*Submitted is the report from 2010-2011. The Adult Education program assessment includes
ongoing assessments. More recent data are unavailable. The updated data will be submitted when
received.
Feburary, 2011
-1-
College of Education Annual Assessment Review Checklist
Program _____ADED_______________________________Date of review___4/19/11_______
1. Were program objectives and/or outcomes clearly stated and addressed in the report?
Yes
Somewhat
No
Please comment on any strengths and/or areas for improvement:
Yes, but you may want to provide alignment, and more closely align, these to the Standards for
Graduate Programs in Adult Education (see p. 7-14 of this report)
2. Were the assessment methods (design) and measures (instruments) appropriate for assessing the
program objectives and/or outcomes?
Yes
Somewhat
No
Please comment on any strengths and/or areas for improvement:
I’m not even sure of the methods used. The “design” is so generally stated with no specifics given, no
rubrics, etc., that I cannot evaluate them.
Feburary, 2011
-2-
3. Data analysis and results:
Were assessment data collected, analyzed, and results reported?
Yes
Somewhat
No
Were the assessment results linked to the learning outcomes?
Yes
Somewhat
No
Were the assessment results clearly stated?
Yes
Somewhat
No
Was the data analysis appropriate given the types of assessment methods utilized?
Yes
Somewhat
No
Were the conclusions reasonable given the findings reported?
Yes
Somewhat
No
Please comment on any strengths and/or areas for improvement:
Again, this is tough to evaluate because aggregated data is given, but there are no specific data sets
to analyze. Actually, it leads me to think that maybe data is not really formally collected. For each
specific assessment, there needs to be a detailed explanation of the type of assessment, the method
used, tools used (such as rubrics), specific disaggregated and aggregated data that is tied to the
specific assessment. For example, from p. 14 of the report:
For each outcome, data were collected from discussions, examinations, papers, and projects. Each data point (i.e. a
discussion, examination, etc.) was evaluated on a 0-4 point scale (0=inadequate, 1=developing, 2=adequate,
3=accomplished, 4=mastery). For virtually every outcome, there were multiple data points. The scores for the data points
were averaged and reported. For example, for Outcome #5 for Methods and Materials in ADED, data from one section
were included. From this section, scores from several discussions and course projects were averaged and reported (3.7).
Scores were also reported for Psychology of Adults as Learners. Likewise had other data been available for Outcome #4,
scores of items from other courses would have been averaged and reported for Foundations of ADED, Teaching Reading
to Adults, and Internship in ADED.
For Goal #4, there is not a specific assessment or assessments. A scoring rubric is not given that
was used to assess, only a general scale of 1-4. No specific individual scores for individual
assessments are given, only the grand aggregated, amalgam of a score is given. However, based on
the report, it seems like individual scores are obtained, because faculty and the advisory board have
made changes based on areas in which candidates are scoring low (see p. 7). This is so for every
single assessment of every single outcome. I simply do not understand how this assessment plan
was approved and believe that there needs to be a new plan developed.
Feburary, 2011
-3-
4. Use of results for decision making and reporting to program faculty and stakeholders:
Were the assessment results reviewed and discussed by program faculty?
Yes
No
or so it is indicated
Were the assessment results communicated with other stakeholders (as appropriate)?
Yes
No
or so it is indicated
Did the assessment results indicate a need for change?
Yes
can’t tell
No
If the results indicated a need for change, what type of change(s) was(were) made?
The intended learning outcomes were changed or revised based upon results.
The assessment results were used by faculty to improve student learning.
The results were used as basis for changes in courses, services, or curriculum.
Assessment results were used in strategic planning.
Other specific changes reported that should affect student learning.
Please comment on any strengths and/or areas for improvement:
Again, no specifics are given, so I cannot tell if there were data-driven changes made or not.
OVERALL RATING:
Exceeds Expectations (All expectations met, the reviewers had no questions, and the report
shows clear evidence of using results for decision-making.)
Meets Expectations (Most expectations met, the reviewers had few questions, and the report
shows clear evidence of using results for decision-making.)
Needs Revision (Few expectations met, the reviewers had some questions, and the report
shows little evidence of using results for decision-making.)
OVERALL COMMENTS
Strengths:
Suggestions for improvement/revision:
I believe that there needs to be extensive revision. I would suggest starting to shape the entire report
based on the ADHE program review guidelines offered on p. 4-6 of this report. A new assessment
plan needs to be developed that is much more specific, rigorous, and detailed. You should also align
all of the above more with the Graduate Program Adult Ed guidelines provided on p. 7-14 of this
report.
Feburary, 2011
-4-
Existing Program Review
Institutional Self-Study Guidelines
The Arkansas Higher Education Coordinating Board Existing Program Review Policy adopted in October 2008
requires the review of all academic programs every 7-10 years. A major component of the policy is an internal
review (self-study) by institutions and an external review by consultants of programs that do not have programspecific accreditation/ licensure/certification. The institution’s self-study, consultants’ written evaluation, and
the institution’s response to the consultants’ findings will be submitted to the Arkansas Department of Higher
Education (ADHE).
The institutional self-study to be reviewed by external consultants should contain the following information:
Goals, Objectives, and Activities
1. Describe specific educational goals, objectives, and activities of the program.
