Approved by UAC October 1, 2014
Page 1 of 7 University Assessment Committee
Evaluation Report - Assessment of Academic Programs For AY 2013 – 2014
Part I Academic Programs Table Rubric: Review the assessment plans and reports submitted by the academic
programs in your college, division or unit and complete the table for each program using the following ratings.
Report Part 1: Student learning outcomes
Level 0
No answer provided
Level 1
Learning outcomes have been articulated but are not written in terms of observable student behavior
and are not measurable
Level 2
Some learning outcomes have been articulated that are clear and measurable, but not all are written in
terms of observable student behavior, some are unclear or not measurable
Level 3
Learning outcomes have been created, all are clear and measureable
Report Part 2: Assessment measures
Level 0 Less than two assessment measures provided
Level 1
Assessment measures were provided but were not mapped to student learning outcomes, were not
examined by the program and did not lead to appropriate actions
Level 2
Assessment measures were provided that were mapped to student learning outcomes, but were not
examined by the program and did not lead to appropriate actions
Level 3
Assessment measures were provided that were mapped to student learning outcomes, were examined by
the program and lead to appropriate actions
Approved by UAC October 1, 2014 Page 2 of 7
Part I Academic Programs Table: Review of each program’s plan and report submissions and complete the table below.
Program Name Plan: Complete (Y/N) Plan: Needs Further Review (Y/N)* Report: Student Learning Outcomes # Report: Assessment Measures # Report: Were examples of changes provided? (Y/N) Report: Were examples of changes related to assessment results provided? (Y/N) Report: Were examples of changes to the assessment process provided? (Y/N) Notes
BSN Program Yes No 3 3 Yes Yes Yes The Assessment Plan includes collection methods, metrics and sources; applicable student learning outcomes; direct and indirect measure of student learning; frequency of data collection and review; and persons/groups responsible for reviewing data
RN-BSN Program Yes No 3 3 Yes Yes Yes The Assessment Plan includes collection methods, metrics and sources; applicable student learning outcomes; direct and indirect measure of student learning; frequency of data collection and review; and persons/groups responsible for reviewing data
MSN-CNL Program Yes No 3 3 Yes Yes Yes The Assessment Plan includes collection methods, metrics and sources; applicable student learning outcomes; direct and indirect measure of student learning; frequency of data collection and review; and persons/groups responsible for reviewing data
MSN-FNP/PNP Programs
Including FNP/PNP Certificate Programs
Yes No 3 3 Yes Yes Yes The Assessment Plan includes collection methods, metrics and
sources; applicable student learning outcomes; direct and indirect measure of student learning; frequency of data collection and review; and persons/groups responsible for reviewing data MSN-Nurse Educator Program Including MSN Nurse Educator Certificate Program
Yes No 3 3 Yes Yes Yes The Assessment Plan includes collection methods, metrics and
sources; applicable student learning outcomes; direct and indirect measure of student learning; frequency of data collection and review; and persons/groups responsible for reviewing data
Approved by UAC October 1, 2014 Page 3 of 7 DNP (BSN & MSN)
Program
Yes No 3 3 Yes Yes Yes The Assessment Plan includes collection methods, metrics and
sources; applicable student learning outcomes; direct and indirect measure of student learning; frequency of data collection and review; and persons/groups responsible for reviewing data
*Please explain in notes
Approved by UAC October 1, 2014
Page 4 of 7
Please complete the following overall summary: # of Programs
Total number of programs in the college 6
Number of programs completing all sections of the program report 6 Number of programs completing some of the sections of the program report 0
Number of programs that did not submit a report 0
I would like to nominate the following program to be considered for the Excellence in Assessment Award:
The collective College of Nursing (CON) programs. This recommendation is based on the fact that the college has a progressive, comprehensive, integrated, and collaborative program assessment system/process in place. The undergraduate and graduate expected program student outcomes are congruent with the university and CON mission statements with the intent to assure excellence in nursing practice, administration, scholarship and education in order to achieve the expected program outcomes.
Approved by UAC October 1, 2014
Page 5 of 7
Part II (Review and analysis of data provided in program reports) instructions: After reviewing the plans and reports
submitted and completing Table I, write a brief evaluation of your college, division or unit activity for each of the components of the assessment of student learning outcomes in parts 1-6 below. Please provide specific examples as necessary.
II.1 Overview of the articulation and adequacy of student learning outcomes. (Part one)
Evaluate the overall quality of the programs’ student learning outcomes within the college. Are they clearly stated and written in terms of observable student behavior? Are they measurable?
The SLO’s are clearly stated in terms of observable behaviors and are measurable. The BSN and MSN expected program student outcomes are congruent with the university and CON mission statements with the intent to assure excellence in nursing practice, administration, scholarship and education in order to achieve the expected program outcomes. The key elements of The Essentials of Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing Practice are clearly identified and related to each BSN and RN to BSN course. Each key element is inclusive of expected student learning outcomes in the areas of professional values, core competencies, and core knowledge and role development. Implementation of the BSN course content is also linked to the Ohio Board of Nursing regulations (OH 4723-5-13), a key curriculum parameter, and to the key components of the Baccalaureate Education for Professional Nursing
Practice (AANC, 2008).
