The institution identifies expected outcomes, assesses the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of the results in the following area: educational programs, to include student learning outcomes.


Compliance Judgment:  In compliance

Narrative

Through ongoing assessment and analysis of educational program learning outcomes (both desired general outcomes and, specifically, desired student learning outcomes), documentation of the analysis of assessment results to inform curricular changes at both the undergraduate and graduate level, institution-wide recognition of improvements through the use of assessment results, and academic program review, East Carolina University (hereafter, ECU or the university or the institution) is in compliance with SACS Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1.1.  This narrative includes sections that describe an ongoing assessment process inclusive of the following areas:

I.        Expected Outcomes and Assessment Methods in Educational Programs

II.      Assessment Reports and Achievement of Learning Outcomes in Educational Programs

III.    Use of Assessment Results for Educational Program and Student Learning Outcome Improvement

IV.   Use of Academic Program Review Results for Educational Program Improvement

V.      Specialized External Accreditation for Various ECU Programs

VI.   Continuous Improvement of the Assessment Process

Summary of Evidence

Evidence of compliance is summarized in several tables which are introduced and fully elaborated upon in designated sections provided in the narrative:

       Table 1:  2008 to 2012 Assessment Units and Reports:  Educational Programs

       Table 2:  Historical Assessment Data:  2003 to 2007 Summary of the Use of Results

       Table 3:  Alignment of Assessment Units to Strategic Directions

       Table 4:  ECU Assessment Methods for Educational Programs

       Table 5:  Educational Programs Assessment Reports:  Summary of the Use of Results

       Table 6:  Course Proposal Changes 2004-2011

       Table 7:  Program Review:  Summary of the Use of Results

       Table 8:  Use of Assessment Results from Assessment Day Posters

       Table 9:  Assessing the Assessment Process
 
ECU’s assessment process is designed for educational program improvement and the enhancement of student learning based on the use of results.  The institution’s integrated strategic planning and assessment model is fully described in
CoreRequirement2.5.  In ECU’s assessment model, the core process of teaching and learning is depicted in Figure 1 below and is focused on the assessment of student learning. 

Figure 1:  ECU Assessment Model depicts the use of data from key performance indicators and strategic planning along with program review and assessment of student learning leading to a culture of evidence.

I.        Expected Outcomes and Assessment Methods in Educational Programs

Overview of Assessment

The University of North Carolina system (hereafter, UNC or the UNC system) is governed by a 32-member Board of Governors (BOG) which, in accordance with North Carolina General Statute 116-11, is responsible for the general determination, control, supervision, management, and governance of all affairs of the university’s constituent institution, one of which is ECU.  As part of the UNC system, ECU adheres to UNC Policy 400.2.2 Accountability/Goals and Assessment Measures.  Section 116.30.5 of the Act provides that:

The Board of Governors shall require each special responsibility constituent institution to include in its institutional effectiveness plan those assessment measures that are determined by the Board to be measures that will assure some standard measure of student learning and development in general undergraduate education at the special responsibility constituent institutions.  The intent of this requirement is to measure the impact of G.S. 116-30.1 through G.S. 116-30.5, establishing and administering special responsibility constituent institutions, and their implementation on undergraduate student learning and development.

ECU faculty have primary responsibility for curriculum development, approval, evaluation, and improvement as outlined in the Academic Program Development Section of the Faculty Manual (Section VII).  Faculty are responsible for initiating and conducting the core aspects of the development, approval, evaluation, and improvement of the content, quality, and effectiveness of new and established courses, certificates, and degree programs in all delivery formats.  For additional information, see also ComprehensiveStandard3.4.10.

Current Assessment Processes

ECU assesses all educational programs, defined as the following:

In addition to every program on the Academic Program Inventory, ECU assesses stand- alone minors and the foundations curriculum (general education program).  Stand-alone minors are defined as those minors in which no degree program is offered at ECU but in which students can declare a minor.  The foundations curriculum is assessed by faculty in contributing departments; details of the ECU foundations curriculum and assessment results can be found in the narratives for SACS CoreRequirement2.7.3 and ComprehensiveStandard3.5.1

ECU faculty assess all educational programs in a total of 302 assessment units in TracDat, the institutional tracking system.  This electronic institutional tracking system has provided a venue to house reports for strategic planning and assessment.  Table 1: 2008 to 2012 Assessment Units and Reports, provides a link to each educational program’s assessment report by college and department.  This table lists all reports in the order in which they appear on the academic program inventory and is fully described in the second section of the narrative.  In addition to programs on the academic program inventory, reports have been included for all stand-alone minors and foundations areas.  For the purposes of ongoing and integrated planning and assessment efforts, TracDat has also allowed for documentation of how educational programs support the mission of ECU by aligning each program to the strategic directions of the institution. 