2. Explain how the program serves the general education program and other disciplinary programs on the
campus, if applicable.
3. Document market demand and/or state/industry need for careers stemming from the program.
4. Document student demand for the program.
Curriculum
1. Describe how program content parallels current thinking/trends in the field/trade (best practices, advisory
committee recommendations, etc.).
2. Provide an outline for each program curriculum, including the sequence of courses.
3. State the degree requirements, including general education requirements, institutional, college or school
requirements, and major requirements.
4. Indicate the semester/year the major/program courses were last offered. Exclude general education courses.
5. Provide syllabi for discipline-specific courses and departmental objectives for each course.
6. Outline the process for the introduction of new courses, including all internal curriculum review processes
and the findings.
7. List courses in the proposed degree program currently offered by distance delivery.
8. Describe the instructor-to-student and student-to-student interaction for distance courses (prerequisite
courses, lab requirements, examination procedures-online/proctored, instructor response to student
assignments).
Program Faculty (full-time/adjunct/part-time)
1. Provide curriculum vitae or program faculty information form for all full-time program faculty. The vita or
form should include the following: all degrees and institutions granting the degrees; field or specialty of
degrees; number of years employed as program faculty at the institution; current academic rank, if
applicable; professional certifications/licenses; evidence of quality and quantity of creative and
scholarly/research activity; evidence of quality and quantity of service activities; evidence of professional
activities and non-teaching work experiences related to courses taught; list of course numbers/course titles
of credit courses taught over the past two academic years; and other evidence of quality teaching.
2. Indicate the academic credentials required for adjunct/part-time faculty teaching major/program courses.
3. Describe the orientation and evaluation processes for faculty, including adjunct and part-time faculty.
4. Provide average number of courses and number of credit hours taught for full-time program faculty for
current academic year.
Program Resources
1. Describe the institutional support available for faculty development in teaching, research, and service.
Feburary, 2011
-5-
2. Describe the professional development of full-time program faculty over the past two years including the
institutional financial support provided to faculty for the activities.
3. Provide the annual library budget for the program or describe how library resources are provided for the
program.
4. Describe the availability, adequacy, and accessibility of campus resources (research, library, instructional
support, instructional technology, etc.).
5. Provide a list of program equipment purchases for the past three years.
Instruction via Distance Technology
This section should be completed if at least 50% of any program/major course is delivered
electronically.
1. Summarize institutional policies on the establishment, organization, funding, and management of distance
courses/degrees.
2. Summarize the policies and procedures to keep the technology infrastructure current.
3. Summarize the procedures that assure the security of personal information.
4. Describe the support services that will be provided to students enrolled in distance technology
courses/programs by the institution and/or other entities:
 Advising
 Course registration
 Financial aid
 Course withdrawal
 E-mail account
 Access to library resources
 Help Desk
5. Describe technology support services that will be provided to students enrolled in distance technology
courses/programs by the institution and/or other entities.
6. Describe the orientation for students enrolled in distance technology courses/programs.
7. Summarize the institutional policy for faculty course load and number of credit hours taught, compensation,
and ownership of intellectual property.
Majors/Declared Students
1. State the number of undergraduate/graduate majors/declared students in each degree program under review
for the past three years.
2. Describe strategies to recruit, retain, and graduate students.
3. Provide the number of program graduates over the past three years.
Program Assessment
1. Describe the program assessment process and provide outcomes data (standardized entrance/placement test
results, exit test results, etc.).
2. Describe program/major exit or capstone requirements.
3. Provide information on how teaching is evaluated, the use of student evaluations, and how the results have
affected the curriculum.
4. Provide transfer information for major/declared students including the receiving institutions for transfer and
programs of study.
5. Provide information for program graduates continuing their education by entering graduate school or by
performing volunteer service.
6. Provide aggregate results of student/alumni/employer satisfaction surveys.
7. Describe how the program is aligned with the current job market needs of the state or local communities.
Feburary, 2011
-6-
8. Provide job placement information for program graduates including the number of graduates placed in jobs
related to the field of study.
For undergraduate career and technical education programs only, provide the following:
 Names and location of companies hiring program graduates.
 Average hourly rate for program graduates.
 Names of companies requiring the certificate/degree for initial or continued employment.
Program Effectiveness (strengths, opportunities)
1. List the strengths of the program.
2. List the areas of the program most in need of improvement.
3. List program improvements accomplished over the past two years.
4. Describe planned program improvements, including a timetable and the estimated costs. Identify program
improvement priorities.
Program Self-Study Team
List the names/departments of the self-study committee chair and committee members.
Feburary, 2011
-7-
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
Standards for Graduate Programs in Adult Education
Adult Education is a recognized field of graduate study with a distinctive body of knowledge that embraces
