annual report 2014 - 2015 - home – gallaudet university gallaudet university begana pilot senior...

OFFICE OF ACADEMIC QUALITY: ASSESSMENT OFFICE

ANNUAL REPORT - AY 2014-2015 NORMA MORÁN, COORDINATOR OF ASSESSMENT

INTRODUCTION

This is the second annual report from the Assessment Office (AO) within the Office of Academic Quality (OAQ). The Assessment Office was established to guide, support, facilitate and monitor systematic assessment of academic programs and student learning for improvement of curriculum and programs. This is a report of the key components of assessment facilitated by AO during AY 2014-2015: a) the Assessment Council; b) training and coaching sessions; c)

Learning Assessment Updates (L!U’s); d) Unit Effectiveness Planning (UEP); e) Senior Literacy Assessment (SLA); f) Senior Assessment (SA); and g) maintenance of Program Outcomes Assessment Blackboard site.

For further details on any of these initiatives, see the OAQ website at http://www.gallaudet.edu/office_of_academic_quality/assessment_of_student_learning_outcomes.html.

I. ASSESSMENT COUNCIL

The Office of Academic Quality established an interdisciplinary Assessment Council, which is composed of designated Assessment Coordinators (ACs) from each academic department and service programs. At the least, the council convenes twice yearly to discuss assessment related issues and conduct a peer review. The position of Assessment Coordinator is considered a vital

Office of Academic Quality Assessment Office: Annual Report AY2014-2015 2

http://www.gallaudet.edu/office_of_academic_quality/assessment_of_student_learning_outcomes.html

function within departments/programs, and ACs serve as an important resource to their programs, as well as the university.

Role of Assessment Council

The Assessment Council provides information, professional development, and peer collaboration for assessment (see Appendix A for a description of the AC role). In addition, the Assessment Council provides peer feedback to all programs on their programmatic Learning Assessment Updates (LAUs).

Professional Development: The coordinators also meet to discuss assessment-specific issues, share ideas and strategies, assist one another in the development, coordination, and successful application of departmental assessments of student learning. Best practices are usually identified and made available to the coordinators for their own assessment work.

Peer Review: The Assessment Council convenes in January to conduct a peer review of program LAUs submitted by academic departments and service programs in the Fall. The coordinators work in teams to analyze the assessment reports, provide feedback by completing the GU’s learning assessment report rubric, and participate in a discussion of the implications of the reports in relation to their assessment work.

INDIVIDUAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT MEETINGS: WITHIN ACADEMIC AFFAIRS AND STUDENT AFFAIRS

Academic Affairs

Throughout AY 2014-2015 !O’s Coordinator of Assessment and Planning participated in 45 meetings with departments/programs in Academic Affairs. The purpose of meetings varied:

Explaining, clarifying, discussing and/or following up on any issues related to learning assessment,

Providing refresher trainings on WEAVE,

Discussing the departments/programs’ L!U feedback, and

Discussing the programs/departments’ progress in developing/revising their Assessment Plans.

Figure 1: Professional Development Meetings within Academic Affairs

Meetings with department chairs/program directors/assessment coordinators about Learning Assessment in general

28

Meetings with assessment coordinators about LAU feedback discussion

12

Meetings with Departments/Programs about Assessment Plans

5

In addition to the department/program’s assessment coordinators, chairs are also instrumental in fostering a climate of learning assessment within their department. Since the role of Chair is critical to successful assessment work, including the use of assessment results, there is a need


for department chairs to continue being involved and aware of their !C’s work and assessment-related matters in their departments.

Student Affairs:

For the first time, AO conducted a clarified and in-depth focus on learning assessment within Student Affairs. !O’s Coordinator of Assessment and Planning participated in 57 meetings with the Dean of Student Affairs and Student Affairs units. The purpose of meetings varied as well:

Explaining, clarifying, discussing and/or following up on any issues related to learning assessment,

Discussing the units’ LAU feedback, and

Monitoring and reviewing the programs/departments’ progress in developing/revising their Assessment Plans consisting of student learning outcomes, learning opportunities, measurements, and scoring criteria.

