Student Learning Outcomes

Assessment Reports
Instructions and Examples

Instructions — page 1
Undergraduate Example — page 3 Rubric
Example — page 7
Graduate Example — page 9
 INSTRUCTIONS
Academic Programs
Outcomes Assessment Report for 2016-17
School: Department:

Degree/Major: Contact:

Part 1: Current Assessment Plan

The most recent assessment plan for this program has been submitted or is attached to this report.

Part 2: Report on Student Learning Outcomes Assessed in 2016-17: Methods, Findings, and
Improvements Made or Planned in Response to Results
Instructions: For each student learning outcome assessed this year, copy the outcome statement from the assessment plan, and
then describe the methods, performance targets, results, and improvements or action plans made based on the findings. To add
more outcomes, copy and paste the outline as needed. Note: The bulleted items in italics below are offered as guidance. It is not
necessary to respond to each one.

1. Student Learning Outcome Assessed: (copy from assessment plan):

Methods That Were Used to Assess Student Achievement of This Outcome at the Program Level (If multiple
methods are used, describe each one separately):
• What types of student work or other evidence of learning were evaluated?
• What instruments, rubrics or other tools were used as measures?
• How were the results analyzed and aggregated at the program level for review?
• What persons/committees carried out the assessments and reviewed the results?

Performance Target(s) for Each Assessment Method Used:

• The target can be stated as either a minimum threshold or as an aspirational goal. For example: “90% of
students who take the comprehensive exam will score 80 or higher.”

Results from This Assessment with Analysis and Interpretation:

• Summarize the results from the analysis of the assessment data
• Report key statistics. Present quantitative findings in tables or graphs if appropriate. Attach or provide links to
any supplemental documents (such as a survey report). Qualitative results can be described in narrative form.
• Attach a copy of the rubric or other instrument used to collect data
• State whether the performance target(s) were met
• Provide a brief interpretation of the results and discuss the implications for the students and program.
• What strengths and concerns did you identify from the assessment findings?

Program Improvements Made or Actions Planned in Response to These Assessment Findings

• Describe in the past tense improvements made or initiated in response to the results.
• Describe action plans-- what faculty have decided to do in the future to address the assessment findings.
• If target was not met, some description of improvements made or action plans must be reported.
• If target was met and no immediate interventions are needed, you can say so and go on to describe any new
initiatives that might be underway to further enhance student outcomes in this area
[Repeat for Each Outcome Assessed]
1
Part 3: Follow-Ups on Prior Year Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Results --
IMPORTANT

Follow-Up on Prior Year Improvements Reported and Action Plans: Review your prior year assessment reports and
provide updates as described below:

1. Improvements Reported in Prior Years That Were Based on Assessment Findings – Provide a follow-up on
improvements the program previously reported that it had initiated in response to its assessments of student
learning. What have you observed to date about how effective those changes have been?

2. Plans Reported in Prior Reports for Making Improvements in Response to Assessment Findings – Describe the status
of any plans reported in prior years to monitor, discuss changes, or make improvements based on assessments of learning.
Were changes/improvements initiated or completed? Do you have any evidence to date that they been effective?

OPTIONAL
Part 4: Other Continuous Improvement Efforts Related to This Program
You can use the space below to describe assessments and improvements made in relation to program goals other than
those related to student learning. This might include curriculum redesigns, policy changes and implementations,
improvement of advising, recommendations from Program Review recommendations or professional accreditation
reviews.

Evaluation of Other Program Goals: Metrics the program tracks to evaluate other aspects of academic program
quality besides student learning, such as graduation rates, time-to-degree, diversity, teaching quality, course and curriculum
reviews, etc.
Method Used to Assess Progress toward Goal Improvements Made
Program Goal Results for This Year
and Performance Target or Planned

2
 EXAMPLE
Academic Programs
Outcomes Assessment Report for 2016-17

School: College of Arts & Sciences Department: Archaeology

Degree/Major: BA in Archaeology Contact:

Part 1: Current Assessment Plan

X The most recent assessment plan for this program has been submitted or is attached to this report.

Part 2: Report on Student Learning Outcomes Assessed in 2016-17: Methods, Findings, and
Improvements Made or Planned in Response to Results
Instructions: For each student learning outcome assessed this year, copy the statement from the assessment plan, and then describe
the methods, performance targets, findings, and improvements or action plans made based on the findings. To add more outcomes,
copy and paste the outline as needed.

