Search results

The report from our recent accreditation visit indicated that the unit has an emerging framework for an assessment system that collects data at necessary transition points. However, the report also suggests that the unit does not analyze that data in an effective way to conduct meaningful program change. The events that led to this discovery (and the actions that have been taken since) have provided important lessons learned for our institution that relate to continuous program improvement and the accreditation process itself. This chapter details those events and lessons learned.

Increased emphasis on offering quality education underscores the need for developing a rigorous process for assessing academic programs in higher education. In this chapter, we develop a practical and rigorous framework for comprehensive assessment of academic programs. This framework generates in-depth communication between the academic departments and the university administration. It provides a useful tool for advancing the university mission, setting priorities, allocating resources, and identifying future areas of potential growth. This data-driven framework covers a wide range of qualitative and quantitative variables. To ensure a smooth and efficient implementation of the assessment process we present the critical stages in the development of a successful program assessment framework − from determining the assessment criteria, establishing the organizational climate, appointing the assessment committee, preparing program self-studies, to collecting and analyzing data. We present real examples from the author’s home institution to illustrate and support the reader’s understanding of the framework.

Many accounting departments have implemented assurance of learning (AoL) processes in the last few years because accreditation agencies have mandated it. In prior articles, we described an early assessment process (Stivers, Campbell, & Hermanson, 2000), a revised assessment process, and a suggested systems-oriented methodology for implementing an AoL process (Hill & Campbell, 2007). The purpose of this article is to provide the post-implementation review of our revised AoL process. We evaluate whether the AoL process is meeting the users’ goals effectively and efficiently. To do this, we provide the feedback we received from our Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation visit, the results of a faculty survey, and some output from our AoL system. Our review indicates that while the AACSB accreditation team viewed our AoL process as a “best practice,” the faculty members evaluated the process less positively. Faculty members were concerned about the number and clarity of the learning goals, the usefulness of the information generated, and the cost/benefit of the process with respect to the time involved. We conclude that different goals for the AoL process, accountability versus course improvement, drive the difference in opinion between the accreditation team and the faculty. Changes in senior management in the college along with faculty opinions have led to significant changes in the college’s AoL process including changing the name from AoL to TLC (Teaching and Learning Community). The results of this research emphasize the importance of treating the AoL program as a dynamic process that must be periodically evaluated to determine if it is meeting the organizations’ goals for the process. If the AoL program is not meeting goals or costing too much to meet them, then it should be revised and improved.

Entrepreneurship is one of the fastest growing disciplines at colleges and universities today. Programs span campuses offering traditional coursework and a variety of experiential learning options for students from all majors. While most agree that as much learning, if not more, occurs outside of the classroom, there has not been a model for integrating curricular and cocurricular components in entrepreneurship programs. Moreover, there has not been clear agreement on how to assess value from these programs.

To resolve this, we used a five-phase competency development process to create a customized learning model that engages the learner, the educator, and the community volunteer in the learning and assessment process at both the individual and program levels. This chapter presents a case study in a private, metropolitan university of 8200 students. The case study presents the problem and rationale, a history and overview of the application of competency-based education, and a five-stage process used to develop the model and apply the model to achieve a customized learning path for students in entrepreneurship.

The five-stage model of competency-based education can be applied to develop a customized learning approach and assessment path for students who study entrepreneurship. The use of a technology support platform can extend and simplify the use of this model and allow for the integration of curricular and cocurricular components of an experiential education.

This is a unique approach to integrating curricular and cocurricular education to provide a holistic experiential education for learners. The value of this program extends to faculty who assess learning and volunteers who participate in the learning experience. Specific attention is given to the challenges and process for curriculum mapping and the use of this model for assessment.

This chapter chronicles the process of one division of education's journey in achieving initial teacher accreditation from the perspective of the chair and author of the accreditation report. It was acknowledged early in the process that a collaborative self-study that had never been done before would be critical to a successful outcome. A committed faculty willingly participated in a study of themselves, their work and their collective work as a division. A deeper understanding of the complex role of teacher educators and authentic assessment in teacher education led to the development of a new assessment system resulting in valid and reliable data to support current claims and make planning decisions. Their shared belief in the power of education and understanding drove the faculty through various challenging, frustrating, invigorating, and exhausting experiences resulting in positive change and a clearer vision for the future.

The history of continuous improvement, particularly requirements to close the feedback loop, was explored through an analysis of experiences at St. Cloud State University (SCSU). A method for generating evidence of the use of assessment data is provided. Several program improvements tied to this example were cited, including increasing the number of program area reports, adding to the number of qualitative studies, and strengthening advisement. Difficulties encountered with the system included institutionalizing the approach, response rates, and workload issues.