Outcomes to be Achieved by 2008
Developed in May 2005 by Assessment Committee
√ indicates completion as of May 2005
‡ indicates completion as of September 2006
Priority
Outcomes
Strategies
Measures
Indicators
Progress/Action
Report May 2005
Progress/Action
Report September
2006
1
Assess general
education
across the
curriculum
GenEd faculty work with
program faculty to
develop rubrics, etc.,
supported by the
administration (deans,
etc.)
a. Evidence of co-designed
rubrics, guidelines, collaboration,
and projects ‡
b. Portfolios established as an
assessment mechanism for
capstone courses.
a. Five-column model is
completed by an
increasing number of
programs over time.
b. At least one GenEd
outcome included in
each program list of
outcomes.
Progress: Speech and
writing rubrics
developed and piloted –
writing in ’04 and ’05,
speech in ’05. Used
CAAP test to pilot
critical thinking
assessment in ’05.
Action:
2
All programs
are
participating
in assessment
a. Deans/Directors
advised by assessment
committee on
achievement of
assessment time line,
matrices, and audits√ ‡.
b. Presentation of same to
CASS√.
a. Program outcomes are clear
and appropriate.
b. Assessment proceeds
according to the time line.
c. Expectations and resources are
clarified.
Program audit includes
cycles being repeated
within time line
parameters.
Progress: Programs
reported outcomes
assessment in 2003,
2004. Reports are due
for 2005. Less than
100% have closed the
loop. Area most
struggling is Arts and
Sciences division
Action:
Progress: Writing and
speech program level
outcomes included in all
business division
programs. CAAP
testing done ’06 – results
on Assessment web site
Action: Develop Student
Success Plan with core
outcomes and
assessment plans
Progress:
Engineering/Workforce
Development programs
did not report program
outcomes assessment.
General Education area
still struggling as are
some areas in Health
Sciences. Departments
received formal
feedback from
Committee.
Action: Set progress
report and final report
3
Faculty
Involvement
a. Develop a system for
faculty & staff training on
assessment and learning.
b. Develop a recognition,
reward, and mentoring√.
program.
4
Publicize
outcomes
a. Include in catalog, FYE,
brochures, syllabi√, Web
site√.
b. Create periodic fact
sheets.
5
Educating
administration
on the
importance of
assessment
Present to administration
importance of
assessment‡.
a. Participation rate in
assessment increases.
b. Numbers participating in
professional development
activities increases.
c. Training schedule/plan
developed and implemented.
d. Recognition and reward plan
developed and implemented.
e. Mentor program established
and implemented√..
a. Revise/edit publications,
catalog, web site√, syllabi√ as
needed.
b. Publish periodic fact sheets‡.
Number of faculty
involved in these
programs increases over
time.
Progress: Assessment
Coordinator mentors
program faculty.
English Department ran
multiple workshops on
writing rubric.
Assessment presented at
professional
development days.
Action:
Measures are done
a. Assessment is included in
program review√.
b. Assessment is included in
planning (strategic) process√‡.
c. Assessment budget line-item√.
d. Assessment is included in all
job descriptions.
Assessment influences
program review.
Progress: Assessment
web site exists, course
syllabus template
includes outcomes with
assessment measures.
Action:
Progress: Assessment
added as element in
program review process
and as budget line item.
Full cycle of program
review yet to be
completed. Assessment
as part of AQIP
included in planning
process.
Action:
deadlines, post reports
on web. use OBR
initiative and re-org
with Academic Chairs to
push this agenda
Progress: September
professional
development to focus on
assessment
Action: Plan
professional
development
Progress: CAAP results
on web site
Action: Publish Student
Success Plan, publish 5column reports
Progress: Assessment
Committee rep to be on
PAC, assessment is part
of job description for
academic chairs.
Action: Continue to
work with Caucuses and
other groups to get in
job descriptions
6
Student
involvement
Feedback, focus groups,
student input.
a. Student transcript addresses
core competencies.
b. Student input modifies
curriculum (interpretation of
results).
a. Curriculum change
occurs.
b. Transcript reflects
core competencies.
Progress: Little to no
progress made.
Action:
Progress: No progress
made on institutional
basis.
Action: None planned at
this time.