Dakota State University students walking around campus

Preparation + opportunity = success

That's the DSU equation. We're a four-year university with nationally recognized programs, cutting-edge facilities, and the brightest thinkers. But we're also a tight-knit, inclusive community. Small class sizes mean hands-on training and individualized attention. All this with an affordable, public school price that's among the best values in the region.

Majors & Degrees

Search

Popular searches

smiling woman

Is DSU the right fit for you?

Even the best brochures and postcards (and yes, even websites) can only tell you so much about a college. The only surefire way to know if DSU is right for you is to see for yourself.

Visit DSU

Home ― Academic Program Assessment

Academic Program Assessment

Policy 1.21
Approved by: President
Responsible Officer: Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs and Student Affairs
Responsible Office: Academic Affairs
Originally Issued: 09/09/2024
Last Revision: new
Category: Academics
Related Policy
SDBOR Policy 2.3.9 Assessment
SDBOR Policy 2.3.4 Board of Regents Academic Program Evaluation and Review
SDBOR Policy 2:7 Undergraduate General Education Requirements
SDBOR Policy 2.3.2 New Programs, Program Modifications, and Inactivation/Termination
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A Program Evaluation and Review Guidelines
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(A-1) Program Analytics-Evaluation and Review Chart
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(A-2) Review of Academic Programs 6-Year Cycle Flowchart
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(1) Annual Program Health Analytics Evaluation Guidelines
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(2) Mid-Cycle Program Evaluation Guidelines
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(3) Comprehensive Program Review Guidelines
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(4) Program Accreditation Review Guidelines
SBDOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(5) Program Productivity Review Guidelines
SDBOR Guideline 2.3.4.A(6) New Program Evaluation Guidelines
SDBOR AAC Guideline 2.3.7.D Cross-Curricular Skills

I. REASON FOR THIS POLICY

This policy establishes the University’s responsibility and procedures for the assessment of academic programs pursuant to SDBOR Policy 2.3.9 and 2.3.4. The University implements a systematic, continuous process of improvement aligned with its mission with a commitment to embed in its culture meaningful, manageable, and sustainable assessment practices to enhance institutional quality. Credible evidence and focused reflection serve to inform University decision making in instruction, curriculum, and programs for the improvement of student outcomes and institutional effectiveness. University assessment policy and procedures ensure that systematic assessment translates into steps that result in the collection, analysis, and use of data to enhance all student learning.

II. DEFINITIONS

  1. Academic Assessment Committee. Fulfills a University advisory, monitoring, coordinating, and regulatory role in assessment matters and advises the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs on the implementation of the University’s Academic Assessment Plan.
  2. Academic Program. The degree, major, and as applicable the specialization approved by the Board of Regents for the degree-granting institution.
  3. Ad-Hoc Program Review. University unplanned, expedited review process in response to significant extenuating circumstances as deemed appropriate by the University President.
  4. Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation. University examination of program performance based on a set of common metrics: enrollment, student success, instructional activity, faculty, and revenue/expense.
  5. Assessment. A systematic collection, review, and use of information about educational programs undertaken for the purpose of improving student learning and development.
  6. Curriculum Mapping with PLOs. A method by which faculty identify in what courses the content and instructional activities align with the program learning outcomes (PLOs): Introduced, Developing, and Assessed for Proficiency.
  7. External Review. A review conducted by individuals outside the University. The University shall establish an external review process appropriate for the program which shall include individuals with the appropriate qualifications and expertise for the review, as deemed appropriate by the University and/or program accreditation requirements.
  8. Internal Review. A review conducted by individuals from within the University. The University shall establish an internal review process appropriate for the program.
  9. Program Accreditation Review. Accreditation review process completed by programs where standards are determined by specialized accrediting bodies related to a profession.
    The University may use a program accreditation review to satisfy the requirements for the Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Review.
  1. Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs). What the University expects students to know, do, or believe by the time they complete coursework for an academic program.
  2. Program Productivity Review. Board of Regents program productivity review analyzing programs that fail to meet the established criteria thresholds.
  3. Trojan Assessment Profile (TAP). Online repository for assessment plans, results, documentation, and reflection.
  4. Year-Three (3) Mid-Cycle Analytics/Evaluation. University examination of program performance based on a set of common metrics: enrollment, student success, instructional activity, faculty, and revenue/expense.
  5. Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Review. University extensive analytical and reflective peer review process that analyzes program status and effectiveness to identify strengths, opportunities for improvement, and priorities for the future.