1. Student Learning Outcome Assessed: Students will demonstrate the ability to recover and document a
variety of forms of material culture and archaeological contexts.
Methods Used to Assess Student Achievement of This Outcome at the Program Level

Archaeology majors’ and minors’ papers from the following laboratory methods courses have been retained for this
purpose and were evaluated by a committee of Curriculum faculty using the rubric attached at the end of this report:

• Archaeobotany
• Laboratory Methods: Human Osteology
• Laboratory Methods: Zooarchaeology
• Laboratory Methods: Ceramic Analysis

A faculty committee reviewed 24 papers and projects collected between 2012 and 2016. These were then scored
using a rubric developed to examine the students’ command of archaeological principles, ability to work with data,
and expository skills (see Appendix for copy of the rubric).

Performance Target(s) for This Assessment: For each of the dimensions rated, 70% of students will score at a 4 or
higher on a scale of 1-5.

Results from This Assessment with Analysis and Interpretation

The scores are summarized in Figure 1. The summary statistics for the student scores are provided in Table 1.

Student scores on data analysis and data interpretation are marginally lower than concepts, the area where students
scored the highest.

When the subcategories are merged, the differences among Principles, Data, and Exposition become more clear. The
average scores on Principles and Exposition are higher than for Data.

3
Figure 1. Graphical summary of rubric scores.

Table 1 Summary statistics of paper scores

Mean SD Mode Median

Principles Theory 3.5 1.47 3 3

Concepts 3.8 0.88 3 4

Data Analysis 3.5 0.86 4 4

Interpretation 3.4 0.75 3 3

Logic 3.6 1.06 4 4

Exposition Prose 3.6 0.95 4 4

Presentation 3.7 1.14 4 4

When using the scores received by each student for each measure as categorical variables, this difference is not
statistically significant (chi-square = 11.5, df = 6, p = 0.074), but does suggest some tendencies. Students seem to be
marginally more effective at conveying conceptual knowledge than at applying those concepts to analyses and
interpretations of archaeological data. In Bloom’s taxonomy of learning, remembering and understanding are one
level of learning, while applying and analyzing represent another level of comprehension.

One of the reasons that the Archaeology major requires courses in archaeological practice is because students
generally have so few opportunities during their other coursework to produce work at the application/analysis level

4
 of learning. These courses represent a vital contribution to our curriculum and to the general education of our
majors.

Strengths and Concerns Identified from the Assessment Results

The Archaeology Curriculum provides a breadth of courses for students. Some emphasize conceptual or abstract
learning, others offer more hands-on opportunities. The results of this assessment indicate the continued importance
of offerings such as the archaeological practice courses. In particular, it is noted that students scored highly (median
and modal scores of 4/5) in the development of technical data analysis skills. Development of technical competence
in the identification of archaeological materials is a concrete benefit that serves students well as they move forward
in their career and educational paths. Lab courses are therefore a valuable component of the course offering under
the Archaeology degree program.

Lower scores and higher standard deviations were observed in the area of Theory in lab reports. This suggests that
instructors need to help students better understand the connections between the theory that structures the
interpretation of data and the data themselves.

We note that in an earlier assessment (2013), an evaluation of student work indicated the need for improvement in
the area of Exposition. Subsequently, faculty in the Curriculum have offered workshops to raise the level of student
performance in this area, which seems to be reflected in the relatively strong scores for that category in this corpus
of student work.

Program Improvements Made or Actions Planned in Response to These Assessment Findings

Plans for program improvement:

• Engage faculty in identifying ways that analytical and application skills can be developed and reinforced in
settings besides archaeological practice courses.
• Structure research projects in Lab Methods courses so that students receive feedback from instructors on an
initial draft of their manuscripts and allowing them to revise and resubmit. This method would allow
instructors to identify student weaknesses in connecting Theory and Concepts to Data Analysis and
Interpretation (where scores were lowest) and explicitly help students bridge the gap between these two
types of learning processes.
• Continue to emphasize the importance of Exposition and offer opportunities including workshops for
students to build strength in the technical writing.

Part 3: Follow-Ups on Prior Year Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Results --

IMPORTANT

Follow-Up on Prior Year Improvements Reported and Action Plans

Instructions: Review your prior year assessment reports and provide updates as described below:

1. Improvements Reported in Prior Years That Were Based on Assessment Findings – Provide a follow-up on
improvements the program previously reported that it had initiated in response to its assessments of
student learning. What have you observed to date about how effective those changes have been?