Figure 2: Professional Development Meetings within Student Affairs

Meetings with unit directors/assessment coordinators about Learning Assessment in general

41

Meetings with assessment coordinators about LAU feedback discussion

8

Meetings with the Dean of Student Affairs 8

As a result of the meetings, units have either demonstrated some progress in understanding of their program’s learning outcomes assessment through improved reporting or revising their program assessment plan.

II. ANNUAL LEARNING ASSESSMENT UPDATE (LAU)

Each year programs assess the student learning that takes place in their programs. The purpose of this student learning assessment is to understand how well students are achieving the program’s student learning outcomes. This understanding then leads to discussions within the programs on how to respond to assessment information.

LAUs are a mechanism to guide the learning assessment process in programs. LAUs also allow the Assessment Council and the AO to assess and provide feedback on strengths and needs in program assessment. Additionally, reports provide focus points for discussions among faculty and staff regarding qualities that characterize good assessment practices (e.g., at Assessment Council Meetings).

Results of the Earlier Initiatives: The usage of WEAVE is now in its third year, and all programs that had a LAU submitted it by using this system this year. Starting in Fall 2013, AO also began to require programs to do a curriculum map. As of Fall 2015, only 7 academic programs have established curriculum mapping in WEAVE. Evidently, the habit of doing curriculum mapping in WEAVE is still not solidly established in our campus’ culture; This remains one of !O’s


continuing commitment to renew efforts in encouraging the usage of curriculum mapping among all academic programs.

Learning Assessment Update Policies:

NON-ACCREDITED PROGRAMS: All programs are to submit an annual Learning Assessment Update (LAU) in the fall. The LAU is to describe and document the program’s use of assessment results since the previous LAUs. LAUs should also document any ongoing assessment progress that include SLOs, assessment tools, and scoring criteria.

ACCREDITED PROGRAMS: Programs with accreditation requirements are to submit a Learning Assessment Update (LAU) mid-way through their accreditation cycle. See the assessment calendar for the accredited programs on the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes’ website (https://www.gallaudet.edu/Documents/OAQ/Assessment/Reporting%20Calendar%20for%20Accredited%20Programs.pdf)

o The accredited programs at GU are: Audiology Business Administration & Accounting Counseling Education Psychology (School psychology and Clinical psychology) Speech Language Pathology Social Work

AY2014-15 Learning Assessment Update Completion in Academic and Student Affairs

Academic Programs

Out of 43 academic undergraduate and graduate programs, 13 other programs have their own accreditation requirements. In Fall 2015, AO received 19 completed Learning Assessment Updates (LAUs) via WEAVE. Ten other programs did not submit a current LAU or did not complete their LAU. 13 programs did not submit any LAU due to being on a separate reporting calendar for the accredited programs. One did not submit a LAU due to being in the progress of developing/revising their program Assessment Plan.

Figure 3: Snapshot of LAU submission


https://www.gallaudet.edu/Documents/OAQ/Assessment/Reporting%20Calendar%20for%20Accredited%20Programs.pdf

Student Affairs

Units within Student Affairs also participate in assessing student learning in their extracurricular activities. Gallaudet’s Student !ffairs, like that at many universities, was most familiar with conducting evaluations of effectiveness of their units, primarily through satisfaction surveys. Beginning AY 2013-14, AO has been channeling more resources on learning assessment for Student Affairs. As a result, during AY 2014-15, AO saw an increase in meetings with Student !ffairs’ assessment coordinators to discuss learning assessment in depth;

Out of 171 units, eight submitted their LAUs in Summer/Fall 2014 while the other eight programs were developing and/or revising their program Assessment Plans which entailed of revising their Student Learning Outcomes, identifying or developing the appropriate assessment measures, selecting or creating scoring criteria to evaluate the measures, and planning the assessment timeline.

Figure 4: Snapshot of LAU submission

AO anticipates that next year Student Affairs will be able to use assessment of student learning to supplement their current forms of evaluation for program improvement. See Appendix B1 and B2 for charts of LAU submission by program for AY 2014-2015. See Appendix C for a review of Assessment Reporting AY 2012-2013 to present.

