Academic and Student Services

• Heads of functional units who oversee offices of 10 staff members or more will be required to report on a minimum of two assessment outcomes. Heads of functional units who oversee offices of 9 or fewer staff members will only be required to report on one outcome.
  • Applies to BOTH administrative effectiveness AND academic and student affairs units.

Quick Links

• Process
• Deadlines
• Liaisons

Who

Directors for each academic and student support service will lead discussions to gain collective input to create appropriate, measurable academic and student support outcomes for each department or office.

When

The deadline for the submission of revised academic and student support outcomes and assessment measures for all appropriate academic and student support services for each fiscal year is September 30th.  Near the close of the fiscal year, a brief analysis and evaluation pertaining to each measure, an action plan for improvement for each outcome, and evidence of realized improvement are submitted by May 31st.  Following the assessment, outcomes will be revised and submitted for the subsequent year.

What

Academic and student support outcomes are intended results of the programs or initiatives that assist student learning and success, whether directly or indirectly. To develop a system for assessment of academic and student support outcomes, departments should proceed through the following steps.

Steps

1. Discuss the mission and overall intent of the department or office. Is the mission clearly stated? Is the mission-specific to the department or office? Does it reflect the core purpose, primary functions, and activities of the department or office?

2. Identify three to five measurable outcomes that are consistent with the mission and overall goal of the department or office.  Do the outcomes focus on issues pertinent and important to the department or office as specifically defined in the mission? Do the outcomes concentrate on key areas that will lead to continuous improvement with a focus on the end result and not the means to get there? Do the outcomes clearly articulate the intended result or action desired? Is it possible to measure the achievement of the outcomes? Do revisions to outcomes align with last year's action plans?

3. For each outcome, identify two methods of measurement that will be used to measure progress on the outcome; direct methods are preferred. Multiple methods of assessment are necessary to assure reliability and validity.  Do the methods align with the intent of the outcome? Do the methods of measurement include a direct means of assessment?  Is it possible to collect accurate, valid and reliable data for each measure in a reasonably efficient manner within the fiscal year? Do the measures provide detail on who will be assessed, what will be assessed, how the assessment will be conducted, when and where the assessment will take place?  Do revisions to methods/measures align with last year's action plans?

4. For each method of assessment, determine the acceptable level or standard of performance (desired target). What level of achievement is considered acceptable for the initiative or program? 

5. Develop a system for implementation and assessment.  How will individual outcomes be measured?  What measures and rubrics will be needed to quantify the outcome?  Who will be involved in the measurement process?  When will the service be measured?  How will the measures be evaluated?

6. Collect and analyze the assessment data. Do results reflect on and discuss the findings amassed from the corresponding measure? Are the results based on reliable and valid data? Do results indicate the level of achievement of performance targets? Do results illustrate the effectiveness of previous action plans? What indicators for improvement can be gleaned from the results?

7. Based on assessment findings, develop an action plan. Are action plans based on the findings reported in the results? Are action plans feasible with the available time and resources? Are action plans likely to lead to continuous improvement?

8. Describe the evidence of improvement gained from actions taken based on previous outcomes assessments. Does the evidence of improvement focus on improvements in services? Is evidence of improvement founded in the assessment results from year to year? Does the evidence of improvement present summarize if and how action plans from the prior year led to further improvements for the current year?

When

All support service outcome assessment plans are maintained in the Texas State Outcomes System. The Web site allows the outcomes to be incorporated into a standardized format for all University initiatives.

September 30

Academic and Student Services Outcomes and Methods of Assessment Revised and reviewed by Unit Heads

All academic and student support departments have the opportunity to modify their mission, outcomes, and methods of assessment.  As the assessment of outcomes begins, University Planning and Assessment assists in creating plans for improvement.

October 15

Academic and Student Services Outcomes and Methods of Assessment Revisions Audited by Audit Team

Academic and student support departments submit mission, outcomes, and methods of assessment revisions to their Unit Head for review and approval.

October 31

Academic and Student Services Outcomes and Methods of Assessment Audits and Revisions Reviewed and Approved by Vice Presidents

Following Unit Head approval and completion of audit reports of outcomes and assessment methods, Vice Presidents review audit results and approve outcomes and methods of assessment. Following outcomes approval, University Planning and Assessment assists departments in developing and implementing assessment methods.

May 31

Academic and Student Services Outcomes Results, Action Plans, and Evidence of Improvement Reported and Approved by Unit Heads

All academic and student support departments report outcomes results, develop action plans for further improvement, and provide evidence of service improvement.

June 15

Academic and Services Audit Team audits Results, Action Plans, and Evidence of Improvement and makes recommendations to Unit Heads/Vice Presidents.

June 30

 Outcomes Assessment Results and Audits Reviewed and Approved by Vice Presidents

Following Unit Head approval and completion of audit reports of results, action plans, and evidence of improvement, Vice Presidents review audit results and approve results reports.

The Director of Assessment provides oversight for the academic and student services outcomes assessment process. The following representatives serve as liaisons and support for the academic and student services outcomes process. The liaisons audit the reports after completion of the outcomes phase and results phase. Feedback provided by the liaisons should be used to improve the outcomes assessment process. The liaisons also serve as a conduit to and from the Associate Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness. Feedback provided should be used to improve the outcomes assessment process to contribute to the overall educational goals of the university. The director also serves as a conduit to and from the Associate Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness.

Dr. Lon Olson, Director of Assessment, serves as the contact for academic and student services outcomes assessment.

The audit team for academic and student services assessment is listed below.