Over the past five years, our learning outcome assessments have suggested that we could improve the skills
we give to our students. We addressed that specifically by offering workshops teaching them how to create

5
 papers whose illustrations and general appearance meet professional standards. These workshops were
aimed at students writing honors theses, but other students elected to take these workshops as well. The
participation and positive feedback we have received have supported our decision to offer these workshops.

2. Plans Reported in Prior Reports for Making Improvements in Response to Assessment Findings – Describe
the status of any plans reported in prior years to monitor, discuss changes, or make improvements based
on assessments of learning. Were changes/improvements initiated or completed? Do you have any
evidence to date that they been effective?

Student responses to our survey of seniors described in the 2014-15 assessment report indicated that
somewhat lower levels of satisfaction were registered for the variety of archaeology courses and lower
division course offered. We responded to that with plans to expand and improve the course offerings that
satisfy the requirements of the major and minor. As a result, we added courses to the Undergraduate
Bulletin for Fall 2015 which satisfied the “Topics in Archaeology” requirement, including ANTH 149, 651; LING
558, 560, and 561. 2015-16 was the first year that LING courses were included in our repertoire.

OPTIONAL
Part 4: Other Continuous Improvement Efforts Related to This Program

You can use the space below to describe assessments and improvements made in relation to program goals other
than those related to student learning. This might include curriculum redesigns, policy changes and implementations,
improvement of advising, recommendations from Program Review recommendations or professional accreditation
reviews.

Evaluation of Other Program Goals: Metrics the program tracks to evaluate other aspects of academic program
quality besides student learning, such as graduation rates, time-to-degree, diversity, teaching quality, course and curriculum
reviews, etc.
Method Used to Assess
Improvements Made or
Program Goal Progress toward Goal and Results for This Year
Planned
Performance Target
Increase percentage of Department Profile Out of last year’s graduating class, 52% We’re making progress
graduates who studied Reports. studied abroad. toward that goal but will
abroad Target= 60% of promote study abroad
graduates have studied with entering students
abroad and look for opportunities
to establish fieldwork
placements abroad.
Increase percentage of Department Profile In last year’s graduating class, 20% None at this time.
graduates who completed Reports. completed an honors thesis, up from 10% Advisors will continue to
an honors thesis Target= 30% of three years ago. identify juniors who
graduates have qualify to enroll in honors
completed an honors thesis work and
thesis. encourage them to do so.

During 2016-17, the Archaeology Curriculum participated in the College of Arts & Sciences’ strategic planning
effort. We will be able to describe that process in more detail next year as well as metrics and assessment
processes that emerge from it.

6
 APPENDIX: Rubric Used for Assessment
RUBRIC FOR EVALUATION Course Number: Assignment:
OF LEARNING OUTCOMES
Course Name: Evaluator:
Semester: Date:
5 4 3 2 1
Excellent Very Good Good Needs Work Poor
Principles
Theory: Student Demonstrates an Demonstrates Demonstrates
* demonstrates an accurate exceptional and an accurate limited or
and thorough thorough understanding inaccurate
understanding of relevant understanding of of the theories understanding of
theoretical frameworks theories underlying the the theories
and their application. underlying the activity. underlying the
activity. activity.
Concepts: Student Concepts are Concepts Concepts are
* demonstrates an accurate correctly are listed but are
and thorough described and correctly not used
understanding of relevant used described. logically or are
concepts and their appropriately. incorrectly
application. defined.
Data
Analysis: Student Relationships Relationships Relationships
* demonstrates the ability to among variables among among variables
observe patterns and are discussed and variables are are discussed but
trends in the data. patterns are discussed and no patterns,
logically analyzed. patterns are trends or
Shows creativity logically predictions are
or independent analyzed. made based on
thought. the data.

7
 Interpretation: Student Demonstrates an Demonstrates a Does not appear
* demonstrates the ability exceptional basic to appreciate the
to interpret and discuss understanding of understanding of broader
patterns and trends in the significance of the significance implications of
the data. the analysis. of the analysis. his/her argument.
Exposition
Logic: Argument is Information Information Information has
* logically and persuasively clearly relates to clearly relates little or nothing
organized and presented, the main topic. It to the main to do with the
integrating source includes topic. Details main topic.
materials effectively. exceptional and/or
Information clearly supporting details examples are
relates to the main topic. and/or examples. given.

