Botany
Results of Assessment
2002-2003 (submitted
05/16/03)
This academic year represented the
second full year of implementation of the department's new curriculum whose
revision was inspired by the Assessment Plan development process begun three
years ago. We are pleased with the progress the faculty are making in
incorporating the various aspects of the Assessment Plan into their courses and
student responses to the requirements demanded. Two major portions of the plan
are the Student Portfolio and the Exit Interviews.
The portfolio requirement is
accepted more positively since the advent of the Career Planning for
Botanists (Botany 2121) course which devotes more than half of the course
time to the portfolio requirements. It is imperative that majors get off to as
quick a start as possible with these requirements. This is still a challenge
given that most of our majors are usually already juniors when they are
recruited into the program.
Exit interviews were not conducted
this year inasmuch as we did not have any graduates.
Since considerable time was spent
this academic year on the Self-Study evaluation by outside evaluators whose
report was also used in the Northwest Accreditation Report, the report of the
evaluation committee is included here as well as the Department of Botany’s
response to the contents.
Botany Program Review, October 2002
Reviewers:
Dr. Kathryn L. MacKay, (Team
"Captain"), Associate Professor, History Department, WSU,
Dr. Randolph J. Scott, Associate Professor, Communication Department, Weber
State University
Dr. Gordon Uno, Chair of Department of Botany and Microbiology and David Ross
Boyd Professor of Plant Reproductive Biology, University of Oklahoma
Mr. Glen E. Lyon, (Alumnus), Application Engineer, Software Support Group,
Campbell Scientific, Inc.
The Botany Program is recognized at Weber
State for doing a lot of good with few resources. Most faculty members are
active on the campus in faculty governance and in interdisciplinary projects.
Most faculty members are admired for their research and involvement in
professional organizations. And most faculty have been involved in faculty
development initiatives on campus designed to help faculty improve their
teaching in support of student learning.
We take particular note of these strengths
of the Botany Program:
1. Faculty members are active scholars,
doing research and bringing their research into their teaching. Faculty
members are committed to student learning and have good working relations with
many of their students.
2. Although laboratory space and equipment
continues to be inadequate, facilities have improved since the last program
review in 1994. Grants and gifts have enabled the program to improve
laboratory and computer spaces and plant storage areas.
3. The student portfolio method of
evaluating student learning continues to be effective, particularly with the
addition to the curriculum of 2121, an orientation to the portfolio. The
Botany student portfolio project is admired on campus and has recently been
used as the model for the new Honors Program portfolio project.
4. Students feel well supported in their
Botany Program. Photos of scholarship students and of student field trips are
on public display. The Botany Club is an active Association of Registered
Organizations (ARO) student organization. The letter sent to promising
students in the general education courses continues to be an effective
recruitment tactic.
5. Library resources have been improved
since 1994 as part of a university-wide effort to strengthen those resources
for faculty and students.
6. The Botany Program has used student
assessments of the program such as the exit interview to give additional
support to students by way of a greater emphasis on advisement and by way of
the class on careers in botany.
We note challenges for the
Botany Program:
1. The small size of the Program means that
students feel faculty are approachable. And some faculty do engage their
students in their research projects. However, as greater efforts are made
university-wide to increase development of and support for undergraduate
research, the Botany Program should consider ways to involve more of their
students in their own research and/or in other projects - perhaps by
increasing internship opportunities, particularly with local agencies and
businesses which should then also be involved in assessing the student’s
work.
• Perhaps the program could work with
the University Administration and other departments to obtain materials,
supplies, and equipment that would improve the undergraduate research
experience.
2. The small size of the Program means that
it is not highly visible to students on the campus.
• Strategies to increase visibility
(and recruitment of students) on campus might include campus xeriscape
projects, community garden projects and "eating well’ projects, a
campus "heritage" display of living native plants.
• Perhaps the Program might join in on
a college-wide student poster session (in the library or student union
building) in which the research projects of science students are made
visible to the larger campus.