Summary

Inevitably, there are conditions that make it difficult for some programs to submit L!U’s in any given year. Sometimes it has been due to the rapid expansion of a program or limited faculty resources. At other times, it has been due to a change in the Chair or Program Director in the Department or Program. AO continues to work with these programs to assure that a gap in assessment remains a temporary gap rather than a continuing pattern.

1 For AO’s assessment tracking, the three units from the Office of Diversity and Equity for Students (within Academic Affairs) are included in Student Affairs. ODES’s primary focus is on students.


III. UNIT EFFECTIVENESS PLANNING (UEP)

Student learning assessment is a critical component of assessing the effectiveness of programs. However, Gallaudet also uses a Unit Effectiveness Planning (UEP) process that also provide information on program effectiveness, especially related to the Gallaudet Strategic Plan.

Each undergraduate and graduate program annually sets targets and develops action plans through Unit Effectiveness Plans (UEPs) to achieve those targets. In the following fall, programs assess the achievement of their goals, report outcomes, and revise targets and action plans as needed for the following year.

The targets and goals are based on the Gallaudet Strategic Plan Objectives of

A.5 Increase and broaden accountability for student enrollment

B.4 Increase and broaden accountability for student retention and graduation

D.3 Strengthen students' preparation for employment and career success

E.1 Establish Gallaudet's research agenda and set targets for externally-funded research proposal submission, funding, and completion by 2015 and beyond

E.2 Create the infrastructure needed to support a world-class research enterprise

Annually in September, OAQ/OIR disseminates to the academic programs an updated AY reporting template with data from Institutional Research on four UEP indicators (enrollment, graduation rate, retention, post-graduation outcomes: % employed, % pursuing education, % neither) based on the previous AY OIR data. Programs complete the data template by providing data on internships and faculty research indicators.

The academic programs have until October to assess the achievement of their goals, report outcomes, and revise targets and action for the current/following year. Then they submit their updated UEPs to their Deans in October with a copy to AO. Deans meet with program leaders to review the program’s progress towards goals and discuss budget needs related to improvement. If there is a revision to the program UEP after this meeting, the academic program submit their revised UEPs to Deans and AO by December.

Fall 2014 Submission: Out of 48 academic undergraduate, graduate, and certificate programs, 47 submitted their UEPs to their Deans and AO. The submission rate increased by 81% from last year’s rate of 26 UEP submissions. See Appendix D for a list of programs that submitted their UEPs in Fall 2014.

IV. SENIOR LITERACY ASSESSMENT

In 2009, Gallaudet University began a pilot Senior Literacy !ssessment of graduating seniors’ English writing skills. Then, in Spring 2011, a parallel version was implemented for the ASL assessment; This process of assessing graduating seniors’ !SL and English skills continued to take place until AY 2014-2015. This process was:


Instructors collected the final written and signed products from graduating seniors in their senior seminar or capstone courses.

Instructors or department chairs then submitted the products by the established deadline; the written English papers were uploaded to a Blackboard portal and the links of the signed products were electronically sent to a shared Google document.

AO recruited interested faculty members from all disciplines on campus and provided a calibration rubric session for English and ASL.

AO coordinated the “SL! Evaluation Day” for English and ASL. There were 10-14 faculty evaluators for each session. They used two “standard” rubrics to evaluate the seniors’ final products which were 1) the Written Communication Rubric (adapted from the AACU) for English and 2) the ASL Senior Language Assessment Project Rubric for ASL.

AO then collected the evaluations, performed a data analysis, and produced a report.

The establishment of the new Senior Assessment process, which examines senior outcomes on all five of the Gallaudet institutional outcomes signified necessary changes for the SLA process. The 2013-2014 SLA cycle was the last one in the original form. The complete reports of the Senior Literacy !ssessment are available on O!Q’s website2.

AO recognized the essential value of collaborating with The Center on Bilingual Teaching and Learning (CBTL), an important resource, for discussions on redesigning our approach to assessing literacy as one of the five institutional outcomes. The first action was in Spring 2015 with the formation of an ad-hoc committee with representatives from Communication Studies, English, ASL/Deaf Studies, Linguistics, Biology, and Chemistry. The sole purpose of this ad-hoc committee was to develop examples of several potential prompts that might be used to assess the Literacy outcome then select the most fitting one for our purpose and provide feedback on rubrics. AO and faculty are now discussing possible next steps to continue these discussions for improved assessment of this important institutional outcome.