At the college level, academic deans and associate deans for assessment work directly with faculty and are heavily involved in the assessment of student learning.  The provost has provided institutional support and vision for continual improvement of educational programs.  Within the past two years, the provost has spoken at faculty meetings of each college and met separately with each academic dean in assessment audit meetings to emphasize the ongoing use of assessment results to improve academic programs.

Faculty in undergraduate, foundations, and graduate programs have developed assessment plans that include program learning outcomes, assessment methods, and criteria for success.  An Overview of Assessment Reporting for 2008-2009 and a Form for Assessment Reporting 2008-2009 were provided to all programs to assist in the development of assessment plans.  ECU has numerous accredited programs that have ongoing assessment efforts related to accreditation, and these programs continued their established processes.  ECU has used an annual assessment cycle based on the submission of a plan in the fall 2008 semester, the collection of data every fall and/or spring, and the reporting of the implementation of changes in the fall of the next academic year. ECU’s Overviews of Assessment Reporting for 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 have served as a framework for assessment reporting. 

The Overview of Assessment has been sent to all academic units, outlining procedures and timelines for assessment of all academic programs, including those delivered through distance education:

Unit of Analysis

All academic programs should develop an outcomes assessment report for each distinct academic program. Bachelor’s, masters and doctoral degrees in the same field represent three distinct programs. If there are two degrees at the same level in the same area but with only slight distinctions, these may be combined at the faculty’s discretion. Examples are: 1) a B.A. and a B.S. degree in the same field in which the difference between required curricula resides in only one or two courses; 2) two masters’ degrees in the same area that differ only by requiring a thesis in one case and an independent project in the other. Programs with both face-to-face and distance education sections of the same course should employ the same learning objectives and assessment instruments in order to demonstrate comparable outcomes.

 

Departments and assessment committees are responsible for determining how each educational program is assessed.  Following the Academic Program Inventory and the unit of analysis description, ECU has 302 educational programs assessment units in TracDat.  ECU assesses 85 undergraduate units, 96 graduate units, 62 certificate units, 28 stand-alone minor units and 34 foundations area units.

In several departments, more than one program is being assessed within the same assessment unit in TracDat.  For example, the stand alone minor in statistics is assessed along with the math BA/BS degree; the graduate certificates in nursing are housed in the MSN nursing degree assessment unit; and the stand-alone minor in exercise and sports science is housed within the sports studies BS assessment unit.  These three instances explain why the above totals equal 305.   

Every department or school has identified administrators and faculty who serve on a Unit Assessment Committee. Program learning outcomes for each undergraduate and graduate educational program have been developed under the guidance of the unit assessment committee. These outcomes are assessed through a variety of mechanisms, and plans for improvement are continuously implemented, with results, actions taken (use of results), and follow-up summaries recorded in ECU’s assessment tracking system.  To assist with the documentation of assessment plans and reports in TracDat, ECU created a glossary.

Note: ECU has a significant history of program learning outcomes assessment.  Table 2:  2003 to 2007 Historical Assessment Data Summary of the Use of Assessment Results displays assessment results used by academic programs to make program improvements. The summary shows that during this period, academic programs in the Division of Academic Affairs and the Division of Health Sciences assessed hundreds of program learning outcomes and used the data of the accumulated assessment results to make program improvements.  The examples highlight the use of assessment results to make program improvement.

Institutional Learning Outcomes

In addition to program learning outcomes, undergraduate and graduate programs also assess institutional learning outcomes which are directly linked to the strategic directions of the university.  Faculty have led an intensive process of operationalizing the ECU strategic directions by developing measurable program learning outcomes:

This process documents clear alignment between the mission of ECU and educational programs and is demonstrated in Table 3:  Alignment of Assessment Units to ECU Strategic Directions.  Because planning and assessment data is housed centrally, ECU has the ability to document and track how educational programs support the institutional mission.   Programs have the ability to document how their program learning outcomes align to all appropriate strategic directions of the university.  

