Governance:
The personnel structure within the assessment program has gone through significant changes during 2004. At the beginning of the year, the assessment program was staffed by an interim Director, and an Assessment Coordinator. The ad hoc Faculty Senate Assessment Committee was charged with completing its tasks and developing guidelines for governance by a permanent Assessment Committee that was to be formed after the North Central Association's accreditation team visit. The Assessment Coordinator's position was being restructured and advertised in a national search. As part of the restructuring of the position, a Web Site Manager position was created.
The personnel organization and staffing was completed during the time period of the first of April through the month of May. A new Assessment Coordinator, Dr. Jeanne Butler was hired effective April 1st. Ms. Jeanne Cutler was then reassigned from her previous position as Assessment Coordinator to the position of Web Site Manager. Glen Powell was appointed to the position of Faculty Assistant to the Senior Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs and Student Life (SVC) which included the position of Director of Assessment as part of the position. The Faculty Senate ad hoc Assessment Committee became a standing committee responsible to the SVC after the North Central Association Accreditation visit in April. A graduate assistant was employed to assist Ms. Jeanne Cutler with her position as Coordinator of Academic Publications and duties as Web Site Manager. The graduate assistant, Kim Elliott, assists with web site maintenance and recording of the Assessment Committee minutes as part of her assistantship.
The Assessment Committee had been working on developing a governance plan since November 2003. The proposed plan had been forwarded to the Dean's Council for input. The SVC, Dr. Galen Hadley, had the opportunity to review it. The proposed plan was reviewed by the Faculty Senate at their May meeting. The proposal was also reviewed by the North Central Association accreditation team member assigned to examine the assessment process at UNK. Revisions from suggestions provided by the various groups were discussed at a special May meeting of the Assessment Committee and then incorporated into the document. The Assessment Committee voted its approval of the plan pending incorporation of the agreed upon changes. A copy of the "University of Nebraska at Kearney Assessment Governance Document" is attached.
The Director began implementation of the governance plan with the provision that revisions may need to be made early in the fall semester pending further suggestions potentially to be provided in the exit report from the accreditation team. The accreditation team's exit report was received in September, and no additional changes were needed. The governance plan has been followed since its adoption in May by the Assessment Committee.
The governance plan stipulates that there be student representation on the committee. The Coordinator for Assessment proposed that a separate student committee be utilized in place of having a student representative on the Assessment Committee. The formation of the student committee is in progress. The governance plan will need to be amended to incorporate the student committee into the process once it is more fully developed.
There is provision for a member from the Student Life division to serve on the Assessment Committee. An invitation was issued in September/October, but there was no response at the time. This needs to be followed up more aggressively or the governance plan should be revised.
An initial process for monitoring assessment of students was developed in April. The monitoring process utilizes the following schedule.
Spring semester:
- Audit of assessment tools used across campus to determine what is being used, by whom, and the purpose: A list of the different assessment tools being used with students was developed by conducting an audit of the assessment tools submitted for inclusion in the exhibit room for the North Central Association team's accreditation visit.
- Evidence of approved assessment plans: Departments/programs are required to have student outcome assessment plans that are approved by the Coordinator and Director of Assessment. The approved plans are posted at the assessment website. The programs without approved plans include: General Studies and the First Year Program although both programs have been conducting assessment and piloting assessment processes although the actual plans have not yet been submitted.
- Audit of types of data collected: This has not been conducted.
- Analyze progress toward meeting assessment strategic plan: Jeanne Cutler conducted an informal review of progress toward meeting the strategic plan in May. The Director of Assessment has appointed an Assessment Committee subcommittee to more formally complete this process. The subcommittee began its work in November.
Fall semester:
- Monitor submission of annual assessment reports from departments and respective programs (General Studies, First Year, etc.): Reports were due by October 1st. A majority of the programs submitted reports by the due date. Follow-up contacts were made by the Director after that date. Approximately 80% of the programs had submitted reports by December 1.
- Review quality of assessment plans and reports: The Director of Assessment has appointed an Assessment Committee subcommittee to review assessment reports to identify exemplars and revise the current reporting format. It began its work in December.
January:
- Develop general report on the status of assessment during the previous calendar year.
The monitoring process is expected to change over time. Since most programs have very recent assessment plans, it was decided to concentrate on the quality of the reporting process first. Informal analysis of the reports for the past two years suggests that most departments are submitting data to complete the task rather than interpreting it to benefit the student learning process and program development. Therefore, it was decided to focus on the reporting process as a first step to improve the quality of the assessment process.
A long term concern is to increase the number of departments submitting reports in a timely manner. The number of departments submitting reports has increased from the first year (2002-2003) to this past year (2003-2004). This is a positive sign of progress. However, 80% leaves room for continued improvement.
The primary concern is the development of a General Studies assessment plan. The North Central Association's accreditation team was not satisfied with the progress in the area of a General Studies Program assessment plan and process. This area of concern will be of primary interest in a follow up focus visit in four years. In response to this concern, the Director of Assessment developed an analysis of tasks to be accomplished and presented it to the General Studies Council's assessment subcommittee in early September. The subcommittee has developed an outline of the assessment process and is in the process of implementing it.
The Director of the First Year Program and the Director of Assessment agreed to work on developing an assessment plan during the spring semester of 2005. This schedule will permit the Director of the First Year program to finish piloting a writing assessment that was initiated during the fall semester and to review existing data prior to finalizing an assessment plan.