Prose: Writing is clear and Writing is Writing is clear Writing is murky

* well edited (with respect exceptionally and well and poorly
to spelling, grammar, and clear and well edited. edited.
style). edited.
Presentation: Data are Illustrations and Illustrations and Illustrations are
* accurately represented tables are neat, tables are not accurate OR
and effectively accurate, and add somewhat do not add to the
illustrated. to the reader's neat/accurate reader's
Bibliographic references understanding of and sometimes understanding of
are listed correctly and in a the topic. add to the the topic.
conventional style; reader's
appropriate and sufficient understanding
sources are used. of the topic.

8
 EXAMPLE
Academic Programs
Outcomes Assessment Report for 2016-17

School: College of Arts & Sciences Department: American Studies

Degree/Major: MA in Folklore Contact:

Part 1: Current Assessment Plan

The most recent assessment plan for this program has been submitted or is attached to this report.

Part 2: Report on Student Learning Outcomes Assessed in 2016-17: Methods, Findings, and
Improvements Made or Planned in Response to Results
Instructions: For each student learning outcome assessed this year, copy the outcome statement from the assessment plan, and
then describe the methods, performance targets, results, and improvements or action plans made based on the findings. To add
more outcomes, copy and paste the outline as needed.

1. Student Learning Outcome Assessed: Discuss and critically assess contemporary and historically
important theories and concepts for the study of traditional and vernacular cultures.

Methods That Were Used to Assess Student Achievement of This Outcome at the Program Level (If multiple
methods are used, describe each one separately):

We assess students’ mastery of disciplinary theory by their performance on the required comprehensive exam
substitute, the Critical Literature Review, as reported by the chair of each student’s thesis committee and
aggregated for review by the faculty.

Performance Target(s) for Each Assessment Method Used:

80% pass rate

Results from This Assessment with Analysis and Interpretation:

Four of the five (80%) of the students who were expected to undertake the Critical Literature review this year
completed the exercise successfully (the remaining student requested and received an extension on medical
grounds). Students demonstrated a thoughtful ability to pull together key texts and concepts from their coursework
in order to position themselves within the disciplinary arguments central to their varied MA thesis topics and
projected research and career paths. This suggests that the current degree plan, involving two required courses in
disciplinary theory and methodology and six elective courses, is providing the students a solid common foundation
and opportunities to delve deeply into their areas of specialization.

Program Improvements Made or Actions Planned in Response to These Assessment Findings:

Since the target was met and we are pleased with these results, we decided that no changes were necessary at this
time.

9
2. Student Learning Outcome Assessed: Demonstrate the ability to think creatively and critically in
approaching specific research topics in folklore.
Methods That Were Used to Assess Student Achievement of This Outcome at the Program Level (If multiple
methods are used, describe each one separately):

We assess the students’ ability to complete high quality research within the discipline by their completion of a well-
researched and well-argued MA thesis, reviewed and approved by their three-person thesis committee and
aggregated across the program for faculty review. Our requirements specify a text roughly the length of an article
for a scholarly journal, 45-60 pages. We note that in some ways it is actually more difficult for students at this level
to condense their work into an article-length piece than to construct the traditional longer, more loosely-argued
thesis, but want to encourage students to devote the additional effort so as to create work that it should be
relatively easier for them to revise for publication.

Performance Target(s) for Each Assessment Method Used:

80% pass rate

Results from This Assessment with Analysis, and Interpretation:

As above, four of the five (90%) students whom we expected to complete, defend, and submit their theses in 2016
did so either in the spring or summer session. All of the theses were judged to be very strong. The fifth student is
expected to complete her thesis next year.

Program Improvements Made or Actions Planned in Response to These Assessment Findings:

Since the target was met and we are pleased with these results, we decided that no changes were necessary at this
time.

3. Student Learning Outcome Assessed: Demonstrate facility with appropriate research methods
(including research design, data interpretation, and collaboration with communities) in their
chosen area of folklore.
Methods that Were Used to Assess Student Achievement of This Outcome at the Program Level (If multiple
methods are used, describe each one separately):

We assess students’ command of research methods by their performance on the final project in the required core
course in ethnographic methods based on an annual report by the instructor of that course.