theory, research, and practice relating to adult learners, adult educators, adult education and learning processes,
programs and organizations. Graduate adult education developed as a field of study in the 1920s and 1930s and
the Commission for Professors of Adult Education was established nationally in 1955. It currently meets at the
annual American Association for Adult and Continuing Education (AAACE) and Adult Education Research
Conference (AERC) meetings. Adult Education university-based programs are dedicated to meeting the
demand for providing graduate education for those interested in understanding, fostering and articulating the
ways in which adults learn and can be helped to learn in a wide range of settings. There is an historic
commitment to promoting innovation in teaching-learning strategies, adoption of emerging technologies, and
social change.
Graduate students in adult education are seeking academic careers or preparation for leadership and practice in a
range of adult education settings. Examples include continuing education, adult learners(ing) in postsecondary
environments, distance learning organizations, program development, adult basic education, cooperative
extension, workplace learning, gerontology, nonprofit or community education, places of worship, as well as
many other contexts. Adult education, as a field, places emphasis on developing diverse and equitable cultural
and economic sustainability in schools, workplaces, and communities through the facilitation of adult learning
and collaboration among participants.
Rationale for Standards
This document suggests guidelines and standards for high quality planning, administration and evaluation of
adult education disciplinary graduate education. They are written for use by university academic graduate
programs (or specializations, departments) as a part of a voluntary internal or external program assessment
process. After a systematic process of reflection and discussion, the standards have been endorsed by the
national Commission for the Professors of Adult Education (CPAE).
This standards document is organized into the four distinct sections:
I. Administration
Mission and Values Statement
Resources
Examples of Indicators
II. Organization of Graduate Study
Learning Community
Admissions
Advisement
Thesis/Dissertation Process
Teaching Loads
III. Curriculum
IV. Faculty Members
Faculty Member Qualifications
Adjunct or Courtesy-Appointed Faculty Members
I. Administration
Feburary, 2011
-8-
Mission/Values Statement
CPAE acknowledges that Adult Education programs of study encompass a wide range of specialty areas and
institutional contexts. Consequently, the CPAE standards recommend that each program creates and maintains
statements that express:
1. The mission, purpose, and scope of the Adult Education Program and alignment with the institution’s
mission.
2. The values, ethics, or principles which inform the practice and scholarship of the Adult Education Program.
3. The commitment to and understanding of diversity and inclusion.
4. A strategic plan which sets forth statements about goals for improvement, change and future directions.
These statements should be easily accessible to all constituents: faculty, staff, administrators, students, and
external stakeholders, and they should be periodically reviewed and updated.
Resources
Graduate programs share a commitment to excellence and to creating a community of scholarship and practice.
With this in mind, programs should be able to expect adequate resource support to accomplish these aims.
While the standards cannot dictate the specific or ideal levels of resources allocated, the standards do
recommend:
1. That the internal budget and support of the adult education program be in proportion to other academic units
in the college relative to the level of staff and other forms of tangible resource support. Programs should also
have comparable shared access to resources available at the university and college level (e.g., technology
support, development/fundraising support, library collections/access, travel funds).
2. Adult education faculty and student representation and participation in college and university governance
(e.g. committees, councils, decision-making bodies) should be proportional to representation of other program
or department areas of comparable size in that particular university or college, and adult education program’s
presence should be appropriately reflected in college or university language (mission statements, statements of
purpose, web pages, etc.) and in communications to constituents.
3. The number of graduate assistantships and other forms of graduate student support should be in proportion to
support given to other academic units in the college/university.
4. The adult education faculty members’ workload, evaluation and reward policies are clearly stated in terms of
the balance of learning, discovery and engagement or other categories of academic responsibility that are
pertinent at that particular university.
5. If program benchmarking or assessment data is required to be gathered and collected for the college or
university that adequate resources (staff, software, time) are provided to adult education faculty members to
support the process. This includes representative participation in relevant Commission for Professors of Adult
Education meetings, projects, and committee structures and the Adult Education Research Conference and other
appropriate professional organizations.
Feburary, 2011
-9-
6. Due to the nature and mix of full- and part-time students, program data and definitions of categories should
be clearly described and presented for enhancing external audiences’ understanding of how the presence of parttime students may alter expectations regarding processes and data concerning Adult Education programs.
Adult education programs and/or departments should voluntarily gather consistent and comparable information
about their productivity and accomplishments, resources, and perceptions of the environment/climate. The
information gathered may be compiled and shared for internal growth and development as well as external
university and external constituent purposes.
Examples of indicators of a high quality graduate program are as follows:

Publications in refereed journals and other academic publications (books, reports) by faculty members,
students, and graduates

Additional alternative forms of scholarship (e.g: white papers, public policy documents, evaluation
project reports) by faculty, students, and graduates

Contributions by faculty, students, and graduates to conferences at all levels (local, regional, national,
international)

Exchanges with colleagues at other universities and programs, both formal and informal (faculty and
students)

Other forms of alternative educational experience (e.g., exchange, internship, service learning, research
team experience)

Service to the field and profession by faculty, students, and graduates (e.g serving on CPAE, AAACE,
or AERC leadership positions, or other appropriate professional associations)

Appropriate professional placement and performance by graduates

Visible and equitable participation in the surrounding college and university environments

Visible commitment to principles of integrity and equity in the educational process

Shared perceptions of an educational environment that is collegial, collaborative and innovative
II. Organization of Graduate Study
A graduate program in adult education may be located in a variety of colleges (e.g. education, agriculture,
human development) or form part of a multi- or interdisciplinary unit. The strength of a high quality graduate
program lies in the caliber of its faculty, its students, and its graduates. Programs should be organized to
maximize and support their contributions to theory, research, and practice in the field. While programs will
need to organize their efforts in relation to their institutional context, the following general criteria apply:
Learning Community
As a field, adult education scholars and practitioners are committed to high quality and innovative instructional
philosophies and practices with the understanding that adult education graduate students come from a range of
Feburary, 2011
- 10 -
professional and academic preparation backgrounds. There is a shared commitment that this diversity of
backgrounds serves as an asset or strength in fostering a community of learning.
Other suggested ways to enhance the instructional process and learning community include:

A commitment to providing adult education faculty members with opportunities for both formal and
informal professional development experiences related to their teaching

A commitment to providing adult education faculty members with appropriate levels of support and
professional development regarding the integration and use of technology or other innovative practices
in instruction

A process for systematic review of courses, programs and procedures related to the formal curriculum
and informal practices that support graduate teaching and learning

A process for systematic feedback from current and former students, and cand other stakeholders
regarding the quality of graduate programs (e.g., relevance of courses, appropriate pace and time to
completion of studies, alumni accomplishments)

An identifiable and equitable resource or process for resolving faculty and/or student issues, questions,
or potential grievances

The presence of informal learning opportunities for faculty and students such as colloquia, study circles,
research, mentorship, service learning opportunities, and other special learning events

Formal and informal contacts with faculties from other disciplines, in the interest of developing fruitful
relationships that benefit adult education faculty, students, and alumni