These program and institutional learning outcomes are then measured by a variety of assessment methods.  In the annual Overviews of Assessment, programs are encouraged to use both direct and indirect methods, as well as multiple, complementary methods.  In the institutional tracking system, faculty have a comprehensive list of assessments methods to choose from.   A description of the assessment method along with the criteria for success is included in the assessment plan.  The description of the method and criteria for success elaborate on the category selected by faculty.  Table 4:  Assessment Methods for ECU Educational Programs  clearly shows the assessment method category and a description of the method by program.  Educational programs have successfully measured their program learning outcomes with an appropriate variety of data collection methods.  The included sample represents programs in the Divisions of Academic Affairs, Health Sciences and Research and Graduate Studies.  Programs from each college are included. 

It is important to note that assessment of programs delivered through distance education is fully integrated into the university-wide assessment program. Since all distance education programs and courses originate in the academic unit, the academic unit develops the assessment plan for the program regardless of the mode of delivery.  To ensure quality and content of these educational programs, the ECU Distance Education Policies states that faculty and administrators within academic units oversee all distance education programs.  As stated in the university’s policies on distance education, the academic unit establishes the intended learning outcomes, the means of assessment, and the criteria for success, and carries out the assessment activities for both the campus and DE programs. Academically, there is to be no distinction between courses taught on campus and those taught via distance education. All participants must meet the same course objectives and demonstrate the same learning outcomes. The curriculum and evaluation of DE courses are conducted under the same procedures and personnel as on-campus courses.

Student support services are available to all students as well.  As fully described in CoreRequirement2.10, beginning with orientation, students at ECU have access to student support services designed to support achievement and success in all educational programs regardless of delivery method or program level.

II.      Assessment Reports and Achievement of Learning Outcomes in Educational Programs

All programs are engaged in ongoing assessment and they report results, actions taken based on those results, and follow-up summaries to the actions.  An assessment report for each educational program (by college) is included in Table 1.  In addition to each degree program listed on the Academic Program Inventory, a report for each stand-alone minor and general education area is also included in this table.       

The ECU Institutional Effectiveness (IE) Council is comprised of several working groups.  Working groups on undergraduate, graduate and foundations programs assist in defining the assessment process, and guide the review of assessment reports.  Working groups meet and review annual assessment reports under the structure of the IE Council.  The IE Council’s charge includes the following components:

Assessment Report Review Process

The SharePoint Assessment Report Workflow is designed for review of the quality of assessment reports in TracDat.  Assessment reports for undergraduate programs, graduate programs, and foundations are assigned to institutional effectiveness working group chairs who then assigns the assessment reports among members.  Working group members use a rubric to provide formative feedback to the Responsible Assessment Person (RAP) on all components of the assessment report.  Department Chairs and Associate Deans for Assessment/Assessment Directors are provided with a copy of the completed rubric as well.

The review process is initiated when the Office of Institutional Planning, Assessment and Research (IPAR) generates the assessment report from TracDat.  The report is then loaded to a SharePoint site which is accessible to all working group members.  The rubric is also housed on the SharePoint site.  Working group members complete the rubric and save a copy to the SharePoint site.  Members of the groups reviewing assessment reports open both the assessment report and the Rubric to Evaluate Assessment Reports at the same time.  At the top of the rubric the College, Department and Degree Program is selected from the drop down menus in order for the rubric to reach the appropriate people for each degree program.  For each outcome the working group member selects from the drop down menus next to each component of the report.  Written comments are encouraged and these will be sent to the RAP.  Department chairs and associate deans for assessment are also included in this feedback loop and are sent copies of the completed rubric.

If enhancements to the assessment report are suggested, faculty have the ability to make modifications.  The RAP must log in to TracDat, using an ECU username and passphrase, and make the necessary changes.  Changes to the Outcomes, Means of Assessment or Criterion for Success can be made under the Plan tab.  Changes to Results, Actions Taken or Follow Up can be made under the Report tab. 

When completing the rubric, working group members focus on the use of assessment results to improve educational programs:   the Results, Actions Taken, and Follow Up statements which document the process faculty and academic departments used towards quality improvement.  Working group members also document a change code related to the action taken.  This process is depicted below in Figure 2.

Quality Improvements to the Review Process

The 2010-2011 review process was significantly modified compared to the 2009-2010 review in terms of the workflow process.  Changes were made to expedite the process for reviewers and to provide a more thorough review of reports.  The rubric was also enhanced with drop down menus and codes for change.  As documented in Institutional Effectiveness Council agendas and minutes, the group continues to review and recommend improvements in the review process.