Performance Target(s) for Each Assessment Method Used:

90% of final projects rated as High Pass or Pass

Results from This Assessment with Analysis, and Interpretation:

The instructor has indicated that all students in this cohort performed well or excellently in the course. The faculty
are satisfied that students are being very well prepared for the research they will need to do for their thesis
projects and future employment.

Program Improvements Made or Actions Planned in Response to These Assessment Findings

Since the target was met and we are pleased with these results, we decided that no changes were necessary at this
time.

10
 4. Student Learning Outcome Assessed: Demonstrate facility with appropriate methods for
dissemination of knowledge about folklore to the general public.
Methods That Were Used to Assess Student Achievement of This Outcome at the Program Level (If multiple
methods are used, describe each one separately):

We assess students’ facility in sharing knowledge publicly by the quality of their presentations in the year-end
departmental colloquium, at which each year’s cohort presents their MA thesis research, and by their presentations
at national conferences. A copy of our rubric is attached.

Performance Target(s) for Each Assessment Method Used:

90% will be rated as High Pass or Pass on each of the dimensions of presentation quality.

Results from This Assessment with Analysis, and Interpretation:

All of the students who were working on theses in Spring 2016 were judged to have made effective and accessible
presentations to the assembled faculty and students (ratings of High Pass or Pass). None of the graduating students
presented at national conferences this year, but that had more to do with lack of support for travel than with
interest or ability. One student did, however, produce an ethnographic film connected to her thesis research and
screen it locally and regionally to publicize the issues she is analyzing.

Program Improvements Made or Actions Planned in Response to These Assessment Findings

Based on these results, our chair has been active in development work, identifying funds to promote and reward
excellence. These funds are targeted for student professional development, for example, to defray the cost of
student travel to present their work at conferences, so this should improve students’ ability to make presentations
as a result of this experience.

5. Student Learning Outcome Assessed: Demonstrate the empirical, methodological, and theoretical
grounding, along with professional skills, needed for successful pursuit of career choices.
Methods That Were Used to Assess Student Achievement of This Outcome at the Program Level (If multiple
methods are used, describe each one separately):

Administration of a questionnaire to students who had completed our program during the past five years, asking
what jobs they had currently and recently held, how they employed the knowledge and skills they had gained in the
program, and how they would like to see the program change to better serve future students.

Performance Target(s) for Each Assessment Method Used:

80% will be in doctoral programs or in a career related to this program. 90% will indicate that they are actively
using the knowledge and skills gained in the program.

Results from This Assessment with Analysis, and Interpretation:

In Fall 2016 we administered our questionnaire and received responses from or have information via social media
about all but a few who graduated in the last five years. Selected results are provided below.

• Recent graduates are working in a wide and exciting range of fields, including:
o Recognized folklore institutions like the International Storytelling Center, the Southern Foodways
Alliance, and the Museum of International Folk Art;
o Entrepreneurial endeavors connected to their training and skills, including photography and multi-
media communications;
o Journalism and creative writing;

11
 o Teaching at the community college level and in roles at 4-year universities where an MA is
sufficient;
o Pursuing further graduate education in American Studies, Folklore, and Creative Writing.
• We note in particular the accomplishments of students in creating thoughtfully-curated cultural
presentations that are accessible to the public and raise consciousness of pressing social issues, for
example, the Fabric of Freedom series at the National Folk Festival, coordinating UNC’s Social Initiative
Center, coordinating community engagement for The Museum of International Folk Art’s Gallery of
Conscience, and food writing for The Independent Weekly.
• Students regularly reported that the combination of practical training in ethnographic research methods
and the theoretical perspective on the role of tradition and vernacular creativity in contemporary culture
stood them in good stead for many aspects of their career.
• Students likewise generally praised the core components of the program (theory and ethnography)
combined with flexibility and encouragement to pursue their individual areas of interest. A challenge some
note is that in a two-year program it is difficult to immerse themselves as fully as they might like both in
courses that inform their theoretical and methodological approaches and in courses that provide practical
skills.
• Recent graduates suggested five changes they would like to see the program institute:
1. to refocus the department colloquium so as to make it function better as an opportunity for
students and faculty to meet outside the classroom and discuss each other’s scholarly work and
current social issues;
2. to facilitate networking with graduate students and public sector folklorists in other parts of the
country;
3. to organize internships with potential future employers and collaborators in the public and private
sectors locally;
4. to identify and facilitate opportunities for students to take courses in journalism and non-profit
management to provide skill-sets they will require;
5. given that so many students go into non-academic careers, to provide the opportunity for students
to satisfy the requirement for a final major project by means other than the extended essay (similar
to an article in a major journal in the field) that is currently required.

