presented by
Rob Till, Chair UAC
Craig Bain, Chair UCC
Bruce Fox, Chair LSC & member of UAC
Niranjan Venkatraman, member UGC & UAC
1
PROCESS


Summer 2013: Curriculum & Assessment Work Group
Two “Rounds” of Feedback (beginning Sept. 2013)
1.
2.

Faculty Senate Committees and Academic Leadership
Committees
Faculty Senate Committees, College Curriculum
Committees, and Extended Campuses
Purpose of proposal:



To articulate (or set) Degree Program Expectations for
Curriculum & Assessment
Modify curriculum and assessment processes to support
and sustain expectations
Obtain support from academic leaders for degree programs
and curriculum and assessment processes
2
Strengths of the proposal:

Formal adoption of expectations

Connection of curriculum & assessment

Alignment of curriculum & assessment processes

Incorporation of Expectations into the Academic
Program Review process

Satisfy requirements of NAU’s regional accreditor
(Higher Learning Commission)
3
Two Rounds of Revisions Addressed the following Areas of
Concern:



Implementation: Extended implementation timeline
Workload: Implementation Committee will identify needs
of departments and committees, and develop
approaches to provide support
“Continuous Course Improvement Documents:”
removed individual faculty course reporting from the
proposal

Perceived duplication of reporting requirements:
Implementation Committee will work to ensure there is
no duplication in reporting requirements.

Perceived limitations on curricular design: Expectations
focus on ensuring intentional planning of curriculum to
achieve the best learning outcomes for students.
4
REVISED PROPOSAL

Expectations for Degree Program Curriculum will
frame the development, approval, and review of
curricula.

Modifications to curriculum and assessment
committees

Request of support to academic leaders
5
Expectations for
Degree Program Curriculum

Mission and Purpose of a Degree Program *

Degree Program Student Learning Outcomes *

Curriculum Design with a Curriculum Map

Strategic Course Learning Design which supports Degree
Program Student Learning Outcomes

Systematic Assessment of Degree Program Student
Learning Outcomes *

Use of Assessment Findings for Continual Improvement *
* Already required as part of current policies
6
Re-structured Curriculum/Assessment Committees
Faculty
Members
Degree Programs
University Curriculum &
Assessment Council
(Chairs,
Academic Unit
Leaders, Etc.)
College
Curriculum &Assessment
Processes And Deans
*University Graduate Committee
*Liberal Studies Committee
*University Curriculum
Committee
*Extended Campuses
Curriculum Committee
7
Charge to Academic Leaders
1. Identifying and providing support and training to all
committees and committee members
2. Identifying and providing support to degree programs:


to prepare for their Academic Program Reviews and
to implement their Action Plans following the Academic
Program Review process
3. Examining the extent to which degree programs
achieve faculty-driven curricular expectations
8
The proposal being set forth for a Faculty Senate vote
on May 5 includes:

The Degree Program Expectations for Curriculum and
Assessment

The proposed modifications to curriculum and
assessment processes

The charge to academic leaders to support degree
programs in achieving the goals of this proposal
9
QUESTIONS?
10