Assessment Reports

Annual Reviews

Each academic, administrative and educational support department (unit or program) is to submit an annual assessment report by September 15. Submission of reports is done via the Operations and Strategic Planning assessment website. Administrative unit assessments are reviewed and feedback are sent by the President. Academic and Educational Support unit assessments are reviewed and feedback provided by the Provost/Executive Vice President.

Annual Review Workflow

The workflow for the reports follows the process below:

Assessment Plan. Each unit separately and in conjunction with their respective division/school's plan, develops an annual assessment plan.
Assessment Implementation. Each unit implements its plan over the academic year.
Report Submission. All department chairs complete and submit their respective unit reports online.
Primary Review. Primary review of all reports is performed by two separate groups: (1) the associate provost and (2) the respective vice-presidents and deans. Recommendations for unit reports are sent back to the department heads/chairs for modification and additional evidence. Upon approval by the vice-president or dean, the report moves onto the secondary review.
Secondary Review. The secondary review is performed by the President and/or Provost. Clarification and recommendations are subsequently sent back to the respective vice-president or dean.
Peer Review. Internal and external peer reviewers (biannual) evaluate each unit's report.
Dissemination of Results. Through personal interviews, emails and the SharePoint assessment workflow comments, department heads/chairs receive feedback on their respective reports.

Five-Year Reviews

Each department (unit or program) is placed on a five year intensive review cycle. Departments requiring external accrediting agency visits will use their respective self study as one of their five year reviews. Departments that fall below threshold (on consensus criteria that are to be developed) could incur an immediate review. Electronic submission of materials (i.e. portfolio, assessment website) will be the recommended mechanism. These electronic materials will provide for transparency as well as enhance the availability of the information to relevant persons, including external peer reviewers. A template for submission of materials is available to assist in the review process.

Scheduling full program reviews requires the involved department to be notified a minimum of 6 months in advance. An opportunity to delay the review an additional year may be made by the involved department's majority of faculty, or appropriate administrator. Requests for a delay would need to be in writing with a rationale and be approved by the Associate Provost.

Program reviews can be focused or comprehensive. Comprehensive reviews would include the entire department, its programs and services. A focused review would involve an intensive study of one or more major elements of a department, its programs and/or services. The option of a focused review would be dependent on a successful comprehensive review from the previous review cycle. Excerpts from these reviews will be displayed with the other university assessment information on the Operations and Strategic Planning websites.