 

Figure 2:  Educational Program Assessment Report Workflow depicts the process of reviewing assessment reports.  IPAR generates a report from TracDat and loads them to a SharePoint site.  The assessment report rubric is also housed on the SharePoint site.  Working groups access both documents and then the completed rubric is sent to the responsible assessment person, department chair and associate dean. 

As noted previously, the foundations curriculum is ECU’s general education program and is fully described in ComprehensiveStandard3.5.1.  Departments responsible for the delivery of foundations courses are engaged in the same assessment process as all other programs.  The Goals of the Liberal Arts Foundations Curriculum provides a clear rubric for assessment. 

Achievement of student learning

As documented in the compliance report for FederalRequirement4.1, criteria that demonstrate student achievement of learning outcomes include retention and graduation rates, licensure examination results, job placement, as well as National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), the Voluntary System of Accountability (VSA) and the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA) results.  These, in addition to annual outcomes assessment reports, demonstrate the ongoing process and documentation of student learning. 

Specifically related to this comprehensive standard, ECU has used the NSSE Toolkit to summarize NSSE Results by Domain and Year related to Educational Programs and Institutional Effectiveness (SACS Principle 3.3.1.1).  This table summarizes multi-year results of ECU first-year students and seniors who participated in the NSSE in terms of items related to educational programs and student learning outcomes.  The Southeast Public institutions and the Carnegie Class are fully described in the attachments. The most current ECU mean results are compared to results from public institutions in the Southeast U.S. and from institutions of the same Carnegie Class.                  

III.    Use of Assessment Results for Educational Program and Student Learning Improvement

Educational programs use results from meaningful sources of data in order to implement quality enhancements and program improvement.  Using the areas listed below, the next three sections discuss the use of data for program improvement:

Educational Program Assessment Results

A summary of outcomes, results, and actions taken based on results is included in Table 5:  Educational Programs Assessment Reports:  Summary of the Use of ResultsThe included sample represents programs in the Divisions of Academic Affairs, Health Sciences and Research and Graduate Studies.  Programs from each college are included.  Since the 2008-2009 academic year, faculty have been reporting assessment results annually via the TracDat system.  In addition to the assessment overview documentation, a Reference Guide for Educational Programs was developed to assist faculty in their reporting efforts.  The questions were designed to provide a consistent context to each component of the assessment report.  In the results and actions taken areas of the tracking system, faculty are encouraged to report their data collection findings along with the decisions made based upon the data.  When quality enhancement initiatives were instituted, faculty later closed the continuous assessment loop by reporting the results of their work as a follow up.

Within the assessment report rubric, used by undergraduate and graduate working groups, were Codes for Actions Taken and the Use of Results which categorized the type of change made based on the analysis of assessment results.  The codes were categorized in order for ECU to summarize the types of changes being made, based on data, as well as to provide educational programs with additional feedback.

Course Approval and Change Forms

Since 2004, all courses approved by the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee have been required by ECU to include an analysis of assessment results as part of the justification for a new or revised course.  The Instructions for Completing the University Curriculum Committee’s Course Proposal Form includes the following requirement:  
 

Type in the reason why your unit wishes to offer this course. The justification must indicate how the course responds to the assessment of student learning in the academic program. Cite specific outcomes of unit assessment of student progress, unit self-assessment, and evidence of student learning which led to the development of the course. If course is recommended to meet the standards of certain accrediting agencies, provide documentation to the UCC chair.

The Graduate Curriculum Committee Course Proposal Form includes the following:

Justification (must cite accreditation and/or assessment by the graduate faculty) for new course or course revision or course renumbering:

 

As a result, the curriculum committees for all undergraduate and graduate curricula require that curriculum changes be supported by an ongoing analysis of assessment results.  Table 6:  Course Proposal Changes 2004-2012, provides representative samples of “justifications” for curriculum change derived from course proposals submitted to UCC and GCC for the following reasons the examples are representative of all curriculum changes since 2004:

1.       The samples are evenly distributed across all ten colleges

2.       Half of the samples are from the UCC and half are from the GCC

3.       The samples are evenly distributed across the three major types of curricular changes: new courses, course modifications, and degree modifications

4.       The number of samples per year is representative of the increase in curricular changes from 2004-2011

New Educational Program Approval Process

ECU’s response to the UNC system-wide expectation has been captured in Faculty Manual Part VI, Section VII.  This section, Academic Program and Curriculum Development, begins with the clear change that “program and curriculum development is a faculty responsibility.”