The presence of visible reward structures (local, regional, national, international) for innovative and high
quality graduate teaching, advisement, and research
Admissions
In universities where the admissions decisions are made at the program level, the standards recommend that:

The student admissions committee includes at least one full-time or part-time member with a doctorate
in adult education

Criteria for admission should be discussed and understood by all admissions committee members within
appropriate legal and institutional compliance, and if permitted, be clearly stated and available to
prospective applicants

Information (if any) on graduate assistantships should be available to all prospective applicants

Information (if any) on the suitability and processes in place to support part-time graduate study should
be available to all prospective applicants
Advisement
Feburary, 2011
- 11 -
The load for advisement depends on certain variables (e.g. number of thesis students and number of non-thesis
students and number of doctoral advisees). For advisement, a distinction is made between full and part-time
students. For faculty loads in advising, the following are suggested as guidelines for high-quality programs,
allowing for adjustments made to account for the proportion of masters and doctoral level students:



A student handbook should be available to both faculty and students to serve as a written guide about the
course and graduate school process requirements; exceptions to suggested process should be
documented accordingly
For students at the coursework stage of advisement, an active student/faculty ratio of no more than 25 to
1
For students writing a capstone, thesis or major dissertation, a combined active student/faculty ratio of
no more than15 to 1
Thesis/Dissertation Process

The program committee is to be chaired by an adult education faculty member or a related discipline
faculty member subject to approval of the adult education unit. Whether the student chooses a thesis or
non-thesis option, the chair and student select advisors or committee members who will best support
student’s desired competency and specialty areas

The program committee for doctoral students is to be chaired by an adult education faculty member or a
related discipline faculty member subject to approval of the adult education unit. The chair and student
select committee members who will best support a student’s desired competency, specialty, and
methodological areas

For special or interdisciplinary topics, co-chairs from appropriate disciplines may be selected on the
basis of their contributions to the research topic or design.
Teaching Loads
The teaching load of a full-time faculty member varies according to many factors, such as onsite or
hybrid/distance course delivery assignments, number and level (master’s and doctoral) of student advisees,
status of advisees (coursework, thesis/dissertation research) and funded research commitments/buyouts. These
are based upon teaching loads over time (norms) rather than idiosyncratic semester-by-semester fluctuations in
workload. The number of student advisees that exceeds the recommend guidelines will ideally result in course
load reassignment. For faculty loads in teaching, the following are suggested general guides:

Faculty members with fewer than 3 master’s thesis or capstone students or fewer than 2 doctoral
dissertation students should not teach more than 5-6 courses (3 credits each) during the academic year.
Programs on the quarter system may have a higher number of hours

Faculty members with 3 to 6 master’s thesis students, 4-5 courses per academic year; for those having 710 master’s thesis students, 4 courses

Faculty members with 2-4 students at dissertation stage should not exceed 4-5 courses per year and for
those having 5 to 7 students at the dissertation stage, 4 courses per year
III. Curriculum
Feburary, 2011
- 12 -
Adult education coursework should clearly distinguish between masters and doctoral levels in terms of defining
outcomes relevant to beginning and advanced graduate study. For both levels, adult education places a value on
the concept of praxis, of integrating theory and practice in such a way that good practice informs and enhances
development and use of theory; and, in the reverse, that good theory informs and enhances the development and
application of practice. Further, adult education places a high value on innovation and acknowledges the
influence of technology both in terms of content and delivery of curriculum. The Commission recommends
consulting best practices for distance delivery developed by relevant professional associations.
For some programs, masters and doctoral students will have some overlap in core coursework. When they are
taught separately, the following core topical areas, taught from diverse and critical perspectives, are suggested
at the master’s level. These suggestions are for topical areas, and are not necessarily equivalent to separate
courses:






Introduction to the nature, function and scope of adult education
Adult learning and development
Adult education program processes, including planning, delivery, and assessment/evaluation
Introductory study of how technology influences adult education
Historical, philosophical and sociological foundations of adult education
Overview of educational research
These core areas are supplemented by additional study appropriate to student needs and goals, which may
emphasize a range of leadership roles (e.g. administrator, teacher, counselor). A student’s area of specialty
may relate to study within the range of specialty areas reflected in the adult education faculty or may extend
to study with other faculties. In general, it is unlikely that any adult education graduate program will
contain all the supporting courses that students require (e.g., business, community development, philosophy,
political science, sociology, psychology, etc.), and students should be encouraged to seek out and
supplement program instruction through selected coursework and learning experiences with other
appropriate faculties or program areas.
At the doctoral level, these suggestions are for topical areas, and are not necessarily equivalent to separate
courses. The suggested core topical areas include:









Advanced study of adult learning (theory and research)
Historical, philosophical foundations of adult education
Study of leadership, including theories or organizational leadership, administration and change
Analysis/study of the changing role of technology in adult education
Study of issues of policy in relation to adult education
Analysis of globalization and international issues or perspectives in adult education
In-depth analysis of social, political and economic forces that have shaped the foundations and
discourse within adult education
Advanced specialty courses relevant to unique program and faculty strengths (e.g., continuing
professional education, workplace learning, social movement learning)
Appropriate depth of qualitative or quantitative research methodology coursework to support
dissertation research and ability to utilize existing literature
Students entering doctoral study with a master’s degree in another field may be asked to take prerequisites from
the adult education master’s level courses. At the master’s level, select doctoral courses may be used as a
supplement to additional study congruent with students’ needs and goals.
Feburary, 2011
- 13 -
Adult education doctoral study can be a Ph.D., an Ed. D., or both options may be available at some institutions.
Institutions offering both options should provide clear information on the distinctions between the two degrees.
Generally, the Ed. D. focuses on translating theory and research into practice, and has the larger goal of
preparing practitioners or scholar-practitioners who will be well-informed, credible leaders in the field of adult
education. The Ph. D. emphasizes the study and synthesis of theory and research, and can produce dedicated
scholar-researchers committed to the advancement of knowledge and scholarship in the field and may also
produce scholar-practitioners who wish a strong depth in research preparation for practice.
IV. Faculty Members
Faculty Member Qualifications
Institutions offering a graduate degree, major, certificate or specialization in adult education appear in a variety
of organizational forms and with differing language. For example, some programs are independent departments
while others are combined with other program areas into departments with interdisciplinary degrees with
specializations in adult education. Full-time members of the adult education faculty should have an earned
doctorate in adult education or a related designation. Other designations or language may include, though are
not limited to: lifelong education, community education, cooperative extension, and continuing education.
Additional part-time, adjunct or courtesy-appointed faculty should have earned doctorates in adult education or
relevant related fields with knowledge of and, preferably, experience in adult education. Other criteria for
consideration are as follows:

Academic rank necessary for graduate status in a tenure eligible position

A record of leadership, as evidenced by significant positions in the adult education field, profession and
university

A record of contributions to adult education scholarship

A continuing commitment to adult education theory, research and knowledge of current best practices
Selection or hiring of faculty should be on the basis of their particular expertise and contributions, and the
following general criteria:

An earned doctorate or specialization in the adult education area of their competency or a closely related
discipline approved at the discretion of the adult education faculty

Evidence of interest and commitment to the field of adult education

A record of contributions to scholarship relating to courses to be taught or areas of advisement (e.g.,
adult basic education, community development, continuing professional education, human resource
development)
Resources available to adult education faculty members should be on par with resources made available within
the surrounding college and university contexts in terms of salary, office support, travel support, graduate
student assistantship, or other forms of research support.
Adjunct or Courtesy-Appointed Faculty Members
Feburary, 2011
- 14 -
Adult education programs should develop and document an explicit rationale for the participation of full-time,
part-time, and adjunct/associate faculty with understandings about what roles, responsibilities, contributions,
and privileges faculty members should expect to have based upon their full-time, part-time, adjunct/associate
and tenure eligble/non tenure eligible position. In exceptional cases, suitable experience may be substituted for
the doctorate when appointing part-time or adjunct/associate faculty members. Part-time or adjunct/associate
faculty members are individuals whose assignments to the adult education area are limited due to:

A full-time administrative role at the university

A major commitment as a faculty member in another program or university

A formal joint appointment between adult education and another recognized unit in the university

A research appointment related to grants or contract funded work

An assignment outside of the university (business, government, voluntary agency, consultant)

A retired or emeritus adult education faculty member
Feburary, 2011
- 15 -