V. SENIOR ASSESSMENT

In the fall of 2011, the GU Faculty Senate requested that OAQ establish the Institutional Outcomes Assessment Committee (IOA), charged with developing a process for assessing institutional student learning outcomes at mid-career and graduation.

The IOA began its consideration of assessment of SLOs by referring to other models for assessment of students as they prepare to graduate. The Association of American Colleges and Universities (AACU's) Greater Expectations Project on Accreditation and Assessment Capstone Assessment Project within their Taking Responsibility for the Quality of the Baccalaureate Degree Initiative was the main model. The goal is to develop assessments in which (1) general education outcomes and major outcomes are assessed together, and (2) general education and major outcomes can be assessed at the highest levels of undergraduate education (i.e., in the senior year

2 Senior Literacy Reports for 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14 can be found at

http://www.gallaudet.edu/office_of_academic_quality/assessment_of_student_learning_outcomes/senior_literacy_assessment.html


http://www.gallaudet.edu/office_of_academic_quality/assessment_of_student_learning_outcomes/senior_literacy_assessment.html

By 2014, all 23 undergraduate programs should have a draft written senior assessment plan that describes the following:

1. The institutional and program-specific outcomes that are required to be integrated by the student in performing this assessment activity

2. Disciplinary standards for the outcomes 3. The ways in which students, in explicit and cumulative ways, are prepared for

senior assessments in prior semesters 4. The ways in which the senior assessment(s) are a learning experience for

students 5. The breadth of faculty collaboration in the assessment activity

Professional Development opportunities to support the establishment of this new process took place during AY 2012-2013. Programs were asked to develop a Senior Assessment Plan, and they received feedback on their Plan. In January 2014, 19 out of 23 academic undergraduate programs submitted their Senior Assessment Plans (SAP) to AO. Their SAPs report on the five criteria as described above.

June 1, 2015 was the deadline for the inaugural Senior Assessment Reports (SAR). SAR focuses on the following:

Results on the selected measures

Targets

Improvement discussion and timeline

Out of 23 academic undergraduate programs, AO received 16 (70%) inaugural Senior Assessment Reports. Five did not submit, and one submitted a SAP instead. One program informed AO that no data had been collected during AY 2014-15. See Appendix E for a list of programs that submitted their Senior Assessment Reports in June 2015.

Figure 5: Snapshot of Senior Assessment report submission

The criteria used in evaluating the Senior Assessment reports were adapted from the rubric


developed by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), “WASC Rubric for

Assessing the Use of Capstone Experiences for Assessing Program Learning Outcomes.” The two

criterions are: 1) Relevant Outcomes and Lines of Evidence Identified and 2) Results are Used.

Figure 6: Snapshot of the Senior Assessment evaluation rubric

Criteria[1] Initial Emerging Developed Highly Developed

Relevant Outcomes and Lines of Evidence Identified[2]

Results Are Used[3]

[1] Source: WASC Rubric for Assessing the Use of Capstone Experiences for Assessing Program Learning Outcomes

[2] Relevant Outcomes and Evidence Identified. It is likely that not all program learning outcomes can be assessed within a single capstone course or experience. Questions: Have faculty explicitly determined which program outcomes will be assessed in the capstone? Have they agreed on concrete plans for collecting evidence relevant to each targeted outcome? Have they agreed on explicit criteria, such as rubrics, for assessing the evidence? Have they identified examples of student performance for each outcome at varying performance levels (e.g., below expectations, meeting, exceeding expectations for graduation)?

[3] Results Are Used. Assessment is a process designed to monitor and improve learning, so assessment findings should have an impact. Faculty should reflect on results for each outcome and decide if they are acceptable or disappointing. If results do not meet faculty standards, faculty should determine which changes should be made, e.g., in pedagogy, curriculum, student support, or faculty support. Questions: Do faculty collect assessment results, discuss them, and reach conclusions about student achievement? Do they develop explicit plans to improve student learning? Do they implement those plans? Do they have a history of securing necessary resources to support this implementation? Do they collaborate with other campus professionals to improve student learning? Do follow-up studies confirm that changes have improved learning?