The MSN program objectives focus on learning outcomes of integration of theory and knowledge, development of specialized diagnostic and management skills, application and dissemination of research, and development of advanced practice professional roles. Student based performance objectives are clearly stated for each course. The course objectives were developed from the Master’s Education in Nursing (AACN, 2011); The Criteria for
Evaluation of Nurse Practitioner Programs (National Task Force on Quality Nurse Practitioner Education, 2012);
and the Competencies and Curricular Expectations for Clinical Nurse Leader Education and Practice (AACN 2013). The concepts incorporated into the current MSN programs curriculum were significantly influenced by the by
The Essentials of Masters Education for Professional Nursing Practice (AACN, 2012). Implementation of the CNL
course content is also linked to the Ohio Board of Nursing regulations (OH 4723-5-13), a key curriculum parameter. The DNP professional nursing standards and guidelines for the preparation of nursing professionals were used to guide the program, its goals and professional nursing standards, including the Essentials of Doctoral Education for
Advanced Nursing Practice (AACN, 2006) and Criteria for Evaluation of Nurse Practitioner Programs (National
Task Force on Quality Nurse Practitioner Education, 2012). The guidelines, standards, and competencies from the major clinical specialties represented by incoming DNP students continue to inform the outcomes of the program. The DNP program expected outcomes were derived from the DNP Essentials and were used to develop and revise the curricula, evaluate program consistency and promote successful progress of students in the program.
II.2 Significance of the assessment methods. (Part two)
Evaluate the significance of the assessment measures reported within the college.
The mission, goals, and expected student outcomes are congruent with current professional standards and reflect the changing trends in health care. The program evaluation plans of UT include periodic evaluation of the mission, goals and expected student outcomes. Review of the CON program mission, goals and expected student outcomes by the faculty-of-the-whole occurs at a minimum of every five years as required by the CON Master Plan for
Evaluation (MPE).
Opportunities for feedback from internal and external communities of interest are routinely provided. Internal
feedback from the Baccalaureate and Graduate students is provided through course evaluations and meetings with the Directors of the BSN and MSN Programs and faculty teaching the courses. The faculty offer feedback by providing suggestions for course improvements during meetings of the Curriculum Committee (CC) and Faculty Assembly, input from external members of the communities of interest includes advisory boards from the college. A focus on strengthening relationships with the community of interest is a priority and is in response to meeting changing health
Approved by UAC October 1, 2014
Page 6 of 7
care needs of individuals and populations, especially in community care settings. The CON conducts periodic surveys of groups constituting our community of interest. The community of interest for the CON includes both internal and external groups, including; BSN, MSN, DNP students; the university communities; agencies and preceptors; accrediting agencies; state populations including patients or clients; interested business affiliates (including potential and actual employers of prepared nurses); and policymakers. The ability of the CON Baccalaureate and Graduate Programs to achieve program outcomes is directly related to soliciting and then appropriately responding to the needs and expectations of the internal and external communities of interest.
II.3 Appropriateness and adequacy of reported changes based on the review of assessment results across the college. (Part three)
Evaluate the reported changes based on the review of assessment data described across the college. Are changes appropriately linked to student learning outcomes and supported by assessment results? Are adequate justifications provided for no changes reported?
The reported changes are appropriately linked to the SLO’s of each program and supported and justified by assessment results.
II.4 Types of changes based on assessment results (Part three)
What types of changes were reported for the college? (Check all that apply)
Curriculum X Instruction
Faculty, professional development TA Training
Advising Facilities
X Course scheduling
X Assessment process, plan or infrastructure
Recommendations that involve other units of the university Equipment
X Other (please specify) Program coordination with external community of interest related to clinical site availability
II.5 Changes to the assessment process (Part four)
Discuss the adequacy of the changes proposed, and any commonalities between programs in response to suggestions for changes in their program assessment processes.
The ability of the CON Baccalaureate and Graduate Programs to achieve program outcomes is directly related to soliciting and then appropriately responding to the needs and expectations of the internal and external communities of interest. The adequacies of changes were timely and appropriate. The CON programs use outcome data for continuous program improvement to achieve the program’s mission, goals, and expected outcomes. Review of these data demonstrates that significant progress has been made toward achievement of the benchmarks identified in the CON MPE. If an aspect of program improvement is identified a plan of action based on input from faculty through governance committees CON task forces, and administration is obtained and used for program improvement.
II.6 University recommendations (Part five)
Evaluate the reported aspects of student learning that the programs indicated should be worked on as a university.
Approved by UAC October 1, 2014
Page 7 of 7
Part III (Liaison’s overall evaluation of college, not directly linked to program reports) instructions: After reviewing
and analyzing the plans and reports submitted to your college, comment on the college level activity related to assessment in parts 1-5 below. Please provide specific examples as necessary.
III.1 Sharing and discussing assessment
Evaluate the level of sharing and discussion of assessment initiatives in the college. Who reviews assessment data at the college level? (Check all that apply)
X Assessment Coordinator(s)
X University Assessment Committee College Liaison X College Assessment Committee (or equivalent)
X Other Committee (please specify): Curriculum Committee; Student Admission, Progression, and Retention Committee; X Associate Dean(s) X Dean X Advisory Board X Current students X Alumni
X Other (please specify): The CON Cabinet
III.2 Trends
Note trends and commonalities between programs in your college concerning assessment issues.
I would not say that the CON has concerns or issues related to assessment. However, there is a trend across all programs for continuous program assessment/evaluation practices that have lead to timely corrective action for the purpose of ensuring program outcomes are met.
III.3 Issues and needs
Identify areas for improvement, possible concerns, and opportunities for faculty development/support.
As the principles and best practices for program assessment evolve and become increasingly important to accreditation there is always room for faculty development related to program assessment.
III.4 Could you identify from the program reports examples of changes that required resources (i.e. human, financial)? If yes, please list.
A secure internal online testing system with test evaluation features that students can use for in-person and DL courses.
III.5 Could you identify from the program reports examples of changes that will require resources in the future (i.e. human, financial)? If yes, please list.