• Perhaps the program might expand its
efforts (perhaps in continuing cooperation with Utah State) to offer
additional courses of general interest to students such as: flora of Utah,
plant biotechnology, plant care and cultivation.
• The Program might consider ways to
promote the minor - particularly in conjunction with other majors such as
Anthropology and Geography-Urban Planning.
3. Laboratory spaces continue to be
inadequate•especially in equipping labs with computers so that some
experiments can take simultaneous advantage of internet resources.
• Having an ethernet port in the green
house in order to collect real time monitoring data is an example.
(According to Fall 2002 IT’s News, a newsletter from the
Information Technology division, wireless Ethernet connections are being
installed on campus by the Systems and Network Management department of IT.
Because of the greater flexibility this offers, the Program should consider
this over a "wired" connection.)
• Perhaps the Program might develop
partnerships with businesses and agencies to allow students to use their
more up-tp-date equipment, or to see demonstrations.
4. The Program is making good efforts--as
part of university-wide efforts--to improve assessment of student learning.
• The Program might consider using
alumni evaluations in addition to student evaluations and exit interviews.
• The Program should review the Policy
and Procedures Manual regarding the method of students evaluating classes.
5. Alumni could also be involved in
developing more internship opportunities for students - perhaps more often at
the junior level. Alumni could also be involved in sponsoring and organizing
field trips.
6. The adjunct faculty seem very involved
in the Program•working with students and colleagues. They need more formal
space in which to meet students.
Response to the Botany Program Review,
November 1, 2002
The Program Review of the Botany Department
at Weber State University, conducted in the Fall of 2002, addressed six main
challenges faced by the department. Incorporated within these challenges were
areas that need improvement and recommendations on how to facilitate these
changes. The Botany Program agrees with the findings of the report and plans are
underway to implement some of the recommendations as early as Spring 2003, with
more to follow in Fall 2003. The department’s response to this review is as
follows.
Challenge 1: The
Botany Program should consider ways to involve more of their students in their
own research and/or in other projects.
Recommendation: a)
Increase internship opportunities, particularly with local agencies and
businesses which should then also be involved in assessing the student’s
work. b) Work with the University Administration and other departments
to obtain materials, supplies, and equipment that would improve the
undergraduate research experience.
Response: The
suggestion to create internships with local agencies is well taken. We realize
that most of our graduates that succeed in careers in Botany have held one or
more internships while in college. We have had department discussions on how
to increase student interest and involvement in internships and have even
considered requiring students to have an internship prior to graduation.
Although we encourage students to take advantage of these opportunities, many
are not willing to leave the state, even temporarily. Local opportunities are
limited, but the best chances would be with the Forest Service, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Utah Department of Agriculture, and the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality. This is certainly worth pursuing further. There are
many out-of-state and some in-state internships available, particularly in the
summer, with government agencies, environmental groups and research
universities. Unfortunately, there are not many local businesses that do
research in Botany, although co-op experiences with local nurseries may be
possible. Many local companies have been reluctant in the past to offer paid
internships and we suspect the same might apply at least until the economy
improves. If we could help supplement internships, by grants or money
solicited through the Development Office, the likelihood of local business
participation would undoubtedly increase. We will survey some local
agencies/businesses to determine the level of interest and commitment for such
endeavors.
Last summer the Botany Department was part
of an interdisciplinary grant awarded by the Hemingway Fund, along with the
Microbiology and Zoology departments, to obtain summer internship money for
students to conduct research with faculty mentors. Additional funding will be
given this summer. Further collaborative efforts will be pursued and will
become more feasible when the Tech Ed Building is renovated, providing
additional lab space and interdisciplinary contact.
One problem we have faced in getting more
students involved in projects and internships has been timing. We have not had
consistent access to students early enough in their programs for lengthy
project or internship planning. With Botany 2121, we now have access to
students early in their programs. However, even with early and ongoing
announcements and advisement about projects, we face two problems that are up
to the students to overcome:
1. students who are unable to engage in
projects because of work and family commitments
2. students who want projects or
internships handed to them, without the work of application, planning, etc.
