The North Dakota University System (NDUS) mandates program reviews at least every seven years to assess the current level of program quality, means to improve program quality, relationship of the program to the mission of the institution, and program productivity.
In the Program Review process, programs are required to show how they use current assessment data to evaluate the program’s success in meeting the stated objectives, including assessment of student learning.
Each Course is assessed according to the corresponding student learning outcomes. Faculty write assessment plans and then provide assessment findings and action plans for course continual improvement. Each year, faculty will use these course assessments and other assessments (such as institution surveys) to make program-wide decisions. For example, this is a finding and action plan for SLO 3:
Finding: 12 candidates averaged a score 4.52 to meet acceptable target and ideal target score of a 4 in INTASC Principle 6 -Communication. Candidates are demonstrating an appropriate level of understanding the use of effective verbal, non-verbal and multi-media communication techniques, models proper effective communication, encourages modes of communication in the classroom, uses a variety of communication tools, uses correct grammar and writes according to an accepted standard within the Clinical Practice experience. Program requirements are well supported after reviewing INTASC principles for SLO #3.
Action Plan: Ensure candidates are getting detailed feedback from university supervisors and cooperating teachers in all the courses with field experiences. University supervisors will provide both a pre and post conference with candidate after each INTASC evaluation. This Action is underway and will be continued.
CLA demonstrates scores below or well-below performance standards for critical thinking, analytical reasoning, problem solving and writing skills.
Action Plan: Embed more course activities to guide and support student writing skills, reasoning and critical thinking. Collaboratively develop consistent rubric scoring for writing mechanics and share across disciplines.