Northwestern State University

Assessment of Counseling Program Objectives (2013-2014)

Objective Content Area NSU Comprehensive Exam Percentage NCE National Statistical

Summary (2012)

#1 Professional Functioning 79% 73%

#2 Multicultural/Cultural Contexts 77% 77%

#3 Human Growth/Development 62% 62%

#4 Career Development/Life Factors 77% 63%

#5 Counseling Process/Professional Orientation

78% 73%

#6 Group Counseling 70% 67%

#7 Assessment 64% 66%

#8 Research/Program Evaluation 66% 66%

#9 Field Experiences Student Overall Ratings - Excellent

#10 Professional Development At least two professional development opportunities were offered each semester.

Survey Data for AY 2013-2014 (COUN) Based on a 5 point scale

Objective Graduates Supervisors Employers

2013-2014 n=6

2013-2014 n=6

2013-2014 n=4

Objective 1 – understanding of professional functioning as a counselor 5.0 4.604 4.656

Objective 2 – understanding of the cultural context of relationships, issues, and trends in a multicultural society

5.0 4.634 4.7

Objective 3 – understanding of the nature and needs of persons at all developmental levels and in multicultural contexts

4.50 4.634 4.9

Objective 4 – understanding of the career development and related life factors 4.67 4.766 4.85

Objective 5 - understanding of the counseling process in a multicultural society 4.83 4.504 4.8

Objective 6 - understanding of the group purpose, development, dynamics, theories, methods, skills, and other group approaches in a multicultural society

4.33 4.790 4.938

Objective 7 - understanding of the individual and group approaches to assessment and evaluation in a multicultural society

4.50 4.798 4.9

Objective 8 - understanding of research methods, statistical analysis, needs assessment, and program evaluation

4.66 4.598 4.9

Objective 9 – to offer practicum/internship experiences and provide quality supervision

5.0 N/A N/A

Objective 10 – to offer professional development opportunities which directly contribute to the personal and professional growth of candidates

5.0 N/A N/A

Northwestern State University

Counseling Program – CMHC Concentration

Performance on Specialty Standards (2013-2014)

Students who are preparing to work as clinical mental health counselors will

demonstrate the professional knowledge, skills, and practices necessary to address

a wide variety of circumstances within the clinical mental health counseling

context. In addition to the common core curricular experiences outlined in Section

II.G, programs must provide evidence that student learning has occurred in the

following domains:

Various assessment strategies were used to provide evidence of student learning

for each of the Knowledge, Skills, and Practices standards related to each of the

six Clinical Mental Health Counseling domains. The standards have been

specified in the course objectives for each syllabi, along with the specific

assessment that evaluates learning. Assessment strategies providing both

formative and summative outcome data were selected to measure student

learning. Examples of these modes of formal assessment include:

1. Multiple-Choice Exams and Quizzes

2. Rubrics and Rating Scales

3. Research Papers and Reports

4. Visual Products (e.g., PowerPoint, Prezi, website design)

5. Role Play/Skill Demonstration

6. Journals

7. Formal Observation

8. Discussion Forums

9. Projects and Portfolios

10. Oral Presentations

11. Student Self-Assessment

FOUNDATIONS CMHC A.1 89%

CMHC A.2 90%

CMHC A.3 87%

CMHC A.4 89%

CMHC A.5 95%

CMHC A.6 95%

CMHC A.7 92%

CMHC A.8 92%

CMHC A.9 92%

CMHC A.10 83%

CMHC B.1 98%

CMHC B.2 95%

COUNSELING, PREVENTION, AND INTERVENTION CMHC C.1 87%

CMHC C.2 100%

CMHC C.3 90%

CMHC C.4 92%

CMHC C.5 87%

CMHC C.6 91%

CMHC C.7 100%

CMHC C.8 100%

CMHC C.9 100%

CMHC D.1 100%

CMHC D.2 88%

CMHC D.3 100%

CMHC D.4 100%

CMHC D.5 92%

CMHC D.6 98%

CMHC D.7 95%

CMHC D.8 96%

CMHC D.9 90%

DIVERSITY AND ADVOCACY CMHC E.1 95%

CMHC E.2 91%

CMHC E.3 100%

CMHC E.4 100%

CMHC E.5 97%

CMHC E.6 100%

CMHC F.1 100%

CMHC F.2 98%

CMHC F.3 100%

ASSESSMENT CMHC G.1 90%

CMHC G.2 100%

CMHC G.3 93%

CMHC G.4 98%

CMHC H.1 94%

CMHC H.2 100%

CMHC H.3 100%

CMHC H.4 100%

RESEARCH AND EVALUATION CMHC I.1 94%

CMHC I.2 92%

CMHC I.3 92%

CMHC J.1 88%

CMHC J.2 95%

CMHC J.3 95%

DIAGNOSIS CMHC K.1 93%

CMHC K.2 93%

CMHC K.3 93%

CMHC K.4 100%

CMHC K.5 93%

CMHC L.1 88%

CMHC L.2 88%

CMHC L.3 88%

Northwestern State University

Counseling Program – School Counseling Concentration

Performance on Specialty Standards (2013-2014)

Students who are preparing to work as school counselors will demonstrate the

professional knowledge, skills, and practices necessary to promote the

academic, career, and personal/social development of all K–12 students. In

addition to the common core curricular experiences outlined in Section II.G,

programs must provide evidence that student learning has occurred in the

following domains.

