Transcript SUNY GENERAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE

Conducting an Effective and
Useful Program Review Process
Patty Francis
Associate Provost
Institutional Assessment & Effectiveness
Background Information
SUNY, MIDDLE STATES, AND
SUNY ONEONTA
SUNY Assessment

Provost’s Advisory Task Force on the
Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes
(November 2000) Recommendations
Implementation of campus-based Assessment of
the Major (i.e., program review) effective Fall
2001
 Program reviews to be conducted every 5-7
years and to include evaluations by external
reviewers and assessment data on student
learning

SUNY Assessment (cont.)

Board of Trustees’ Resolution on Streamlining
Assessment (March 2010)



Ended SUNY Assessment Initiative
Called for campuses to have in place assessment plans
that meet or exceed Middle States standards and those
of specialized accreditors
Implications for registered academic programs

Regular review that includes assessment of student
learning and external review process
Middle States Expectations




Clearly articulated statements of expected student
learning outcomes for all programs that aim to foster
student learning and development
A documented, organized, and sustained assessment
process to evaluate and improve student learning
Assessment results that provide sufficient, convincing
evidence that students are achieving program learning
outcomes
Evidence that student learning assessment information
is shared and discussed with appropriate constituents
and is used to improve teaching and learning
Program Review at SUNY Oneonta
Has been in place since 2001
 Originally on 5-7 year schedule, now on 7year schedule (with externally accredited
programs able to coordinate program review
and self-study processes)
 Observations about process

Good news: they generally get done
 Bad news: quality is uneven, especially with
respect to student learning assessment data

Expanded Role of OIAE


Annual workshops are held for
programs beginning the process
Feedback to be provided on
submitted reviews


To be sent to program, dean, and
Provost
May require some re-submission,
especially if SLO data weak/missing
Effective Program Review
FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTS
Getting Started



Carefully review resources on College’s assessment
website (http://www.oneonta.edu/academics/Assessment/)
Guidelines and Procedures for the Review of Academic
Programs are found on website and contain a detailed
description of self-study report formatting and content
In Fall 2012 Provost Thompson approved APAC
recommendation that College adopt the SUNY
University Faculty Senate guidelines for program review
(http://www.suny.edu/facultysenate/files/Program_Review.pdf)

Discipline-specific resources
Key Components of Self-Study Process

Consideration by faculty of program’s mission, goals,
and expected student learning outcomes



Development of timeline for conducting and completing
self-study process
Identification of external reviewers and submission of
names to dean



Goals include student learning, but also include teaching
effectiveness, student engagement, student perceptions of
program, scholarly accomplishments, service, and professional
development
Can be from other SUNY institutions
Three names submitted to dean, who selects two to visit
campus
Submission of budget to dean for external reviewers
Self-Study Sections
1.
2.
3.
4.
Title Page
Table of Contents
Introduction and General Information
Assessment of Student Learning




Student learning outcomes
Description of direct and indirect measures
Conclusions regarding student learning
Plans for change based on assessment data
Self-Study Sections (cont.)
5.
Program data (Program Data Summary Table
is NOT needed)
A.
B.
C.
D.
Enrollment trends over past 5 years, impact of those trends, and
expected changes for future
Retention and graduate outcomes
Faculty accomplishments, FTE’s, and role of adjunct faculty
Resources (facilities, operational budgets)
Use of technology in teaching and learning
7. Benchmarking
8. Program’s response to external reviewers’ report
9. Appendices (only external reviewer report
required)
6.
Recommended Timeline

Spring before year self-study to be conducted


Fall Semester


Collection and analysis of information to be included in
document
October


Faculty review of process and requirements, planning, etc.
Selection of external reviewers and submission of
name/budget to divisional dean for approval
November

Verify reviewers and set dates for site-visit
Recommended Timeline (cont.)

March 15


April


Prepare penultimate draft of self-study and distribute to
faculty
External reviewers visit campus and submit report within
two weeks of visit (visit includes meeting with divisional
dean and Provost)
May

Faculty construct response to external reviewers’ report
and finalize self-study document and submit to divisional
dean and APIAE
Conclusions
MESHING REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
Relating Annual Report, Program Review,
and Assessment Plan Processes
Annual Report – due every year, includes section
on assessment of student learning
 Program Review – due every 7 years, includes
analysis of range of processes and outcomes
 Assessment Plan (i.e., APAC) – encompasses
three-year period, requires reporting on annual
basis effective 2011-12; exclusive focus is student
learning


Recent APAC recommendations regarding reporting
of assessment results in Annual Report