1

NYIT Program Assessment Report

June 2017

Name of Program: Carleton Group, Old

Westbury, Communication Arts

Year of Assessment report: AY 16-17

Contact: Professor Fizzinoglia, Dr. Piazza

2

Carleton Group

1) Program Outcomes:

a. 1.) Apply tools and technologies to the Adv.PR and Fields

b. 2.) Demonstrate written, oral and interpersonal communication skills appropriate

to the profession;

c. 3.) Identify and incorporate legal requirements, ethical considerations and the

concepts of social responsibility to their own work.

2) Method:

a. 1.) Indirect from Clients

b. 2.) Direct from Facility

c. 3.) Attached find questionnaire for client and faculty evaluation of students

administered by professor Hanc.

3) Analysis:

a. 1.) A client’s questionnaire was administered to two organizations highlighting

eight areas of the student’s competency. The written categories rated from “below

expectations” as a score of one to excellent as a score of five.

b. 2.) The Faculty member scored a “Student Assessment” questionnaire with five

categories from “Below Expectations” scored as “one” to “excellent” scored as five.

c. 3.) Client Evaluation Results:

i. The two results were most favorable with the clients’ results reflecting

solid fives as excellent in all eight categories.

1. Team’s ability to analyze and interpret data (research client past

campaigns, competitors, trends) to determine client’s advertising

or public relations needs.

a. P.L.0.1

2. Team’s ability to develop a creative and strategic campaign to

meet client objectives.

a. P.L.0.1

3

3. Team’s ability to organize and present campaign ideas effectively

(using written, oral and visual methods) to client.

a. P.L.02, P.L.0.3

4. Team’s responsiveness to client feedback

a. P.L.0.2

5. Team communication/collaboration with client ( frequent and

effective team/client meetings throughout semester)

a. P.L.0.2

6. Ability of team to meet deadlines/show progress in meeting

objectives (progress reports/drafts, revisions of deliverables)

a. P.L.0.1

7. Ability of team to produce deliverables/implement programs to

meet client objectives

a. P.L.0.1

8. Do you intend to use the materials produced by the Carleton

Group student team?

a. P.L.0.1

b. P.L.0.2

The measure of “excellent” which demonstrates the scoring is reflective of the clients satisfactory

with students and their “deliverables.”

4

Client Questionnaire – See 2a; 3a Assessment of ADV 420 – The Carleton Group Spring 2017

Rate the Performance of the Student team in the following areas: Analysis and Ability to formulate strategy:

1. Team’s ability to analyze and interpret data (research client past campaigns, competitors, trends) to determine client’s advertising or public relations needs.

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

2. Team’s ability to develop a creative and strategic campaign to meet client objectives.

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

3. Team’s ability to organize and present campaign ideas effectively (using written, oral and visual methods) to client.

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

5

Team performance: Team’s ability to work effectively in a deadline oriented business environment: 4. Team’s responsiveness to client feedback : Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

5. Team communication/collaboration with client ( frequent and effective team/client meetings throughout semester) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

6. Ability of team to meet deadlines/show progress in meeting objectives (progress reports/drafts, revisions of deliverables) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

Quality Assessment of Student Semester Project: 7. Ability of team to produce deliverables/implement programs to meet client objectives

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

8. Do you intend to use the materials produced by the Carleton Group student team? Yes No

6

Student Assessment by Faculty – See2b; 3b ADV 420 Spring, 2017 Carleton Group

Participation: 1- Ability to display & enhance skills throughout semester

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

2- Ability to receive constructive feedback and improve work Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

3- Ability to collaborate effectively with team members to achieve goals (volunteer for tasks, assist others) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

4- Ability to display responsibility to team (consistent attendance, assigned tasks completed within deadlines) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

7

Professionalism: 5- Ability to effectively participate in client meetings (offer ideas, accept feedback) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

6- Ability to exhibit appropriate behavior in professional settings (appropriate attire, business etiquette) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

7- Ability to prepare professional quality presentation materials/deliverables within deadlines Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

Proficiency 8- Ability to present logical ideas confidently in team environment Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

9- Ability to strategize (brainstorm/negotiate/compromise/troubleshoot) effectively with team members to reach objectives Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

10- Ability to work effectively within a team (coordinates tasks with others/assists others within team) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

8

Long Island Volunteer Center, Spring 2017. See 2a; 3a Rate the Performance by the client of the Student team in the following areas: Analysis and Ability to formulate strategy:

1. Team’s ability to analyze and interpret data (research client past campaigns, competitors, trends) to determine client’s advertising or public relations needs.