Program Improvements Made or Actions Planned in Response to These Assessment Findings

The program is already providing students with the insights and skills they require to secure or devise fulfilling
employment or to be accepted into and thrive in further programs of graduate study. However, we have already
made several improvements in direct response to the suggestions offered by recent graduates listed above.

• We have already restructured the department colloquium in response to suggestion #1 above. A pair of
graduate students elected by their peers organizes weekly programming which includes, once per month, a
professionalization workshop, a presentation of work-in-progress by a faculty member or advanced
graduate student, a meeting of students with the Director of Graduate Studies, and a social event.
• Regarding suggestion #2 above, networking with folklorists in other parts of the country requires funding to
help students attend conferences—both national scholarly events and gatherings planned especially for
graduate students—so fund-raising for this kind of discretionary fund is a department priority.

The Folklore faculty will discuss and seek means to implement the other recommendations offered by our recent
graduates during meetings this year.

(continued)

12
Part 3: Follow-Ups on Prior Year Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Results --
IMPORTANT

Follow-Up on Prior Year Improvements Reported and Action Plans: Review your prior year assessment reports and
provide updates as described below:

1. Improvements Reported in Prior Years That Were Based on Assessment Findings – Provide a follow-up on
improvements the program previously reported that it had initiated in response to its assessments of
student learning. What have you observed to date about how effective those changes have been?

The results from our alumni survey (Outcome #5), which we reported in our 2014-15 assessment report,
suggested that students wanted more practical links to future employers and support in job search
strategies. We identified an opportunity to improve that part of their experience in our program by putting
them into contact with working professionals in our field. In response, we added to the department’s guest
speaker committee some graduate students who now play a major role in deciding which speakers to invite
to campus each year. For fall 2015, they planned a panel presentation by folklorists currently working in
the public sector in North Carolina. Based on the feedback we received from student participants who
attended the fall 2015 panel presentation, this change was very well received. Students emphasized the
value of getting to hear directly from professionals in the field in considering their career paths.

The Director of Graduate Studies DGS is also working with the President of the North Carolina Folklore
Society (a current American Studies PhD student) to devise a regular series of events at which our students
could connect with active public folklorists and the administrators of organizations like the North Carolina
Folklife Institute, which can connect students with future freelance and permanent employment
opportunities. We will continue to strategize other such efforts.

2. Plans Reported in Prior Reports for Making Improvements in Response to Assessment Findings –
Describe the status of any plans reported in prior years to monitor, discuss changes, or make
improvements based on assessments of learning. Were changes/improvements initiated or completed? Do
you have any evidence to date that they been effective?

In the 2014-15 report, we described the feedback we received on the alumni survey (outcome #5)
suggesting that the program needed to provide more opportunities for information and networking to
prepare students for non-academic occupations. In response, The Director of Graduate Studies began
working with the President of the North Carolina Folklore Society (a current American Studies PhD student)
to plan a regular series of events at which our students could connect with active public folklorists and the
administrators of organizations like the North Carolina Folklife Institute, which can connect students with
future freelance and permanent employment opportunities. We implemented these plans by hosting the
first of these events this past year. Student and faculty feedback was very positive and additional events
are now scheduled for the future.

OPTIONAL
Part 4: Other Continuous Improvement Efforts Related to This Program

You can use the space below to describe assessments and improvements made in relation to program goals other than
those related to student learning. This might include curriculum redesigns, policy changes and implementations,
improvement of advising, recommendations from Program Review recommendations or professional accreditation
reviews.

13
Evaluation of Other Program Goals: Metrics the program tracks to evaluate other aspects of academic program
quality besides student learning, such as graduation rates, time-to-degree, diversity, teaching quality, course and curriculum
reviews, etc.
Method(s) or Metrics Used to Assess Progress Results
Program Goal Improvements
or Achievement of Goal
Implement We have been reviewing the results and Not applicable Not applicable
recommendations from recommendations from our external Program
the 2014-15 Program Review last year. We are currently preparing
Review our formal response and action items to be
submitted later this year, which will be added.

14