REPORT FEEDBACK: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
UNDERGRADUATE/ FIRST PROFESSIONAL/GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM
Program: ______________________________________________________________________
Assessment Report - Section I: Assessment of Program Outcomes
1.
Reporting Year: 2015
Outcome(s) Assessed: _______________________________________________ (if more than 1 outcome is assessed with the same artifact, you may be able to use 1 rubric form and COMMENTS to provide feedback on other outcomes as needed.)
Outcome Statement
Advanced [A]
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
The outcome statement is a clear, concise and
measurable statement which uses action verbs to
describe the knowledge, skills and attitudes students
will be able to demonstrate upon successful
completion of the program
The outcome statement uses action verbs (or is clear
enough to infer student action) to describe the
measurable knowledge, skills, and attitudes students
will be able to demonstrate upon successful
completion of the program (as in Blooms Taxonomy)
The outcome statement is unclear and lacks a
verb which would make it a measurable
statement which describes the knowledge, skills
and attitudes students will be able to
demonstrate upon successful completion of the
program
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Achievement Level: ______
2.
Curriculum Map: (If none provided, score MISSING for both criteria below. If provided, score should pertain only to the outcome being assessed; however, if more than 1 outcome is assessed with the same artifact, as above, you may
be able to use 1 rubric form and COMMENTS to provide feedback on other outcomes as needed.)
Advanced [A]
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
Missing
N/A
Score
Comments
[M]
The outcome links to three or more courses or
The outcome links to two courses or curricular
The outcome links to one or no course(s) or
Outcome Links to Curriculum curricular requirements
requirements
curricular requirement
Outcomes Impact on
Program:
Introduced, Reinforced
Emphasized
The outcome has an impact on the curriculum at all
three levels: Introduced/Reinforced/Emphasized
The outcome has an impact on the curriculum on at
least two levels: Introduced/Reinforced or
Introduced/Emphasized or Reinforced/Emphasized
The outcome has an impact on the curriculum at
only one level
Achievement Level: ______
3.
Data/Evidence (student work/artifact used to demonstrate learning)
Advanced [A]
Direct versus Indirect
Sample Size
Course and Time
Sampling
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
A well-formulated collection of direct evidence OR a
mixed methods approach with a combination of
direct and indirect evidence was used
A large and clearly representative sample appears to
have been used which should produce highly useful
results
At least a single source of direct evidence was used
Only sources of indirect data/evidence (e.g.,
surveys, GPA, course grades) were used
An adequate or appropriate sample appears to have
been used which should produce useful results
A small sample appears to have been used which
may not produce useful results or be
representative
Data/evidence reflected student work across
multiple semesters and multiple
courses/sections/requirements
Data/evidence reflected student achievement from:

a comprehensive course or requirement (e.g.
capstone, portfolio, thesis, comprehensive
exams) OR

multiple sections of a single course OR

at least one course over multiple semesters OR

multiple courses during one or more semesters
Data/evidence reflected student achievement
from a narrow course or time sample: student
work examined from one course/one
section/one semester
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Achievement Level: ______
*Examples: Rubric, juried form, scoring sheet
Office of Student Learning, Outcomes Assessment and Accreditation, form update: 5/15
1
REPORT FEEDBACK: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
UNDERGRADUATE/ FIRST PROFESSIONAL/GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM
4. Evaluation Process
Advanced [A]
What Tool* Was Used to
Evaluate the Student Work;
Level of Student
Achievement Expected
(when using the tool)
Who Conducted the
Evaluation Process, and How
Was it Conducted
Who Interpreted the
Evidence
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
The evaluation tool was provided with additional
details about the evaluation process which enhanced
the report; the expected level of achievement was
provided
The evaluation tool was described and may have
been provided; the expected level of achievement
was provided
The evaluation tool was described OR was
provided; OR the expected level of achievement
was provided
Roles and responsibilities for the evaluation process
were provided including how they used the evaluation
tool; details of the evaluation process and/or
additional documentation enhanced the report
Roles / responsibilities for the evaluation process
were provided
It is unclear who participated in the evaluation
process or how it was conducted.
Roles and responsibilities for the interpretation of
assessment results were provided with additional
information which enhanced the report
Roles / responsibilities for the interpretation of
results were noted
It is unclear who interpreted the assessment
results.
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Achievement Level: ______
5. Results & Reflection
Advanced [A]
Comparison between
Expected & Actual Results
Analysis of
Quantitative/Qualitative
Results
Reflection & Conclusions
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
A quantitative comparison between the expected and
actual results was provided with additional details
which enhance the meaning of the comparison
A quantitative comparison between the expected
and actual results was provided
The actual results provided were unclear or
incomplete
The analysis was clear and complete, includes the
identification of strengths and weaknesses, and was
enhanced by supporting materials (graphs, charts,
documents, etc.) which provided more depth to the
report
Comprehensive reflection about the results supported
multiple conclusions
The analysis was clear and complete and included
the identification of patterns of strength and
weakness
The analysis was unclear or incomplete
Reflection about the results supported at least one
conclusion
The reflection did not appear to support the
conclusions
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Achievement Level: ______
6. Recommendations and Planning
Advanced [A]
Recommendations
Reflections and conclusions were transformed into
actions to be taken with details about the process
and goals
*Examples: Rubric, juried form, scoring sheet
Office of Student Learning, Outcomes Assessment and Accreditation, form update: 5/15
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
Reflections and conclusions were transformed into a
list of proposed action(s) to be taken.
Reflections and conclusions were not translated
into actions to be taken
OR the actions were not clearly connected to the
reflections and conclusions
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
2
REPORT FEEDBACK: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
UNDERGRADUATE/ FIRST PROFESSIONAL/GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM
Advanced [A]
Planning
A detailed plan and timeline for implementing
recommendations and for re-evaluation was
provided
Well Developed [W]
A basic plan and timeline for implementing the
recommendations and for re-evaluation was
provided.
Developing [D]
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Plans to implement recommendations were
unclear, OR a timeline for re-evaluation was
unclear
Achievement Level: ______
Overall Achievement Level for Section I
*Examples: Rubric, juried form, scoring sheet
Office of Student Learning, Outcomes Assessment and Accreditation, form update: 5/15
3
REPORT FEEDBACK: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
UNDERGRADUATE/ FIRST PROFESSIONAL/GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM
Program: ________________________________________________________________________
Reporting Year: 2014
Assessment Report - Section II: Follow-up on Recommendations to Assess the Impact of Change
Outcome(s) Re-assessed: _________________________________________________ (if more than 1 outcome is re-assessed with the same artifact, list all outcomes and use 1 rubric form and COMMENTS to provide feedback on individual outcomes)
1.
Follow-up on prior recommendations
Advanced [A]
Recommendations from
prior reports
A description of the recommendation was provided,
noting whether the change was implemented and
when
Well Developed [W]
A description of the recommendation was provided,
noting if the change was implemented
Developing [D]
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
A description of the recommendation was
provided only
Achievement Level: ______
2.
Data/Evidence (student work/artifact of learning)
Advanced [A]
Direct versus Indirect
Sample Size
Course and Time
Sampling
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
A well-formulated collection of direct evidence OR a
mixed methods approach with a combination of
direct and indirect evidence was used
A single source of direct evidence was used
Only sources of indirect data/evidence (e.g.,
surveys, GPA, course grades) were used
A large and clearly representative sample appears to
have been used which should produce highly useful
results
Data/evidence reflected student work across
multiple semesters and multiple
courses/sections/requirements
An adequate or appropriate sample appears to have
been used which should produce useful results
A small sample appears to have been used
which may not produce useful results or be
representative
Data/evidence reflected student achievement
from a narrow course or time sample: student
work examined from one course/one
section/one semester
Data/evidence reflected student achievement from:

a comprehensive course or requirement (e.g.
capstone, portfolio, thesis, comprehensive
exams) OR

multiple sections of a single course OR

at least one course over multiple semesters OR

multiple courses during one or more semesters
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Achievement Level: ______
3.
Evaluation Process
What Tool* Was Used to
Evaluate the Student Work;
Level of Student
Achievement Expected
(when using the tool)
Who Conducted the
Evaluation Process, and How
Was it Conducted
Advanced [A]
Well Developed [W]
The evaluation tool was provided with additional
details about the evaluation process which enhanced
the report; the expected level of achievement was
provided
The evaluation tool was described and may have been
provided; the expected level of achievement was
provided
The evaluation tool was described OR was
provided; OR the expected level of
achievement was provided
Faculty roles and responsibilities for the evaluation
process were provided including how they used the
evaluation tool; details of the evaluation process
and/or additional documentation enhanced the
report
Faculty roles and responsibilities for the evaluation
process were provided
It is unclear who participated in the evaluation
process or how it was conducted.
*Examples: Rubric, juried form, scoring sheet
Office of Student Learning, Outcomes Assessment and Accreditation, form update: 5/15
Developing [D]
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
4
REPORT FEEDBACK: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
UNDERGRADUATE/ FIRST PROFESSIONAL/GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM
Advanced [A]
Who Interpreted the
Evidence
Faculty roles and responsibilities for the
interpretation of assessment results were provided
with additional information which enhanced the
report
Well Developed [W]
Faculty roles and responsibilities for the interpretation
of results were noted
Developing [D]
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Faculty roles and responsibilities for the
interpretation of assessment results were
vague
Achievement Level: ______
4. Results & Reflection
Comparison between
Expected & Actual Results
Analysis of
Quantitative/Qualitative
Results
Reflection & Conclusions
Advanced [A]
Well Developed [W]
Developing [D]
A quantitative comparison between the expected
and actual results was provided with additional
details which enhance the meaning of the
comparison
The analysis was clear and complete, includes the
identification of strengths and weaknesses, and was
enhanced by supporting materials (graphs, charts,
documents, etc.) which provided more depth to the
report
A quantitative comparison between the expected and
actual results was provided
The actual results provided were unclear or
incomplete
The analysis was clear and complete and included the
identification of patterns of strength and weakness
The analysis was unclear or incomplete
Comprehensive reflection about the results
supported multiple conclusions
Reflection about the results supported at least one
conclusion
The reflection did not appear to support the
conclusions
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Achievement Level: ______
5.
Recommendations & Planning
Advanced [A]
Recommendations &
Planning
Indicated if the changes were effective and included
detailed follow-up information, including any future
recommendations and/or a timeline as appropriate
Well Developed [W]
Indicated if the changes were effective and included
follow-up information, including any additional
recommendations and/or a timeline as appropriate
Developing [D]
Missing
[M]
N/A
Score
Comments
Indicated if the changes were effective, but did
not indicate if follow-up was planned OR did
not make recommendations that appeared
consistent with results and reflection
Achievement Level: ______
Overall Achievement Level for Section II
*Examples: Rubric, juried form, scoring sheet
Office of Student Learning, Outcomes Assessment and Accreditation, form update: 5/15
5