Below Adequate Good Very Good

👍Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

2. Team’s ability to develop a creative and strategic campaign to meet client objectives.

Below Adequate Good Very Good

👍Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

3. Team’s ability to organize and present campaign ideas effectively (using written, oral and visual methods) to client.

Below Adequate Good Very Good

👍Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

9

Team performance: Team’s ability to work effectively in a deadline oriented business environment: 4. Team’s responsiveness to client feedback : Below Adequate Good Very Good

👍Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) 5. Team communication/collaboration with client ( frequent and effective team/client meetings throughout semester) Below Adequate Good Very Good

👍Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) 6. Ability of team to meet deadlines/show progress in meeting objectives (progress reports/drafts, revisions of deliverables) Below Adequate Good Very Good

👍Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) Quality Assessment of Student Semester Project: 7. Ability of team to produce deliverables/implement programs to meet client objectives Below Adequate Good Very

Good 👍Excellent

10

Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) 8. Do you intend to use the materials produced by the Carleton Group student team?

👍Yes No I want to take the opportunity to recognize the fine young professionals at the NYIT

Carleton Group who over the years have given the Long Island Volunteer Center a much

needed facelift and workable game-plan for 3 different core business objectives: youth

volunteering, corporate engagement, and a volunteer generation campaign. A program to

recognize the contributions of youth volunteers became an integral part of the Long Island

Volunteer Hall of Fame with 6 Next Generation Award inductees. Carleton

Group members developed the award criteria, were part of the judges panel, and handed

out the awards at the annual induction ceremonies at Carlyle on the Green, Bethpage

State Park, and produced a you tube video to promote the nomination process. Our

corporate activation project was created by another Carleton Group team who

launched our Corporate Volunteers of Long Island with a logo, branding materials, and

tabling opportunity at the Long Island Society of Human Resource Managers Conference at

the Crest Hollow County Club. Their strategies became the foundation for rolling out our

corporate programming. Another project spearheaded by the Carleton Group to increase

the profile of volunteerism and recruit new volunteers via a 5-hour volunteer challenge

produced a campaign logo and process, a resource table at Roosevelt Field Mall during

National Volunteer Week, a contest with a prize for eligible participants, and a you tube

promotional video to promote the campaign. I cannot speak more highly of these

enthusiastic and gifted consultants who helped us meet core business objectives in such

practical ways. It was such a pleasure to work alongside them as they dissected and rebuilt

parts of our organization that needed specialized attention while listening carefully for

what was mission-centric and important to the organizational culture. Many thanks too to

Professor John Hanc who invited our participation and helped direct the work. We are

forever in their debt.

11

Client Questionnaire – Maritime Museum. See 2a; 3a

Assessment of ADV 420 – The Carleton Group Spring 2017 Rate the Performance of the Student team in the following areas: Analysis and Ability to formulate strategy:

1. Team’s ability to analyze and interpret data (research client past campaigns, competitors, trends) to determine client’s advertising or public relations needs.

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

2. Team’s ability to develop a creative and strategic campaign to meet client objectives.

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations)

3. Team’s ability to organize and present campaign ideas effectively (using written, oral and visual methods) to client.

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent

12

Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) Team performance: Team’s ability to work effectively in a deadline oriented business environment: 4. Team’s responsiveness to client feedback : Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) 5. Team communication/collaboration with client ( frequent and effective team/client meetings throughout semester) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) 6. Ability of team to meet deadlines/show progress in meeting objectives (progress reports/drafts, revisions of deliverables) Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) Quality Assessment of Student Semester Project: 7. Ability of team to produce deliverables/implement programs to meet client objectives

13

Below Adequate Good Very Good Excellent Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations) (Exceeded Expectations) 8. Do you intend to use the materials produced by the Carleton Group student team? Yes No

14

L.I. Maritime Museum

Student assessment by Faculty - ADV 420

See2b,3b

Spring, 2017 Carleton Group

Participation :

1- Ability to display & enhance skills throughout semester

Below

Expectations

Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good

(Met Expectations)

Excellent

2- Ability to receive constructive feedback and improve work

Below

Expectations

Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good

(Met Expectations)

Excellent

3- Ability to collaborate effectively with team members to achieve goals (volunteer

for tasks, assist others)

Below

Expectations

Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good

(Met expectations)

Very Good

(Exceeded Expectations)

Excellent

4- Ability to display responsibility to team (consistent attendance, assigned tasks

completed within deadlines)

Below

Expectations

Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good (Met expectations)

Very Good

(Exceeded Expectations)

Excellent

Professionalism:

5- Ability to effectively participate in client meetings (offer ideas, accept feedback)