AO formed an evaluation committee to evaluate the Senior Assessment Reports. The committee comprised five faculty members from the Council on Undergraduate Education and the Assessment Council; the programs of Psychology, PE/Recreation, Deaf Studies, Philosophy, and English were represented on this committee.

The committee evaluated 16 reports in two days using and piloting the new rubric. A data analysis is also included in this report.

Figure 7: Snapshot of Evaluation results


According to the results, none of the programs scored at the Initial criterion level. This was probably due to the proactive step of including the Senior Assessment Plan component and the supporting professional development early in this process.

More than half of the programs scored in the “Developed” rubric category, and several more are considered as “emerging”; The results also show the need for additional support for programs in clarifying the relationship between their SLOs and the evidence.

There was another set of evaluation criteria used in evaluating the Senior Assessment Reports:

Figure 8: Snapshot of Senior Assessment evaluation criteria

CRITERIA (n=16) YES NO

This Senior Assessment Report follows the established Senior Assessment Plan; 13 3

This Senior Assessment Report provides data that demonstrate the student learning experience; 16

This Senior Assessment Report was conducted collaboratively with faculty in the program. 9 7

The first row signifies the majority of the programs adhered to their original Senior Assessment Plans (submitted in January 2014). The second row shows all programs have accomplished in providing data that demonstrates the student learning experience. The final criterion sees a nearly even split between yes and no on faculty involvement in this process. However, the report itself does not explicitly require descriptions of faculty involvement, and AO suspects only one faculty member (either the assessment coordinator or the designated senior assessment coordinator) coordinates this entire process. The report will be revised for the next cycle.

In all, the first cycle of the Senior Assessment process went well with the implementation of the Senior Assessment Plan and the inaugural Senior Assessment Report. For instance, in the first cycle, a relatively high rate of submitting reports and developing an analysis report that provides data on student learning indicates a good sign of progress in this important area of assessment.

During AY2015-16, AO will focus on revising the report template and evaluation rubric for sophisticated future reporting. Also, the next steps will target the follow up actions based on the needs mentioned in the reports.


VI. TECHNICAL SUPPORT: PROGRAM OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT BLACKBOARD SITE

AO continues to seek ways to provide technical assistance to programs. In AY 2011-2012 AO established a Blackboard site that contains key program data for each year: LAUs, Unit Effective Planning data, Senior Literacy Outcomes, and Alumni Outcomes. This site also includes each program’s Assessment SLO Matrix. Senior Assessment data will be added to the Blackboard site by Fall 2015. This comprehensive set of information on learning outcomes for each program supports programs in reviewing the strengths and needs of their program in achieving their goals.

VII. INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT DAYS (IAD)

Beginning in 2011, the Office of Faculty Development and the Office of Assessment established the first two days of the Faculty Development week as a) Teaching and Learning Development Day; and b) Institutional Assessment Day. The purpose of this consistent predictable scheduling is to ensure that time is set aside from the busy schedules of faculty and staff to devote to professional development, discussion, and analysis on assessment related issues. The other goal of this consistent scheduling is to ensure that departments schedule departmental meetings and retreats and other business on days that week other than this day. Chairs, assessment coordinators, and faculty are reminded on a regular basis of the purpose of the Teaching and Learning Development Day and Institutional Assessment Day (IAD).

Topics for IADs focus on high priority areas each year. In 2014, AO provided a workshop on the development of alumni surveys for the programs. Faculty Development’s Teaching and Learning Development Day was tied to assessment as the topic focused on Gallaudet’s institutional outcome #3 of Culture and Identity and how to assess this particular outcome. It appears that there is still a need to identify professional development opportunities for assessing culture and identity. For 2015, AO is slated to provide two-part workshop on Classroom Assessment Techniques related to critical and synthetic thinking skills.

