9/2017

UNIVERSITY ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE
Feedback to Academic Departments on Assessment Activities Reported in / (Academic Year)
Department: / Date:
Program(s) Covered in Review:
Committee Members Conducting Review:
Select only one of the following categories
(Complete undergraduate and graduate degrees on separate forms):
Undergraduate
(Select all that apply)
☐ Bachelors ______
(Specify BA, BS, etc.)
☐ Certificate Program / Graduate
(Select all that apply)
☐ Masters ______
(Specify MA, MS, etc.)
☐ PhD
☐ MD
☐ Other ______
☐ Certificate Program / Non-Academic
☐ Non-Academic
Year(s) of Reports Reviewed: / ☐ 2015-16 / ☐ 2016-17 / ☐ Other, please specify:
Date of Last Assessment Plan:

1.  STUDENT LEARNING GOALS

Y / N / Q / N/A
Were any goals referenced in the plan or report? (If NO, answer following questions with N/A) / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Were goals well-articulated? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Do goals address student learning? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
(*Coding key at end of document)

Comments:

2.  ASSESSMENT METHODS

Y / N / Q / N/A
Were any specific assessment methods that were used to collect information mentioned in the report? (If NO, answer following questions with N/A) / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Were specifically chosen assessment methods appropriately aligned with individual goals? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Were multiple methods used as components of a “multiple measures” approach? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐

Comments (If both direct and indirect methods were not used, please note any potential opportunities):

3.  ASSESSMENT RESULTS

Y / N / Q / N/A
Were any specific assessment results reported? (If NO, answer following questions with N/A) / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Were the results clear in terms of how they specifically affirm achievement of goals? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Were the results clear in terms of how they indicate need for improvement? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Were the results tied to goals of student learning? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐

Comments:

4.  CLOSING THE LOOP

Y / N / Q / N/A
Were any actions taken? (If NO, answer following questions with N/A) / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Did results indicate any potential opportunities for loop closing? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Were actions taken based on assessment results? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐
·  Did any curricular or other improvements/changes arising from assessment results directly address goals for student learning? / ☐ / ☐ / ☐ / ☐

Comments:

SUMMARY

Strengths / Areas for Improvement
☐ / A specific plan for assessment is in place. / ☐ / No specific plan for assessment is in place.
☐ / Student learning goals are well-articulated. / ☐ / Student learning goals are not well-articulated.
☐ / Assessment methods are clearly described. / ☐ / Assessment methods are not clearly described.
☐ / Assessment methods are appropriately selected. / ☐ / Assessment methods are not appropriately selected.
☐ / Assessment methods are well-implemented. / ☐ / Assessment methods are not well-implemented.
☐ / Multiple methods are implemented. / ☐ / A single type of assessment method predominates.
☐ / Results are reported. / ☐ / No results are reported.
☐ / Reported results are tied to student learning goals. / ☐ / Reported results are not tied to student learning goals.
☐ / Results are tied to closing the loop. / ☐ / Results are not clearly tied to closing the loop.
(Decision-making is tied to evidence) / (Decision-making is not directly tied to evidence)

OVERALL SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

MATERIALS REVIEWED

☐ / Annual assessment report / ☐ / Previous Assessment Review
☐ / Assessment plan (as posted) / ☐ / Other

REVIEWERS

Name
Department
Phone #
E-Mail

CODING

Section 1: / Section 2: / Section 3: / Section 4:

CODING KEY

Y = / Yes - Done appropriately and well (bearing in mind the kind of program reviewed and recognizing that assessment is a cyclical process, i.e. with additional kinds of data to be collected in other years)
Q = / Qualified Yes - Action or progress is apparent. However, evidence is lacking that this is completely or appropriately done.
N = / No - It is unclear whether it was done at all or it is not done in relationship to student learning.