Senate Policy on Assessment

President Approved Academic Senate Recommendations AS-1118-990/AP - (effective June-2000) Senate Recommendations: 1. The Academic Senate recommends that any major or program may elect to develop and implement a continuing program assessment strategy instead of conducting one program review. 2. Any program or major electing this option must acknowledge that only one program review will be waived, and that the program assessment model developed will be maintained and continued. Why Assessment in Lieu of Program Review? The following background and discussion of the Academic Programs Committee was included in the report (AP-004-990) to the Academic Senate Background The California State University requires that every program be reviewed on a regular cycle, which is typically every five years. This review typically includes some sort of self-study and external review. Many accrediting agencies for programs and disciplines are now requiring that some sort of ongoing additional program assessment or accountability practice be included in the self-study. In addition the Legislature of the State of California has suggested that various accountability measures be introduced. With the current high workload, programs undergoing a program review and at the same time initiating the required ongoing program assessment surveys will be strained by the task at hand and by various time constraints. The Chancellor's Office has indicated to the campus that some degree of flexibility is available. Based on the above, it was proposed that programs be allowed a one time option of substituting a program assessment study for a program review provided that the program assessment is kept going so that its results will be included in all following program reviews. Discussion If a major or program needs to do a program review, that program or major will be given the option of developing and implementing a full program assessment strategy, implementing their strategy, and using the report of their findings as satisfying one program review. Departments that elect to develop these program assessment measures would be obligated to continue doing these assessments so that later program reviews would report trends and changes. Since many accrediting agencies are now mandating these assessments, this option would give these programs some added flexibility and relief. This is especially true for those programs on ten-year accrediting cycles. These programs must do a program review between accreditation visits. This

proposal would allow these programs to develop and implement their program assessment model instead of doing the "between program review". What about programs that do not have accrediting bodies requiring them to implement assessment mechanisms? These programs can elect to do a standard program review or they may elect to develop and implement an assessment model. Some faculty have noted that the external review is already a form of assessment, so what is different about this option? Program assessment tries to answer the fundamental question of whether the program offers the material expected to be mastered by any student finishing the program and whether the student did indeed master this body of knowledge. These program assessments are typically multipronged strategies that may include things like alumni surveys, employer surveys, or the quality of student portfolios.