Program and curriculum development is a faculty responsibility. Program and curriculum changes may be initiated, prepared, and presented for review to all relevant ECU campus bodies by voting faculty as defined in ECU Faculty Manual, Appendix L. Development of new academic degree programs and certificates is governed by the policies and procedures of the General Administration (GA), specified in Administrative Memorandum 406 and in Administrative Memorandum 407 for Distance Education. Consultation with the ECU Office of Academic Program Planning and Development is recommended before preparing program development requests.  Instructions on specific procedures and documents for program and curriculum development proposals are available on the Office of Academic Program Planning and Development Website.

The ECU Faculty Manual Part VI, Section VII continues with a step-by-step, on-campus procedure for program and curriculum approvals, all of which begin at the academic unit level. Degree approval check sheets for Baccalaureate (Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III), Masters (Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III), and Doctoral/First Professional (Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III) degree programs are used to ensure each step in the process is completed correctly. 

IV.   Use of Academic Program Review Results for Educational Program Improvement

ECU integrates results as shown in the ECU Program Review Process, demonstrating ECU’s commitment to ensuring institutional effectiveness.  ECU implemented graduate program reviews in 1996.  Then in 2009, reviews were expanded to combine undergraduate and graduate program review which also incorporates data on student learning outcomes. The program review process integrates the use of assessment and other data (graduation rates, alumni surveys, etc.) to foster a continuous improvement of academic programs. The process represented in the Unit Academic Program Review Schedule:  2009-2014 Schedule of Reviews reinforces the systematic use of student learning outcomes in planning and in allocation of resources to support student learning.  Every ECU academic unit undergoes periodic (7-Year) external review of its degree programs.  One part of the self-assessment document requires that faculty respond to questions about academic degree programs and the curricula which constitute the programs.  In the Unit Academic Program Review process, content and length of degree curricula are examined by faculty from ECU’s peer institutions.  Since program reviews began at East Carolina University, no academic unit has been cited by review teams for either insufficient or excessive curriculum degree hours. Reports of all program reviews are tracked on the Academic Program Development SharePoint Site.

Table 7:  Program Review:  Summary of the Use of Results, provides examples of the use of assessment results to improve academic programs based on our ongoing system of program review.

V.      Specialized External Accreditation for Various ECU Programs

As documented in the East Carolina University Program Accreditation Cycle, the majority of ECU’s professional academic programs are accredited and evaluated by specialized external accrediting agencies.  Many of these accrediting agencies establish their own rigorous guidelines regarding student learning outcomes assessment and the use of results to improve academic programs.  Therefore, learning outcomes assessment is a critical factor in ECU’s ongoing, successful accreditation with the accredited programs.  Documentation of each accrediting agency’s learning outcomes assessment standards is included in each self-study report of each externally accredited ECU program and is available through the Office of Academic Program Development.

Some programs are using the institutional tracking system to document their specialized external accreditation as well.  For example, the College of Education uses the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Standards for all of their programs.  Educational programs align program and institutional learning outcomes to the NCATE standards and reports are generated to summarize and disseminate data.   The Brody School of Medicine has also utilized the tracking system for the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) accreditation standards.  The MD program learning outcomes are aligned to LCME standards.  The outcomes have also been linked to courses and are depicted in a curriculum map.

ECU Assessment Day:  Evidence of Improvement Celebrated

In fall 2011 and in conjunction with a meeting of the ECU Board of Trustees, ECU held its first Assessment Day- a celebration of best practices in assessment of academic programs.   Dr. Belle Wheelan (President of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges) attended the event and spoke at both the Assessment Day meeting and in the Board of Trustees meeting.  Reflecting on the day’s activities, Dr. Wheelan offered the following statement

“I think the fact that you’ve got concrete examples of what’s going on in the different departments, that faculty are talking about it not just in the departments but across the campus, and you’re having conversations about learning, that puts you out front of a lot of your peer institutions,” following her presentation Wheelan commented.

“There is a better collective understanding of why we do assessments. I really get the feeling just being here today that it’s more than a SACS requirement. It will benefit students, and that’s a good feeling.”

The Assessment Day forum was an opportunity to examine what ECU has been doing to advance outcomes assessment in the institution.  As part of the forum, a call for poster presentations was directed to all colleges, and emphasized “closing the loop” in assessment.  Posters were to display how programs were using data to make decisions and ongoing improvements.  Each college contributed at least one poster highlighting an assessment practice in at least one of its academic programs.  

