UNIVERSITY COUNCIL
PLANNING AND PRIORITIES COMMITTEE
REQUEST FOR DECISION
PRESENTED BY:
Jay Kalra, Chair, Planning and Priorities Committee
DATE OF MEETING:
September 25, 2008
SUBJECT:
A Framework for Assessment: Beyond Systematic
Program Review
DECISION REQUESTED:
It is recommended:
That Council adopt A Framework for Assessment:
Beyond Systematic Program Review as the new framework
for assessment for the University of Saskatchewan, effective
September 25, 2008.
PURPOSE:
A Framework for Assessment: Beyond Systematic Program Review outlines a new
framework for University assessment to enhance quality and demonstrate accountability.
CONTEXT AND BACKGROUND:
The framework follows upon the adoption in 1999 of Systematic Program Review (SPR)
and the completion of the first six-year cycle of program reviews in 2005. Following
completion of the cycle of SPR reviews, a review of the SPR process was undertaken, as
set out when the process for Systematic Process Review was approved in 1999 “using a
mechanism to be determined by Council no later than June 30, 2004.” The Planning
Committee agreed that the process should closely follow the process for program reviews
in general. Accordingly a self-study was prepared, a site visit with external consultants
arranged, and survey of program heads completed. In March, 2005, the Planning
Committee circulated the SPR Self-Study Document and reviewers’ report to the
Committees of Council, Deans, and Department Heads, and invited comment on how
systematic reviews of the University’s programs should be done in the future. On
April 21, 2005, Council was engaged in a discussion on the future of a University-wide
review process.
CONSULTATION:
The Planning and Priorities Committee reviewed the initial drafts of the assessment
framework document in April and June of 2006, and broad consultation continued with
Council Committees throughout the Fall of 2007 and Spring of 2008. Discussion also
occurred with the Board of Governors, at Deans’ Council, with the President, and within
the Provost’s Committee on Integrated Planning (PCIP). On June 4, 2008, the Planning
and Priorities Committee carried a motion to approve the assessment framework in
principle and to submit the document to Council for input and feedback.
Discussion at the June 19, 2008, Council meeting focused on the timing of assessment
within the academic stream, the integration of assessment activities with external
accreditation, and the description of the scope of professional accreditation. The
Planning and Priorities Committee subsequently received a revised version of the
document, and suggested further changes related to the integration of survey data,
consultation with the unit being reviewed, and the reflection of research as integral to the
teaching, learning, and scholarly mission of the University. The attached document
incorporates these final revisions.
On September 10, 2008, the Planning and Priorities Committee carried a motion to
recommend that Council adopt the assessment framework.
IMPLICATIONS:
The assessment framework is broader in scope and moves beyond the Systematic
Program Review (SPR) focus on instructional programs to include assessment of
processes and administrative units. Graduate program review to support the University’s
goal of becoming a major presence in graduate education is outlined as a priority. A
major outcome will be the development of a cyclical review process for all graduate
programs.
Responsibility for assessment initiatives is vested at a variety of levels within the
University. Undergraduate curriculum review will no longer be systematic, but
undertaken at the recommendation of the Provost and Academic Programs Committee, or
voluntarily as part of the unit’s preparation for Integrated Planning. The review process
will be coordinated with the planning and accreditation processes which exist and aligned
with institutional goals and priorities.
SUMMARY:
The framework is conceptualized in terms of three types of assessment activities:
academic assessment (teaching, learning, research performance, outreach and
engagement); operational assessment (unit and organizational effectiveness); and
reputational assessment (local, national, international). The principles which anchor the
assessment framework are intended to promote flexibility, inclusiveness, and
transparency.
With the adoption of the proposed framework, Systematic Program Review (SPR) will be
suspended and the assessment framework outlined within the attached document A
Framework for Assessment: Beyond Systematic Program Review implemented as a
University-wide initiative.
FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED:
Reflecting the university-wide importance of assessment to support quality improvement,
quality assurance, and accountability, University Council, University Senate, and the
Board of Governors will share collective responsibility for the process and be apprised of
outcomes.
Council and Council committees will contribute significantly in the consultation process
for development of the University’s policy for graduate program review. Council
Committees will also have an ongoing role in assessment activities, including the
schedule of reviews, development of performance indicators, and integration of survey
results.
ATTACHMENTS:
A Framework for Assessment: Beyond Systematic Program Review dated September 9,
2008