We hope that with the implementation of an
improved advising system, students will become more aware of the importance
and availability of internships and they will be more likely to pursue them.
We may also be more successful if we offered a four week block from May to
June for students interested in working on short-term research projects.
In terms of equipment, the Botany
Department has applied for and received in-house grants for equipment with the
Microbiology and Geosciences departments. We will continue to pursue these
opportunities as they become available.
Challenge 2: The
small size of the Program means that it is not highly visible to students on the
campus.
Recommendations: Strategies
to increase visibility (and recruitment of students) on campus might include
campus and community projects, participation in college-wide student research
poster sessions (in the library or student union building), expanding efforts
(perhaps in continuing cooperation with Utah State) to offer additional
courses of general interest to students such (E.g. flora of Utah, plant
biotechnology, plant care and cultivation), and promoting the minor with
majors such as Anthropology and Geography-Urban Planning.
Response: Every
year, the department’s student organization, the Botany Club, holds a two-
day plant sale which is widely advertised and serves as the club’s major
fund-raiser. People campus-wide and from the community attend the sale which
generates enough revenue to fund one student scholarship per year. The club is
currently involved in a xeriscape landscaping project adjacent to the Science
Lab building. The involvement of the department and the Botany Club in
community projects has been discussed and could include projects in
landscape/gardens, composting, weed control, and water conservation. These
types of activities yield good publicity for both our department and our
students.
The Botany Department’s fall field trip
to the Uinta Mountains has been an annual event for over thirty years. Over
eighty students campus-wide enrolled in Botany courses attend each year.
Reporters from the campus newspaper are invited, although they do not always
come. A few years ago the trip was also written up in the local newspaper.
Last year we started an annual spring field trip to Antelope Island and we
have discussed the possibility of offering scenic trips elsewhere in Utah that
would be open to the public.
We have quite a bit of campus exposure via
Botany LS1403 (Environment Appreciation). However, as a core requirement in
the School of Business, this in not necessarily a positive exposure for the
department. Botany LS1203 (Plant Biology), new last year, has shown enrollment
increases each semester, and should serve as a good recruitment vehicle for
the department. There has also been discussion to offer the popular Botany
2203 (Home and Garden Plants) as a general education course. It used to be
offered as such, but we were limited by the number of LS courses we could
offer. We removed its LS status, but we may revisit this issue. Zoology and
the GIS program have student research presentations.
The College of Science as a whole would
benefit from a single effort with campus-wide publicity. Some entities on
campus are trying to start a campus-wide presentation of student projects.
(This has come up with the Women’s Studies program. The goal seems to be
next academic year.) An additional source of exposure would be student
presentations at the Utah Academy of Arts, Letters and Science.
As a result of our Program Review, we have
discussed the possibility of offering courses that would appeal to the general
public either through Continuing Education or through local high schools’
lifelong learning programs. We have already scheduled a class for Fall 2003 on
Utah Pioneer Herbal Medicines as a night class to be offered through
Continuing Education. Other courses discussed include Local Flora, Homeopathic
Uses of Plants, Flower Arranging , Xeriscaping, and
gardening classes on Cottage Gardens, Zen Gardens, and Feng-Shui
Gardens. We have also discussed establishing a Wetlands Certificate
Program and a Horticultural Therapy Certificate Program. In instances where
our mission and that of Utah State conflict, we would seek a mutually
beneficial arrangement.
Increasing the number of Botany minors
would increase SCHs, especially in upper division courses. However, the minor
itself does not count in our statistics. Only majors, Biology composites ( 1/2
and BIS (1/3) student are credited to the department. One way to increase some
enrollments and the department’s visibility on campus would be to encourage
Social Sciences students to take Botany LS1303 toward their general education
requirement.
Challenge 3: Laboratory
spaces continue to be inadequate-especially in equipping labs with computers so
that some experiments can take simultaneous advantage of internet resources.
