Cycle(s) for Educational/Academic Programs

For the ChSCC IE Model, educational/academic programs must establish both administrative/operational goals or outcomes, sometimes referred to as program quality goals or outcomes, as well as program-level student learning outcomes (PSLOs).  In order to maintain program quality as well as excellence in achievement of student learning, academic programs must either undergo an Academic Audit on a regular and periodic basis (for non-accreditable programs) or seek and maintain accreditation from a recognized agency (for accreditable programs).  A program is defined as eligible for the accreditation indicator if there is a recognized agency which accredits programs for that field and degree level. Therefore, academic programs may have multiple assessment cycles occuring at the same time but with slightly different reporting components, processes, and timelines.

These various assessment cycles among the institutional, audit, and accreditation requirements all share commonalities with any general assessment cycle but may use different terminology or labels for the step, process, or reporting component.  

Program Student Learning Outcomes (PSLO)

All Associate of Applied Science degree programs have program student learning outcomes (PSLOs).  All other associate degree programs track learning to the institutional student learning outcomes (ISLOs).  FOr additional information about the assessment plan for ISLOs, please see Student Learning Outcomes section of this site.

While measuring student performance to PSLOs  occurs every semester and across various courses within the program, reporting of the assessment details for each PSLO can be scheduled so that each PSLO is reported upon at least once within a 3-, 5-, or multi-year accreditation or academic audit cycle.  See Annual Reporting Requirements for the individual details required in the reporting of PSLO assessment.

Quality Assurance Funding (QAF) (THEC website materials)

A quality assessment component of the Outcomes Based Funding Formula (OBFF) managed and monitored by THEC.  The intent of the comprehensive QAF assessment and evaluation process is to incentivize institutional excellence and reward continuous improvement as measured by established growth indicators for the QAF standards.

The QAF cycle is a 5-year period in which institutions reoprt annual progress to specific standards and metrics defined by the QAF Cycle Standards.  The 2015-20 Cycle Standards are housed on the THEC QAF website. As defined in the 2015-20 document, the following standards and components are annually evaluated and reported in order to be awarded points that calculate into the OBFF.

The Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Research, and Planning (IERP) coordinates the annual reporting with campus constituents and THEC.  Academic program accreditation, academic audit, and IE model (as defined in this handbook) is included in various standards throughout the QAF. 

Academic Audit

The academic audit process is coordinated through TBR with assistance from campus coordinators for non-accredited academic programs.  Academic audits are on a 5-year cycle that aligns within the 5-year cycle for QAF. 

From TBR website for Academic Audit:

The Academic Audit is a faculty-driven model of ongoing self-reflection, collaboration, teamwork and peer feedback. It is based on structured conversations among faculty, stakeholders and peer reviewers all focused on a common goal: to improve quality processes in teaching and learning and thus enhance student success. During the self-study phase of the Academic Audit, the faculty look at the key activities in place that regularly improve the quality of teaching and learning. Faculty members reflect on how they organize their work and how they use data to make decisions. The faculty may also note opportunities for improvement during this self-study phase and thus identify initiatives for improvement. These are undertaken during ensuing years. The Academic Audit model also involves a review by peers called the Academic Auditor Team. This team reviews a program’s self-study report, conducts a site visit, and writes its own report that includes commendations, affirmations and recommendations for continued improvement.

Educational/Academic Programs receive a completed rubric of findings from the peer audit team that factors into the QAF annual reporting. The peer audit includes the evaluation of Learning Outcomes, Curriculum and Co-Curriculum, Teaching and Learning, Student Learning Assessment, Support, the Academic Audit Process and Follow-up of Previous Audit.  

Recommendations from Academic Audit Report should inform the program, departmental, or divisional administrative/operational goals for the timeframe between audits, depending on the level of complexity of the recommendation and the level at which the recommendation can be addressed.   

Accreditation

Accreditable programs should either be in the process of gaining accreditation or in the maintenance cycle or reaffirmation processes of accreditation with the appropriate agency for the program.  Cycles for accreditation differ depending on the accrediting agency and can span 3-, 5-, or 10-year periods.  Most agencies require intermediate reports, often annually, between longer terms.  Accreditation agencies may have standards to which the program must demonstrate compliance in order to maintain accreditation.  These standards typically involve an assessment and evaluation of various areas of program quality and student learning.   Some cycles require a peer review team and/or site visit periodically in addition to the reporting  in order to evaluate compliance.

Recommendations from Accreditation Reports should inform the program, departmental, or divisional administrative/operational goals for the timeframe between audits, depending on the level of complexity of the recommendation and the level at which the recommendation can be addressed. 

Previous Topic >  Cycle - Integration

Next Topic > Annual Reporting Requirements