UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — A recent review of program learning assessment evidence sparked a shift in the Chinese baccalaureate program in Penn State’s College of the Liberal Arts, prompting faculty to refine both their teaching strategies and the way they measure students’ learning.
Specifically, the program used the program learning assessment process to inform pedagogical changes intended to increase Chinese-language learners’ engagement in reading, listening, critical thinking and in-depth discussions. The program has also used assessment evidence to refine how it evaluates students’ learning — strengthening alignment between instructional priorities, assessment methods and program learning objectives (PLOs). PLOs state what students should know and be able to do by the end of the program.
One focus of this work was a PLO that requires students to demonstrate literacy skills that allow them to read and write in Chinese. To assess whether Chinese majors are meeting this objective, the program uses a contextualized essay-writing assignment. In this approach, students demonstrate advanced literacy through sustained, paragraph-level writing that synthesizes ideas from authentic materials.
At Penn State, all undergraduate, graduate, and for-credit certificate programs are required to assess how well their students are achieving key PLOs. Each year, programs identify at least one PLO to assess. They collect and analyze data to determine how well students are meeting that objective and then use those findings to inform any changes — whether in pedagogy, curriculum, instruction, student support or assessment methods. This helps ensure that students are gaining the knowledge, skills and abilities they need to succeed both in and beyond the classroom.
Findings prompt pedagogical adjustments
In the 2023–24 academic year, Yupeng Kou, associate teaching professor of Chinese and coordinator of the Chinese language program at Penn State, found that roughly 40% of students were not meeting the program expectation of demonstrating advanced-level reading comprehension skills in Chinese. Building on evidence from prior assessment cycles, Kou also recognized that combining skill areas in a single assessment could obscure which underlying abilities needed the most immediate instructional attention.
While authentic Chinese reading materials were already included in the program’s required 400-level courses, it was concluded that more materials needed to be incorporated into classroom activities to support student learning.
“While there was indication that the authentic Chinese reading materials the program already had integrated into the classroom activities were beneficial, we determined that the content, structure, level of difficulty, and new vocabulary of the authentic materials needed further review and recalibration given our findings,” Kou explained.
He added that the program’s response centered on strengthening reading comprehension as a foundation for students’ broader language development.
Observed improvement in student performance
Assessment findings from the 2024–25 academic year indicated improved student performance in reading comprehension, grammatical competence, and sustained writing following the incorporation of additional authentic Chinese reading materials into the classroom activities, according to Kou.
“I was able to create a classroom learning environment in which fourth-year Chinese language learners extensively engaged in reading, listening, critical thinking and in-depth discussions,” Kou said. “It turns out that students’ reading comprehension skills developed tremendously along with significant growth on the mastery of grammar knowledge, the accuracy of tone pronunciation, and the fluency of contextualized meaningful language use.”
Kou noted that these gains were reflected in students’ increasingly sustained, paragraph-like in-class discussions and in their essays completed through written tests.
While a direct comparison to the prior year’s findings cannot be made as the Chinese program adopted a new assessment method for the 2024-25 academic year, Kou noted that the decision to change methods was part of a broader assessment plan to “try to target and gradually approach an integrated assessment of all PLOs.”
According to Kou, adjustments of assessment approach in 2024-25 were implemented based on a careful review of feedback from Penn State’s Office of Planning, Assessment, and Institutional Research (OPAIR) on the 2023-24 findings, to better capture the integrated skills Chinese major students need at the advanced level.
About program learning assessment at Penn State
The assessment success stories featured in this series highlight how Penn State programs are using assessment findings to improve student learning. These stories typically involve a full cycle of assessment: identifying an area for change, implementing an action plan, and reassessing a program learning objective to see whether there’s evidence that the change or changes made a difference. This process plays a central role in Penn State’s commitment to continuous academic improvement and is commonly referred to as “closing the loop.”
Visit this link for more information about the program learning assessment process, or email assessment@psu.edu with any questions.