Recommendations a)
Install wireless Ethernet connections to offer greater flexibility in places
such as the green house in order to collect real time monitoring data is an
example. b) Develop partnerships with businesses and
agencies to allow students to use their more up-to-date equipment, or to see
demonstrations.
Response: a)
There may not be a great need for internet access in labs currently, however
portable devices for data collection and analysis, such as the various Licor
units, may prove helpful. Instructors of the labs that could use such
equipment (ecology, physiology, house and garden plants) will compile a list
and apply for RSPG/ARCC money. b) Partnerships with agencies/businesses for
equipment use could be explored at the same time we survey regarding
internships
Challenge 4: The
Program should continue and expand its good efforts to improve assessment of
student learning.
Recommendations:
a) Consider using alumni evaluations in addition to student evaluations and
exit interviews. b) Review the Policy and Procedures Manual regarding
the method of students evaluating classes.
Response: a)
Currently , it is difficult to track alumni. However, the Alumni Office is
making an effort to do so. Once we have a better capability we agree that it
would be valuable to have alumni evaluate the department, their education at
WSU and how their experience in the Botany Department prepared them for their
career/future. We also agree that an anonymous, written evaluation would be
beneficial in addition to exit interviews for graduating seniors. Students may
feel more comfortable making criticisms or suggestions anonymously. We will
add a written evaluation as part of the process for Spring 2003. We have
received good feedback in our exit interviews in the past and have begun to
implement some of the changes that were suggested.
b) The department does not fully understand
the concern regarding the method in which student evaluations of classes are
conducted. We all teach one or two lower division courses (perhaps multiple
sections of one), and usually one or two upper division classes per semester.
Each upper division course is taught by only one faculty member, depending on
the area of his/her specialty. The current department policy for student
evaluations is to have at least one upper division and one lower division
course evaluated each year, preferably each semester. Almost every upper
division course is evaluated each year, given the distribution of these
courses among faculty. Due to the fact that many of the lower division courses
are taught by more than one faculty member, most sections of these are
evaluated every semester in order to produce somewhat meaningful data. The PPM
8-11 states that "...each year each faculty member shall have student
evaluations administered and compiled...in at least two of the courses that
the faculty member teaches. The two courses to be evaluated each year will be
determined through consultation between each faculty member and his/her
department chair...". Since our policy is to evaluate most courses taught
each semester, with at least one upper and one lower division course per
faculty member evaluated per year (as stipulated by the Chair), we feel that
our evaluation method falls within the criteria set forth in the PPM. We also
feel that in evaluating more than two classes per faculty member each year,
the Chair is able to get a better idea of the overall student perception of
our department’s quality of courses and instruction.
Challenge 5: Alumni
involvement in the department
Recommendations:
Involve alumni in developing more internship opportunities for students-
perhaps more often at the junior level and in sponsoring and organizing field
trips.
Response: As
stated in #4 above, we hope that it will soon be easier to track alumni. We
agree that there are a number of ways in which alumni could become involved in
the department. It would undoubtedly be possible to involve them in helping to
organize specific field trips. It might be possible to have them or their
employers sponsor trips, although this might be more difficult. Another
possible way to get alumni involved is to have them give guest lectures, in
classes or to larger audiences, or become involved in other departmental
projects.
Challenge 6:
The adjunct faculty seem very involved in the Program-working with students and
colleagues. This involvement could be enhanced.
Recommendations: Provide
more formal space in which adjunct faculty could meet students.
Response: We
would love to provide space for adjunct faculty. Given the ongoing office
crunch in the Science Lab building, formal space just won’t be available.
Even as faculty acquire lab and equipment space in other buildings, they will
still have offices in SL. With enough college pressure for office space, there
could be increased lobbying for construction of Phase 2 of the science
building.
Mission Statement /
Student Learning Outcomes
/ Curriculum Grid / Assessment
Plan / Contact Person | 