Institutional Assessment Day topics:

1) Fall 2013 topic: “Senior !ssessment “ 2) Spring 2014 topic: “Providing Feedback on !SL Texts” 3) Fall 2014: “Program-Level !lumni Surveys” 4) Spring 2014: “Evaluating English and !SL Texts” 5) Fall 2015: “Analyze, Synthesize, and Criticize, Oh My!: Check Out Our Critical Thinking

Toolkit!” (part 1) 6) Spring 2016: “!nalyze, Synthesize, and Criticize, Oh My!: Check Out Our Critical Thinking

Toolkit!” (tentatively part 2)


Appendix A: Role of Assessment Coordinators

Role of Assessment Coordinators

Assessment Coordinators provide leadership and support in the assessment of student learning and the use of learning assessment data for program improvement in their unit.

To do so, the Assessment Coordinator:

1. Develops and updates (in conjunction with Department Chair/Unit head, and faculty/ staff) the unit's plan for using program-level student learning assessment to improve the program by:

a. Engaging unit colleagues in shared conversations about student learning and assessment, and the use of assessment data for program improvement. b. Leading the development and periodic review of unit outcomes. c. Leading the development and periodic review of unit curriculum and assessment activities matrices. d. Leading the development and implementation of direct and indirect assessment methods appropriate for the unit. e. Leading the collection of data about the program and student learning. f. Working with other faculty and staff to close the loop between what is found in the data and improving student learning.

2. Provides annual updates of progress and/or achievements (Learning Assessment Update) to the Senate curriculum councils, Dean, Provost and Office of Academic Quality.

3. Participates as a member of the Assessment Council (AC). Activities include: a. Functioning as a peer professional development group member with other Assessment Coordinators; b. Reviewing and providing feedback on annual Learning Assessment Updates.

4. Functions as unit specialist in learning assessment by through professional development and use of resources.

5. Keeps the unit informed about Gallaudet University's institutional requirements regarding learning assessment.


Appendix B1:

Submission of Learning Assessment Updates by Program (Academic Affairs): AY 2014-2015

Program LAU

CAS

Art N/A3

ASL, BA N/A

ASL, MA Assessment Plan DUE Fall 2015

Biology √

Chemistry N/A

Communication Studies Revised Assessment Plan DUE Fall 2015

Deaf Studies, BA √

Deaf Studies, MA √

English √

GSR √

History √

Honors √

Information Technology Assessment Plan due in Fall 2014; LAU expected in Fall 2015

International Studies N/A

Linguistics, MA √

Linguistics, PhD N/A

Math-CS N/A

Philosophy √

Psychology, BA √

Psychology - School Psy* different schedule4

Psychology - Clinical* different schedule

Sociology √

Spanish √

Theatre N/A

SEBHS

Business (Accounting)* different schedule

Business (Bus Adm)* different schedule

Counseling (MHC and School)* √

Education, BA* different schedule

3 n/a=no LAU was submitted this year. 4 “different schedule” is for an accredited program which follows an accreditation reporting timeline.


Education, MA* different schedule

Education, PhD* different schedule

Government √

HSLS: SLP, MA* √

HSLS: PhD √

HSLS: AuD* √

Interpretation, BA √

Interpretation, MA √

Interpretation, PhD N/A

International Dvlp, MA √

Public Affairs, MPA Revise assessment plan due Jan. 2015

PE-Rec N/A

Social Work, BA* different schedule

Social Work, MA* different schedule

Educational Neuroscience, PhD (interdisciplinary -graduate)* Assessment Plan DUE Fall 2015


Appendix B2:

Submission of Learning Assessment Updates by Program (Student Affairs) - AY 2014-2015

Program LAU

Academic Advising √

Alcohol and Other Drugs Program √

Athletics √

Campus Activities Assessment Plan - pending

Career Center √

Commuter Programs Assessment Plan - pending

Counseling Psychological Center √

Health and Wellness Programs √

New Student Orientation Assessment Plan - pending

Office for Students with Disabilities √

Office of Student Conduct N/A

Residence Life-Housing Assessment Plan - pending

Student Success Submitted Assessment Plan

Tutorial & Instructional Programs √

KTP Assessment Plan - pending

MSP Assessment Plan - pending

LGBTQ Center Assessment Plan - pending


Appendix C:

ASSESSMENT REPORTING CHART: FALL 2011-PRESENT

This chart demonstrates the progress of reporting on student learning assessment within academic and service programs/units over the period of four years (Fall 2011 to present).