Table 8 presents data from the Assessment Day Posters with links to each. Assessment Day 2012 is scheduled for October 19th

VI.   Continuous Improvement of the Assessment Process

The process of assessing student learning is itself continually reviewed for improvement. The working groups employ rubrics to evaluate each assessment plan, its results and the actions taken as a means of review and feedback.  As an additional effort to enhance a sense of shared responsibility in the assessment of student learning, an educational program assessment report review process was developed and the completed rubric is shared with the RAP, department chair and associate deans for assessment. 

Several times throughout the development of our assessment processes, assessment elements have been added, deleted or modified. Table 9 below describes this process of “assessing assessment” and actions taken to improve:

Table 9:  Assessing the Assessment Process

Desired Outcome

Result

Action Taken

Document meaningful assessment data designed to be used by faculty for program improvement

Inconsistent recording of assessment report components

Added further definitional clarity by writing a Reference Guide for Educational Programs to provide context for those constructing assessment reports

 

Capture changes in the assessment process and, as needed, modify the workflow to assure the assessment process and information would be meaningful and appropriate

Assuring integrity of assessment process even as the process is improved

Whenever any component of the assessment process was adjusted or modified, the effect upon the workflow was reviewed and adjusted as necessary

Establish a methodology to analyze and synthesize large amounts of assessment data

All educational programs currently assess program learning outcomes and are different levels of sophistication in terms of using data to initiate and sustain program improvement

 

Summarized the assessment methods utilized by programs as well as the actions they took based on results 

 

 

Reviewing and disseminating these findings, along with a continuous review process will sustain ECU’s ongoing, integrated, institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation process for the assessment of educational programs.  IPAR continues to work with departments and RAPs through departmental assessment meetings, to further develop their assessment reports and respond to assessment related questions.  Funding from a competitive and highly prestigious Department of Education Strengthening Institutions Title III grant has provided ECU with the financial resources to bring faculty together, and has facilitated an increased emphasis of improved student learning outcomes.  Faculty from the Colleges of Business, Arts and Sciences, Fine Arts and Communication, and Human Ecology have worked to build upon the current assessment system.  This core group of faculty will expand in the coming years (2012-2015) of the grant to include faculty from the College of Nursing and the College of Education.  The current group is focused on clearly defining the attributes of a graduate of ECU, and there is considerable interest from additional colleges. 

The Think, Value, Communicate and Lead Core Learning Matrix was designed by faculty to document course, program, or college level outcomes.  This work will be essential towards the sustainability of an authentic and meaningful assessment process.  Faculty are working with the Office of Faculty Excellence to design opportunities for classroom research, for the sharing of best practices, and for collaborative initiatives to improve program quality and student learning.

Summary

East Carolina University identifies expected learning outcomes, assesses the extent to which it achieves these outcomes, and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of results in all educational programs.
 

Documentation

Reference Title

Location

Academic Program Development Section of the Faculty Manual (Section VII).

Part V - Curriculum Development

Academic Program Inventory

API_14May2012

Academic Program Development SharePoint Site

Academic Program Review Sharepoint Site

Accredited Programs

Accreditation Cycle 7-24-12

Assessment Audit Meetings

Individual Dean Meetings Summer 2011

Assessment Day

3.3.1.1 Assessment Day

Baccalaureate New Check Sheets: Phase I

Bachelors_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseI

Baccalaureate New Check Sheets: Phase II

Bachelors_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseII

Baccalaureate New Check Sheets: Phase III

Bachelors_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseIII

Board of Governors

UNC BOG

Carnegie Class

ECU NSSE 2012 Carnegie Class

Codes for Actions Taken and the Use of Results

Codes for the Use of Results

Completed Rubric

Completed Rubric Art Education (BFA)

