Tribal Colleges & Universities Chief Academic Officers 3 rd Annual Meeting

1. Tribal Colleges & UniversitiesChief Academic Officers3rd Annual Meeting Wisdom Sharing: Assessment and Academic Program Review Dr. Koreen Ressler, Vice President of Academics Sitting Bull College

2. HLC Criterion Criterion Four. Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement. Core Components 4.A. The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs. 1. The institution maintains a practice of regular program reviews.

3. Program Review Purpose 1. Report for degree programs and certificates. 2. Purpose of report: • Analysis • Evaluation • Improvement

4. Information in Program Review The role of the program within the institution Staff/faculty Student information – program numbers, retention, persistence, graduation rates, graduate employment data Revenue and budget information Future needs – who is all involved in planning for the program – advisory committee

5. SBC Program Review Process

6. Curriculum at SBC FUNCTION:Recommend academic and instructional policy to the Board of Trustees. SCOPE:Covers all matters of instructional policy, programs, and activities as they relate to the curriculum. Goal # 1:   To provide and refine a systematic evaluation of current academic and technical programs through 2017. Objective 1:  Assign programs to the annual review for the year.Objective 2:  Review & revise curricular components of the college catalog Goal #2:  To explore and evaluate future academic and technical programs through 2017. Objective 1:  Evaluate & review potential new courses.Objective 2:  Evaluate & review potential new programs.Objective 3:  Explore online/hybrid delivery of course and/or program offerings. 

7. SBC Program Review Evaluation Criterion • Evaluation completed by Curriculum Committee • Maintain a program • Enhance a program • Reconfigure a program • Reduce or phase-out a program. • Five year cycle for all programs, unless recommendations are made by curriculum committee to complete within a designated time.

8. HLC Criteria 4.B. The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational achievement and improvement through ongoing assessment of student learning. 1. The institution has clearly stated goals for student learning and effective processes for assessment of student learning and achievement of learning goals. 2. The institution assesses achievement of the learning outcomes that it claims for its curricular and co-curricular programs. 3. The institution uses the information gained from assessment to improve student learning. 4. The institution’s processes and methodologies to assess student learning reflect good practice, including the substantial participation of faculty and other instructional staff members.

9. Diagram for Assessment of Student Learning Establish Learning Goals Use the Results to Implement Change Provide Learning Opportunity for Students Assess Student Learning

10. Goals versus Outcomes • Goals (Intended) • What do you want your students to know upon completion – need to connect to mission • Institutional • General Education • Program • Outcomes (Achieved) • Describe essential learning that students have achieved and can reliably demonstrate at the end of a program.

11. Establishment ofProgram Outcomes • Are program outcomes based on industry standards? • Advisory Committee input • Are the program outcomes precise, specific, and measureable?

12. Measurement of Program Outcomes • What do students complete throughout the program that will provide evidence of mastery of program outcomes? • Pre and Post Tests • National Tests - National Center for Construction Education and Research (NCCER) Health Education Service Incorporated (HESI Test) • Internships/Practicums • Self Assessments • Projects • Portfolios

13. Principal Indicators for Assessment Sitting Bull College’s assessment is broken down into four areas: institution wide, pre-entry and freshman level, general education, and program. 1. Institution-Wide Assessment a. Enrollment Trends b. Persistence and Retention rates c. Tracking of Student Withdrawals d. Student Satisfaction Survey (Noel-Levitz) or Community College Survey of Student Engagement (every other year for each survey) e. Student Service Satisfaction Graduate Survey f. Satisfaction of Institutional Outcomes Graduate Survey g. Graduation Rates//IPEDS/AKIS h. Employer Survey i. Alumni Survey 2. Pre-entry and Freshmen Assessment a. COMPASS placement (pre) scores b. 1st Year Freshman Advising c. 1st Year Experience Course d. Freshman Orientation Evaluation e. Enrollment Trends 3. General Education Assessment a. General Education Outcomes Assessment Plan – English, Speech, Computers, NA Language, Science, Math b. Post COMPASS results c. Completion Rates 4. Program Assessment Program Assessment Plans & one page papers Program Reviews Retention/Persistence – report on program review Graduation rates – report on program review. Employer Survey

14. Assessment at SBC FUNCTION:Review, report and make recommendations concerning student learning and institutional effectiveness for continual quality improvement for all our stakeholders. SCOPE:To oversee all institutional data collection and recommend new data that will measure institutional effectiveness. Goal #1:  To review academic and student support data that demonstrates institutional effectiveness through 2017. Objective 1:  Annually review program assessment data which supports the continued improvement for student learning.Objective 2:  Annually review essential learning outcomes (general education) data which supports the continued improvement for student learning.Objective 3:  Meet monthly during the academic year to review assessment data that may be available at the time and/or plan for needed data collection to assist in data driven decisions.Objective 4:  Annually review Student Support Services data including the Enrollment Management Plan which supports the continued improvement of student learning. 

15. Annual Plan Program/General Education

16. Rubric for Annual Review of Program/General Education Plans

17. Rubric Continued

18. Direct Measures • Instruments in which students demonstrate what they have achieved or learned related to explicitly stated learning outcomes. All involve the evaluation of actual student performance vis-à-vis stated learning outcomes. • Standardized tests • Locally developed tests • Essay tests • Projects • Juried exhibits • Oral presentations • Performance in internship • http://www.uta.edu/ctle/assessment/direct-indirect.php

19. Indirect Measures • Measures which rely on perceptions or opinions about student learning. • Surveys (employer, alumni, student) • Exit interviews • Focus groups • Global indicators of student achievement (graduate rates, job placement rates) • http://www.uta.edu/ctle/assessment/direct-indirect.php

20. Examples – Good and Average • Program • Nursing high rating -2.90 • Energy Technology lower rating – 2.23 • General Education • English & Communication high rating -2.84 • Science lower rating – 2.42 Select a partner and discuss the program review and assessment process at your institutions.

21. Thank You • For additional information • Contact: Dr. Koreen Ressler koreenr@sbci.edu 701-854-8001