PROGRAMS LEARNINGNG ASSESSMENT REPORT SUBMISSION

FALL 2011/SPRING 2012

FALL 2012/SPRING 2013

FALL 2013 FALL 2014 FALL 2015

1 Art LAU (fall) none LAU none LAU

2 ASL, BA LAU (fall) none LAU (inc) none none

3 ASL, MA none none LAU none LAU

4 Biology Full report (spring)

LAU (fall) LAU LAU LAU

5 Business (Accounting & Business Admn)

Full report extended to spring 2012

New reporting policy due to accreditation

NA: accreditation assessment


none

6 Chemistry/Physics Full report extended to spring 2012

none LAU none LAU

7 Communication Studies LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU not submitted; need to restart with an Assessment Plan

none (no assessment coordinator)

8 Counseling LAU (fall) NA: NCATE accreditation assessment

NA: NCATE accreditation assessment

LAU NA: Accreditation

9 Deaf Studies, BA LAU (fall) none LAU LAU none

10 Deaf Studies, MA none LAU (spring -inc)

LAU none none

11 Education, Teacher Preparation Programs, BA





LAU

12 Education, Teacher Preparation Programs, MA





LAU

13 Education, PhD NA: NCATE accreditation assessment




LAU


14 Educational Neuroscience, PhD

New Program. Assessment Plan -pending

Assessment Plan due Fall 2015

15 English LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU LAU LAU

16 Government LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU LAU LAU

17 General Studies Requirements

LAU (fall) none none LAU none

18 Hearing Speech and Language, MA

LAU (fall) NA: NCATE accreditation assessment


LAU (not in WEAVE)

LAU

19 Hearing Speech and Language, AuD

LAU (fall) NA: NCATE accreditation assessment


LAU (not in WEAVE)

none

20 Hearing Speech and Language, PhD

new program; Assessment Plan

none none LAU (not in WEAVE)

none

21 History none LAU (fall -inc)/Full report (spring)

LAU (inc) LAU none

22 Honors LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU LAU LAU

23 Information Technology New program Assessment Plan

Assessment Plan due in Fall 2014; LAU expected in Fall 2015

Revised Assessment Plan due Fall 2015

24 International Development MA

LAU (fall)/Full report (spring)

Waived LAU LAU None (no assessment coordinator)

25 International Studies First year of program

none LAU none Revised Assessment Plan due Fall 2015

26 Interpretation, BA LAU extended to spring 2012

Assessment Plan submitted

LAU LAU LAU

27 Interpretation, MA LAU extended to spring 2012


none LAU LAU


28 Interpretation, PhD new program; Assessment Plan


none none none

29 Linguistics MA LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU LAU none

30 Linguistics PhD LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU none none

31 Mathematics & Computer Science

LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU LAU LAU

32 PE: Teaching LAU (fall) LAU (spring) Closed Closed Closed

33 PE: Recreation & Sports programming

LAU (fall) LAU (spring) Closed Closed Closed

34 PERC: Physical Education and Recreation

Merged programs; LAU

none Revised Assessment Plan due Fall 2015

35 Philosophy Full report (fall)

none none LAU none

36 Psychology - BA LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU LAU LAU

37 Psychology – MA (School) Full report (fall)

LAU (fall) NA: accreditation assessment


NA: Accreditation

38 Psychology PhD (Clinical) LAU (fall) none NA: accreditation assessment


NA: Accreditation

39 Public Affairs, MA New program; Assessment Plan

Still on Assessment Plan

Revised assessment plan due Jan. 2015

LAU

40 Social Work (BSW) Full report (fall)

LAU (fall) NA: accreditation assessment

System concerns (due in Fall 2016)

NA: Accreditation

41 Social Work (MSW) Full report (fall)



System concerns (due in Fall 2016)

none

42 Sociology LAU (fall) Full report (fall)

LAU LAU none (no assessment coordinator)

43 Spanish none none LAU LAU none

44 Theatre Arts Full report (fall)

LAU (fall) none none None


STUDENT AFFAIRS

1 Academic Advising LAU (fall) Full report (fall)

LAU LAU LAU; new Assessment Plan completed

2 Tutorial & Instructional Programs (TIP)

LAU (fall) LAU (fall) LAU LAU Partially completed Assessment Plan.