Various assessment strategies were used to provide evidence of student learning

for each of the Knowledge, Skills, and Practices standards related to each of the

eight School Counseling domains. The standards have been specified in the

course objectives for each syllabi, along with the specific assessment to evaluate

learning. Assessment strategies which provided both formative and summative

outcome data were selected to measure student learning. Examples of these

modes of formal assessment include:

1. Multiple-Choice Exams and Quizzes

2. Rubrics and Rating Scales

3. Research Papers and Reports

4. Visual Products (e.g., PowerPoint, Prezi, website design)

5. Role Play/Skill Demonstration

6. Journals

7. Formal Observation

8. Discussion Forums

9. Projects and Portfolios

10. Oral Presentations

11. Student Self-Assessment

FOUNDATIONS SC A.1 95%

SC A.2 93%

SC A.3 95%

SC A.4 95%

SC A.5 93%

SC A.6 96%

SC A.7 90%

SC B.1 97%

SC B.2 96%

COUNSELING, PREVENTION, AND INTERVENTION SC C.1 93%

SC C.2 94%

SC C.3 93%

SC C.4 95%

SC C.5 98%

SC C.6 89%

SC D.1 97%

SC D.2 98%

SC D.3 93%

SC D.4 97%

SC D.5 96%

DIVERSITY AND ADVOCACY SC E.1 95%

SC E.2 92%

SC E.3 93%

SC E.4 91%

SC F.1 98%

SC F.2 95%

SC F.3 92%

SC F.4 95%

ASSESSMENT SC G.1 92%

SC G.2 92%

SC G.3 93%

SC H.1 95%

SC H.2 93%

SC H.3 100%

SC H.4 97%

SC H.5 96%

RESEARCH AND EVALUATION SC I.1 94%

SC I.2 93%

SC I.3 93%

SC I.4 93%

SC I.5 94%

SC J.1 96%

SC J.2 96%

SC J.3 98%

ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT SC K.1 96%

SC K.2 93%

SC K.3 93%

SC L.1 93%

SC L.2 95%

SC L.3 93%

COLLABORATION AND CONSULTATION SC M.1 92%

SC M.2 93%

SC M.3 94%

SC M.4 94%

SC M.5 94%

SC M.6 94%

SC M.7 89%

SC N.1 95%

SC N.2 100%

SC N.3 88%

SC N.4 95%

SC N.5 93%

LEADERSHIP SC O.1 96%

SC O.2 93%

SC O.3 92%

SC O.4 95%

SC O.5 93%

SC P.1 98%

SC P.2 98%

Counseling Program Advisory Board Meeting

July 22, 2014, Tuesday

11:45-1:00

Minutes

Attendees: Gerra Perkins, Aaron Edwards, Latoyia Pea, Caron Coleman, Anna-Kate Oglesby,

Danielle Jones, Rebecca Boone, Michael Lacour, Kim Cain, Wade Williams, Twana Harris, Erik

Braun

G. Perkins opened meeting, thanked members for their service to the profession and the program,

and welcomed new members. Perkins presented the ten program objectives previously approved

by the Advisory Committee in June, 2012. M. Lacour motioned to affirm the objectives; K. Cain

seconded the motion. The committee members voted unanimously to accept the motion.

G. Perkins reviewed the Counseling Program Assessment Plan, including the Specialty

Standards for Clinical Mental Health Counseling and School Counseling. Perkins reviewed how

rubrics are aligned with the CACREP standards and the corresponding coding. Each specialty

standard is typically assessed by at least two assignments and usually around three to five

assessments. Candidate data from the assessments are aggregated to determine how well

students are meeting the objectives. The following ranges and descriptors were used:

o 90%-100% = Target

o 80%-89% = Acceptable

o 79% and below = Unacceptable

Perkins presented data showing candidate scores for each specialty standard within the CMHC

and SC concentrations. Perkins then presented candidate scores for each program objective.

Objectives 1-8 were assessed by candidates’ scores on the multiple-choice Comprehensive

Exam; Objective 9 was assessed by students’ evaluations of field experience sites and site

supervisors; Objective 10 was assessed by the number of professional development experiences

afforded candidates. The following areas of focus were identified for 2014-2015: HGD,

Assessment, and Research.

Exit survey data from Grad School and Graduate, Supervisor, and Employer results specific to

the COUN program were disseminated and discussed. Of note was the Graduates’ rating of

Objective 6 regarding Group. A lack of understanding was not reflected in their scores on the

Comprehensive Exam within this area, but the lower score (M=4.33), when compared to the

other Objectives, is of concern. Perkins explained this group of candidates completed an

intensive 4 week Group summer course rather than the traditional 8 week summer course.

The program faculty reviewed the results of all of the formal follow-up studies and

recommended the following changes be made at this time: (1) redesign of Crisis course (COUN

5820), (2) give recently redesigned Assessment course (EPSY 5520) another year before changes

are made, (3) return Group (COUN 5580) to an 8 week summer course rather than a 4 week

course.

A motion was made by W. Williams to accept the faculty recommendation; D. Jones seconded

the motion. The motion passed unanimously.

M. Lacour motioned to accept the Program Report and place online; W. Williams seconded the

motion. Committee members voted unanimously to accept the motion.