Comprehensive List of Assessment Methods

Educational Programs Assessment Methods

Comprehensive Standard 3.4.10

ComprehensiveStandard3.4.10

Comprehensive Standard 3.5.1

ComprehensiveStandard3.5.1

Core Requirement Standard 2.7.3

CoreRequirement2.7.3

Curriculum Map

MD Curriculum Map

Departmental Assessment Meetings

Dept Assessment Meetings Fall 2011

Department of Education Strengthening Institutions Title III grant

TitleIIIAbstract

Doctoral or First Professional New Check Sheets: Phase I

Doctoral_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseI

Doctoral or First Professional New Check Sheets: Phase II

Doctoral_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseII

Doctoral or First Professional New Check Sheets: Phase III

Doctoral_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseIII

Departmental Assessment Meetings

Dept Assessment Meetings Fall 2011

Dr. Wheelan

3.3.1.1 Wheelan

East Carolina University Program Accreditation Cycle

Accreditation Cycle 7-24-12

ECU Distance Education Policies

Faculty Manual part6

ECU Program Review Process

3.3.1.1 YY-UNC_Tomorrow_Phase_II_-_Program_Review-Assessment-1

Educational Program Assessment Report Review Process

Academic Assessment Report Workflow Slide Final

Faculty Manual Part VI, Section VII

Part V - Curriculum Development

Federal Requirement 4.1

FederalRequirement4.1

Form for Assessment Reporting 2008-2009

Form for Assessment Reporting 2008-2009

Glossary

TracDat Glossary 2011

Goals of the Liberal Arts Foundations Curriculum

3.5.1 1 XXXX foundations Goals

Graduate Curriculum Committee Course Proposal Form

3.3.1.1 GCC Proposal-form-revised-04-06-11

Institutional Effectiveness Council agendas and minutes

Institutional Effectiveness Councils Agendas and Minutes

Instructions for Completing the University Curriculum Committee’s Course Proposal Form

3.3.1.1 UCC instcourseproposalform

Masters New Check Sheets: Phase I

Masters_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseI

Masters New Check Sheets: Phase II

Masters_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseII

Masters New Check Sheets: Phase III

Masters_Degree_Approval_Process_Checklist_PhaseIII

MD Program Learning Outcomes

MD Outcomes LCME Standards

National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) Standards

NCATE Standards Alignment Special Ed (BS)

North Carolina General Statute 116-11

NCGeneralStatute116-11

NSSE Results by Domain and Year related to Educational Programs and Institutional Effectiveness (SACS Principle 3.3.1.1)

NSSEbySACSprinc-3-3-1-1-(2012)    

Office of Academic Program Planning and Development Website

Office of Academic Program Development

Overview of Assessment Reporting for 2008-2009

Overview of Assessment Reporting for 2008-09

Overview of Assessment Reporting for 2009-2010

Overview of Assessment Reporting for 2009-10

Overview of Assessment Reporting 2010-2011

Overview of Academic Assessment Reporting for 2010-11 Revised 2

Overview of Assessment Reporting 2011-2012

Overview of Academic Assessment Reporting for 2011-12 Revised 2

Reference Guide for Educational Programs

Reference Guide Educational Programs

Rubric to Evaluate Assessment Reports

Rubric to evaluate Ed Programs Final

SACS Core Requirement 2.5

CoreRequirement2.5

SACS Core Requirement 2.10

CoreRequirement2.10

Southeast Public

ECU NSSE 2012 Southeast Public

Strategic Directions

ECU Tomorrow_ Our Strategic Directions

Table 1: 2008-2012 Assessment Units and Reports:  Educational Programs

Assessment Units Educational Programs

Table 2:  2003-2007 Summary of the Use of Assessment Results

3.3.1.1-Summary-of-Use-of-Assessment-Results

Table 3: Alignment of Assessment Unites to ECU Strategic Directions

Alignment of Assessment Units to Strategic Directions - Educational Programs

Table 4:  ECU Assessment Methods for ECU Educational Programs

Methods for Educational Programs by Unit

Table 5: Educational Programs Assessment Reports:  Summary of the Use of Results

Summary of Use of Results Educational Programs

Table 6: Course Proposal Changes 2004-2012

Table 5 Course Proposal Changes 2004-2011

Table 7: Program Review:  Summary of the Use of Results

Table 6 Program Review and the Use of Results

Table 8:  Use of Assessment Results from Assessment Day Posters

Table 7 Use of Assessment Results from Assessment Day Posters

Think, Value, Communicate and Lead Core Learning Matrix

TVCL Core Learning Matrix

UNC Policy 400.2.2

UNC Policy 400.2.2

Unit Academic Program Review

UNIT-ACADEMIC-PROGRAM-REVIEW-6-10-2

Unit Academic Program Review Schedule: 2009-2014 Schedule of Reviews

3.3.1.1 AP-Review-Schedule-2

Unit Assessment Committee

ECU Assessment Committees