3 Athletics Full report (fall)

LAU (fall) LAU LAU LAU

4 Campus Activities none none LAU (inc) Assessment Plan -pending

Still on Assessment Plan (continuing from AY2014-2015)

5 Commuter Programs none none none Assessment Plan -pending


6 New Student Orientation none LAU (fall) none Assessment Plan -pending


7 Career Center LAU (fall) none LAU LAU LAU

8 Counseling Psychological Center

none LAU due in summer

LAU LAU LAU

9 Office for Students w/Disabilities (OSWD)

Full report (fall)

none LAU LAU LAU

10 Residence Life LAU (fall) none LAU (inc) Assessment Plan -pending

LAU

11 Health and Wellness Programs

none none LAU LAU LAU

12 Alcohol and Other Drugs Program

none LAU (fall) none LAU LAU

13 Office of Student Conduct none none LAU (inc) none none


14 FYE: First Year Experience (incl. JumpStart) / Student Success

Full report (fall)

none New Assessment Plan

Assessment Plan -pending

Completed a new Assessment Plan and is conducting assessment.

15 Office of Diversity & Equity for Students (ODES)-KTP

LAU (fall) LAU (inc) none Assessment Plan -pending

Completed a new Assessment Plan.

16 ODES - LGBTQA Center New Program. Assessment Plan -pending


17 ODES – MSP none LAU (inc) none Assessment Plan -pending


18 ODES – OMSA LAU (fall) none Closed Closed Closed

TOTALS 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013 2014 2015

3 year reports: Submitted/Due=%

13/57 =48% 3/59 = 5% No longer in effect

No longer in effect

No longer in effect

Learning Assmnt Update: Submitted/Due = %

26/57 = 46% 23/59 = 39% 32/57 = 58% 28/59 = 47% 23/59=41%

Extensions (later submitted)=%

4 1 0 0 0

None/accredited/new/new policy reporting/assessment plan

17 32 25 31 36


Appendix E: Programs’ Unit Effectiveness Planning Submission

UEP Fall 2014

CAS

Art √ ASL, BA √ ASL, MA* √ Biology, BA √ Biology, BS √ Chemistry, BA √ Chemistry, BS √ Communication Studies √ Deaf Studies, BA √ Deaf Studies, MA* √ English √ History √ Information Technology √ International Studies √ Linguistics, MA* √ Linguistics, PhD* √ Math-CS √ Philosophy √ Psychology, BA √ Psychology - School Psy* √ Psychology - Clinical* √ Sociology √ Spanish √ Theatre √

SEBHS

Business (Accounting) √ Business (Bus Adm) √ Counseling* √ Counseling, MHC* √ Counseling, Summer and Online* √ Education, BA √ Education, MA* √ Education, PhD* √ Government √ HSLS: SLP, MA* √ HSLS: PhD* √ HSLS: AuD* √ Interpretation, BA √


Interpretation, MA* √ Interpretation, PhD* √ International Dvlp, MA* √ Public Affairs, MPA* √ PE-Rec N/A

Social Work, BA √ Social Work, MA* √

CERT

Educating Deaf Students with Disabilities, Certificate (Education - SEHBS) √

ASL/Bilingual ECE, Certificate (Education -SEHBS) √

Deaf HH, Infants, Toddlers, Families Certificate (interdisciplinary - Graduate) √

IND Educational Neuroscience, PhD (interdisciplinary - graduate) √


Appendix F: Programs’ Senior !ssessment Report Submission

Report

Submitted June

2015

CA

S

Art √

ASL, BA √

Biology √

Chemistry N/A

Communication Studies reported no data

Deaf Studies, BA √

English √

Honors √

History √

Information Technology √

International Studies (WLC) N/A

Math-CS √

Philosophy √

Psychology, BA √

Sociology N/A

Spanish (WLC) √

Theatre N/A

SEBH

S

Business (Bus Adm and Acct) N/A

Education, BA √

Government √

Interpretation, BA √

Social Work, BA √

PE-Rec submitted a SAP