Establishing Priorities/Initial Efforts
The starting point for further development of the assessment program after the employment of personnel and reassignment to different positions presented an interesting challenge. A significant number of tasks needed to be identified and then prioritized in regard to the management of the program at UNK. The external reviewer on the North Central Association's accreditation team clearly identified several concerns regarding the program during the site visit in April. The personnel and the Assessment Committee had several ideas regarding needs to be addressed. The exit report that was received in September specifically identified a number of areas of concern. This section will first summarize what was done to get started with addressing areas of need in regard to the continued development of assessment at UNK in a chronological order. There are also appended documents that provide more specific information. They are: Analyses of Assessment Topics Addressed in the North Central Accreditation Team Final Report, Agenda of Activities for Assessment Program, and the University of Nebraska at Kearney Assessment Strategic Plan.
The Assessment Director, Coordinator of Assessment, and Website Manager developed a list of potential priority initiatives (see Agenda of Activities for Assessment Program) based on oral feedback during the North Central Association team's site visit in April. This list of initiatives was organized around the following topics: relevance, sustainability, climate, student involvement, and administrative support. The initiatives were presented to the Assessment Committee in May for their reaction and input. It was then revised by the Director. The Director then contacted each College Dean and arranged to meet with the respective set of College department chairs to seek their input regarding potential initiative priorities for assisting them with continued assessment development. The input from the different visits identified that department chairs and Deans tended to be most concerned with promoting relevance and sustainability through alignment of assessment plans for UNK with assessment requirements for accreditation and Academic Program Review (APR) requirements. This feedback resulted in the APR guidelines being rewritten to further integrate the assessment process with the five year APR cycle. The Director met with the College of Education department chairs to discuss alignment with their respective accreditation agencies. The Coordinator of Assessment worked extensively with departments in the College of Business and Technology to promote alignment in their assessment process with the requirements of their respective accreditation agencies. The UNK annual assessment report filed by the Social Work Program was modified to fit the requirements of its accreditation group. The alignment process will be ongoing with the initial steps being undertaken this past summer and fall.
The issue of climate needs to be addressed. The exit report noted that assessment was negatively viewed by many on campus. Initial steps that were begun during the fall semester included:
- offering faculty development sessions sponsored by the Center of Teaching Excellence on a monthly basis,
- a newsletter on assessment topics that was published every other month,
- obtaining a budget that provides stipends to support assessment development and travel with the development stipends focusing on General Studies assessment development and travel during the spring semester of 2005; future budgets will provide for similar activities across all programs,
- a survey of faculty assessment needs for the purpose of guiding future faculty development efforts by the Center of teaching Excellence,
- redesigning the website to promote its use as a resource,
- obtaining an assessment e-mail account,
- creating an office area for the assessment program personnel in conjunction with the Center of Teaching Excellence, and
- by simply being as responsive as possible when contacted
- being proactive and contacting administrators and faculty (an illustrative record of Coordinator of Assessment contacts is attached: Assessment Communications-Fall 2004).
Although a number of steps were initiated during the fall semester, the enhancement of climate will be a long term goal. The final exit report from the North Central Association's accreditation team specifically mentioned that faculty ownership of assessment needed a great deal of development. Seven of the nine activities listed above were designed to facilitate this and were not in existence previously. Two initiatives being developed in the 2005 spring semester include an honors/recognition lunch to recognize exemplars of effort in the endeavor of assessment and a conference on assessment in April.
A number of initiatives were identified and undertaken to address the need for improved administrative support. This was identified by the Director, Coordinator, and the Website Manager as a priority need in April and was further highlighted in the exit report. A budget was developed for supporting the infrastructure of the assessment program at UNK. It was submitted in October and approved in November. The budget is designed to support faculty assessment efforts and development activities. An office center was created that houses the Director and Coordinator. Previously the Coordinator was located in an office on the opposite side of campus. The Website manager has an office across the hall from the Director and Coordinator. Thus, all personnel are located in the same area. Communication and productivity between the individuals has been enhanced.
A list of specific responsibilities ("Assessment Responsibilities Checklist" is attached) was developed in August in order to clarify individual as well as shared roles. Some of the responsibilities will need to be revised to reflect how the tasks have actually developed over time. The specific responsibilities reflect tasks that the Director, Coordinator, Website Manager, and the Assessment Committee believed needed to be undertaken in order to accomplish the goals of the program. Most of the tasks have been accomplished or are in progress. However, some key tasks have not been initiated yet. The major tasks that need to be accomplished include data management, student involvement, coordinating assessment efforts with other areas (such as Student Life), and becoming involved with strategic planning efforts in order to facilitate future assessment initiatives. These will need to be reviewed, initiated, or revised to reflect future needs.
In response to the preliminary exit report from the site visit team, an initial analysis of priority tasks was undertaken by the Director. Two primary areas of concern addressed by the team was the need to further develop General Studies Program assessment and to develop the administrative infrastructure to support assessment. The Director identified these two areas as being the most important priorities in addressing assessment needs for UNK. The analysis was shared with the General Studies Director and the General Studies assessment subcommittee in late August. They used the suggestions to initiate their work on assessment for the year. The Director then completed the analysis of assessment needs when the final report was actually received in September (see Analyses of Assessment Topics Addressed in the North Central Accreditation Team Final Report). The analysis was shared with the Assessment Committee and then with appropriate groups. The intent of it was to accelerate the discussion process for reacting to the report and undertaking actions to respond to suggested actions by the site visit team. The sharing process is still in progress.
Go to:
- Introduction
- Governance (current page)
- Budget
- Departmental Assessment
- General Studies Assessment
- Institutional Assessment
- Web Site
- Climate
- Summary
- Attachments