Below Adequate Good

Expectations (Minimum Effort) (Met Expectations)

Ability to exhibit appropriate behavior in professional settings (appropriate

attire, business etiquette)

15

Below

Expectations

Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good (Met Expectations)

Very Good

(Exceeded Expectations)

Excellent

6- Ability to prepare professional quality presentation materials/deliverables within

deadlines

Below

Expectations

Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good Very Good

(Met Expectations) (Met Expectations)

Excellent

Proficiency

Ability to present creative ideas confidently in team environment

Below

Expectations

Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Very Good

(Exceeded Expectations)

Excellent

7- Ability to strategize (brainstorm/negotiate/compromise/troubleshoot)

effectively with team members to reach objectives

Below

Expectations Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good

(Met Expectations)

Excellent

8- Ability to work effectively within a team (coordinates tasks with others/assists

others within team)

Below

Expectations Adequate

(Minimum Effort)

Good (Met Expectations)

Excellent

16

I 4. Interpretation: P.L.0. 1b

As reflected in the evaluations of the clients’ responses, they seemed to be quite satisfied

with the professionalism and the “deliverables” of the students (see the review in the Long Island

Volunteer Center’s quite favorable comments).

On the other hand, the faculty member in assessing the student’s performance with the

L.I. Martine Museum had some reservations. While the assessments of ten questions rated

between “very good” and “good,” not one construct was rated “excellent.”

Perhaps the discrepancy can be reconciled since the clients were so grateful of the

assistance that perhaps any shortcomings were overlooked while the faculty member was seeking

to instill in the students a higher sense of professionalism and the elusive rating of “excellent”

remained just that since the faculty member reserved this rating for the highest level of

performance and he saw some room for improvement.

I 5. Improvements- Planed are initial student self-evaluations to create a three-pronged bank of

assessment (client, student, faculty) to be further evaluated.

17

II. Summary of Improvements made in response to Assessment Results the past few years:

Over the last 4-5 years the Communication Arts department has been consumed with upgrading

our academic programs which were in desperate need of updating. While our flagship “BFA in

Communication Arts” (registered in NYS in 1966 as Television and Radio Production) and our

BS in Advertising, as well as our AAS in Communication Arts, our BFA/MA 5-year Combined

CA program and our MA in Communication Arts still appear as options, some are being taught

out and the BFA in CA and the BS in Advertising have been replaced and augmented with 4 new

BFAs:

BFA in Communication and Media Production replaces CA, the most generalized program.

BFA in Advertising, PR and Technology replaces the BS in Advertising.

The faculty saw the need for more specialized programs for students wishing to concentrate on

film and TV production or in journalism so we added:

BFA in Digital Film and TV Production

BFA in Electronic and Global Journalism

The AAS, the BFA/MA combined and the MA are all currently under review by faculty who are

in the process of updating them, but they remain the degrees of record for those disciplines.

The new degrees required a heavy dose of revision and approval, including the program learning

outcomes and assessment strategies: each degree faced rigorous departmental, school level and

university-wide review before submission and approval by New York State.

The new degrees were only introduced in AY 2015-16 on the Old Westbury campus and this past

year, 2016-17, on the Manhattan Campus so the new majors show a small, growing number of

students, while the older degrees’ numbers are shrinking but remain in place for another couple

of years while being phased out. This of course, coupled with the high number of degrees, has

resulted in some confusion, and small or underdeveloped patterns of assessment result.

In addition, our program is designed to utilize the experiential model, where hands-on and

practical patterns of education couples with theory, craft and even employability training, tied to

career goals, create a challenge in assessing the various program learning outcomes.

In short, then, we are in the process of remediating the deficiencies of our assessment reports of

the last few years, the skimpiness partially a result of time and effort limitations, but at the same

time, please keep in mind that assessment was an implicit feature of all the work on the new

degrees.

Furthermore, as we are reviewing the MA and BFA/MA, our next curriculum update projects,

assessment will be on the forefront, with revisions of PLOs explicitly required whether or not the

degrees are replaced or revised.

18

This Assessment Report, 2016-17, should be viewed as a pilot, focusing on the learning

outcomes of one of the new degrees, with the small sample an expected deficiency but the

approach and execution a matter of “getting our feet wet”.

The CA faculty understands that ALL degrees will be part of next year’s assessment report (with

the possibility of folding in data from the small numbered programs due to the newness or the

oldness of their status).

III. The Communication Arts faculty on both campuses participated in the revision of the degrees

and will continue to work on revising the MA and BFA/MA degrees. The current report mostly

was the work of Dr. Piazza, John Hanc, the Chair and Julie Price, adjunct faculty.