15, with 92.0% reaching the goal in 2015-16. Students Develop value-added information technology projectst by:
Researching and developing a case study that demonstrates students' ability to identify, quantify, and synthesize a workable solution to the information requirements presented by the case.
Future data will be disaggregated by individual PLO.