A REVISED Proposal: Expectations for Degree Program

Curriculum & Re-designed Campus Processes

presented by

Rob Till, Chair UAC Bruce Fox, Chair LSC & member of UACCraig Bain, Chair UCC Niranjan Venkatraman, member UGC &

UAC

PROCESS Curriculum & Assessment Work Group,

in summer 2013, recognized compelling need to integrate curriculum, assessment, and program review processes on campus.

Foundations of proposal: A faculty committee would collectively set the

expectations for curricula (not content) of degree programs. Expectations would guide:

Development of curriculumDecision making regarding curriculum

proposals, and Review of degree programs during Academic

Program Review.

The work group recommended re-designing the curricular-focused committee structures and reporting processes to support the expectations.

Proposal was presented to campus groups for feedback, including: ACCA, FSExC, PALC, ACADA, UAC, Faculty Senate, LSC, UCC, ACC, and UGC. Feedback identified strengths and areas of concern

Proposal was revised based on the feedback…

Strengths of the proposal:

Formal adoption of expectations for curriculum design and assessment

Combination of curriculum & assessment processes

Incorporation of a review of curriculum design and assessment of student learning into the Academic Program Review process

Assurance we have institutional practices that satisfy requirements of NAU’s regional accreditor (Higher Learning Commission)

Areas of concern:

Implementation issues (i.e., “too much, too fast”)

Workload for chairs and faculty

Workload and training of committee members to quickly adapt and learn a new process

Continuous Course Improvement Documents seen as “busywork”

Perceived duplication of reporting requirements for programs that have discipline-specific accreditation

Perceived limitations on curricular design (i.e., standardization of curricula)

REVISED PROPOSAL

Expectations for Degree Program Curriculum will frame the development, approval, and review of curricula.

Re-structuring of curricular-focused committees

Details

Expectations for Degree Program Curriculum

Mission and Purpose of a Degree Program *

Degree Program Student Learning Outcomes *

Curriculum Design with a Curriculum Map

Strategic Course Learning Design which supports Degree Program Student Learning Outcomes

Systematic Assessment of Degree Program Student Learning Outcomes *

Use of Assessment Findings for Continual Improvemt. *

* Already required as part of current policies

Oversees review of curricular proposals

Re-structured Campus Curriculum/Assessment Committees

Tentative Timeline for Implementation

Spring 2014 ACCA would develop implementation plan for re-structuring

campus curriculum and assessment committees/processes.

ACCA would obtain feedback on plan from the UAC, UCC, UGC, and LSC, then report to the Fac Senate Exec Comm.

Support faculty & degree programs to achieve expectations

AY 2014-2015 Continue to support fac. & deg. programs to achieve expect.

Begin to integrate  processes for curriculum and assessment

Develop plan for re-structured committees for AY15-16

AY 2015-2016 Continue to support fac. & deg. programs to achieve expect.

Implement new committee structure

We request that the Faculty Senate:

A. Approve the Expectations for Degree Program Curriculum that will frame…

the review of degree programs as part of the Academic Program Review process

the development and approval of curricula

B. Approve the re-structuring of curriculum & assessment committees/processes to ensure that these aid degree programs in achieving “Expectations”

C. Charge academic leaders with

Identifying and providing support to degree programs to prepare for their Academic Program Reviews & to implement their action plans following review process

Monitoring extent to which degree programs achieve faculty-driven curricular expectations to help ensure implementation

QUESTIONS?

What issues do you have or have you heard that we have not yet addressed?

How re-structured committees/processes work?

University Curriculum and Assessment Committee will collectively set expectations for degree programs.

Chairs/directors will collectively engage faculty to align degree programs with expectations.

College Curriculum and Assessment Committees will apply expectations in decision-making regarding curriculum proposals.

Academic leaders and faculty will utilize the expectations in developing strategic plans for improvement of student learning as part of the Academic Program Review’s Action Plan.

Response to Feedback: A Revised Proposal…

Removing the Continuous Course Improvement Document and reducing workload of University Curriculum and Assessment Committee members

Clarifying use of Expectations for Degree Program Curriculum as a framework for the development of curriculum and review of degree programs during academic program review but not as a limitation on curricular content

Extending implementation timeline

Clarifying that annual Assessment Reporting requirements will remain the same

Accredited programs will follow their accreditors’ existing accreditation processes

Non-accredited degree programs will continue to participate in NAU’s academic program review process

Highlighting that 4 of 6 expectations in the proposal are already required by programs. The remaining two expectations (Curriculum Design with a Curriculum Map; Strategic Course Learning Design) ensure quality curriculum and meaningful assessment

Combining the curriculum and assessment committees at the college and university level

Continuing to maintain that the Faculty Senate charge academic leaders with identifying and providing support to degree programs to prepare for their Academic Program Reviews, as well as providing support for implementing Action Plans following Academic Program Review process

Continuing to address the requirement of NAU’s regional accreditor (Higher Learning Commission) that all accredited institutions engage in practices of assessment of student learning for continual improvement.