Instructions for Submitting Four-Year Assessment Reports

Schedule

Department chairs and program directors will submit assessment reports on the following schedule:

2018-2019: Biology, Bio-Chem/Molecular Biology, Mathematics, English, Theatre, Neuroscience, Mass Communications, Physician Assistant
2019-2020: Sociology, Economics, Foreign Languages, Physics, Computer Science, Computer Information Systems, Chemistry, and two new core categories— Scientific Endeavor and Science in Context
2020-2021: History, Theology, Criminal Justice, McGowan School of Business, Nursing, Engineering, Exercise Science, Athletic Training, College Seminar
2021-2022: Environmental Science/Studies, Philosophy, Psychology, Political Science, Education, and two new core categories—Global Connections and Human Behavior & Social Institutions 
2022-2023: Cycle begins again: Biology, Bio-Chem/Molecular Biology, Mathematics, etc.

Structure and Content

The quadrennial assessment report will include an assessment plan, rubrics, and a discussion of assessment in the department/program. In addition to filing the report, chairs and directors should also collect evidence of progress in student learning and evidence that action items have been implemented. Evidence might include revisions to syllabi over four years, revisions to questions on quizzes and tests, examples of writing prompts and assignments, and representative graded essays. Evidence needn’t be submitted with the report to Academic Affairs but should be kept on hand by the chair or program director.

1. Assessment plan.  The assessment plan should look forward to the coming four years.  The plan is identical in structure to the one King’s has been using for the past several years. (A sample of a current plan is attached). The table will include:

a.    Student learning outcomes to be assessed over the next four years.
b.    Learning opportunities that will allow students to achieve the outcomes.
c.    Direct and indirect assessment measures/methods used to determine how well students are achieving the outcomes.
d.    Targets/benchmarks for student performance.
e.    Indication of when assessment of each outcome will be conducted and reviewed. Any number of outcomes can be assessed in a given semester; all outcomes are assessed on a two-year cycle.

2. Rubrics. All rubrics intended for assessment of student leaning over the next four years should be included and clearly marked to indicate which learning outcome they measure.

3. Discussion. Chairs and directors can complete the discussion section by responding to a series of questions in two parts—actions and reflections on assessment.

Actions

a.    What actions has your department/program taken over the past four years in response to assessment data? Provide the actions in a list or narrative.

b.    Which actions seem to have been especially helpful in improving student learning?  Give a few examples of actions that have resulted in improved scores.

c.    Upon reflection, did any actions prove to be unhelpful or insignificant? What did the department/program do about those actions?

d.    In comparison to your department/program’s previous assessment plan, what changes, if any, are you making to the plan for the next four years in the following areas? (If you made any mid-cycle changes to your previous assessment plan that you intend to keep, you can discuss them here.)

Leaning outcomes
Learning opportunities
Direct and indirect assessment measures 
Targets/Benchmarks

Reflections on Assessment 

a.    To what extent has student learning in your department/program improved overall in the previous four years? Or perhaps results have remained consistently outstanding. To the degree that students have shown improvement or maintained excellent outcomes, what do you believe has accounted for these results?

b.    In looking at the knowledge, skills, and dispositions demonstrated by your department/program’s students over the past four years, what do you believe might be improved upon? Where do some students appear to be coming up short? How will your new assessment plan respond to those shortcomings?

c.    Does your department/program gather data and information other than that which you report to administration? How do you use that information?