III. STATEMENT OF POLICY

  1. Assessment of Effectiveness Model. The University’s academic assessment program shall include, but is not limited to, components identified in best-practices literature. [See Model in Section V.]
    1. Clearly defining intended outcomes and goals.
    2. Deciding what evidence will inform success.
    3. Assessing during and after actions implementation (fidelity).
    4. Analyzing evidence of success from multiple data sources.
    5. Using assessment results to make adjustments and to keep doing what works.
  2. Ethical Responsibilities for Program Assessment. The University community shall apply assessment ethics to all components of a continuous improvement process.
    1. Assessment Methods Aligned with Intended Outcomes. Program assessment results shall inform the degree to which students achieve their learning outcomes.
    2. Confidentiality. Program assessment results reporting shall follow FERPA guidelines for the release of individual student performance data.
    3. Reporting Assessment Results. Program assessment reports disclose accurate results, both strengths and opportunities for improvement, relative to achieving outcomes. The University shares assessment reports with those who are in a position to impact program and department quality and processes.
    4. Security and Accuracy of Data/Information.
      1. The existence of all program assessment record keeping systems is known and transparent.
      2. The specific information contained in program assessment recording keeping systems, users of that information, and the purposes for use are transparent.
      3. Roles, responsibilities, and processes for correcting inaccurate academic program assessment records are transparent.
      4. Academic program assessment records are reliable.
  3. Institutional Commitment. To ensure that Regental system and institutional expectations for program assessment are fulfilled, the University charges the following offices, groups, and individuals with operational responsibilities.
    1. Office of Provost and Senior VP for Academic Affairs and Student Affairs. For purposes of this policy, this office shall manage University processes for the Annual, Year-Three (3) Mid-Cycle, and Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Review.
      1. Establishes the SDBOR academic program assessment plan six-year schedule.
      2. Coordinates program completion of Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Reviews.
      3. Completes the University response/action to the SDBOR Program Productivity Review by recommending a Moratorium, Teach-Out, or Program Closure if a program does not meet established criteria thresholds, using the appropriate University and institutional accrediting body guidelines and processes.
      4. Initiates Ad-Hoc Program Review as needed.
      5. Submits an annual report summary of program reviews to the SDBOR.
      6. Posts year-six comprehensive self-studies, reviewer reports, and the board report on the University’s website as appropriate.
      7. Integrates program review results into planning and budgeting processes.
    2. Office of Institutional Effectiveness, Assessment, and Policy. For purposes of this policy, responsibilities of this office include, but are not limited to, the following:
      1. Coordinates meetings of the University Academic Assessment Committee.
      2. Manages the University’s Trojan Assessment Profile (TAP).
      3. Provides training in program assessment as needed.
      4. Serves on the SDBOR System Assessment Committee.
      5. Provides consultation and support for program assessment activities.
      6. Assists academic programs with program review self-studies as needed during the Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Review or specialized Program Accreditation Review.
    3. Academic Assessment Committee. Its annual functions are, but not limited to, the following responsibilities:
      1. Advises the Provost and Senior Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs about academic program assessment policy and processes.
      2. Monitors academic program assessment process, including, but not limited to, the following on a program monitoring cycle developed by the University:
        1. Program learning outcome (PLO) student proficiency results.
        2. Cross-curricular skills student proficiency results.
        3. General education learning outcomes student proficiency results.
        4. Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation results.
        5. Year-Three Mid-Cycle Review results.
        6. Year-Six Comprehensive Program Review results.
        7. Makes recommendations for improving academic program assessment plans.
    4. Deans. Each dean shall ensure that academic program assessment is an established priority within her/his respective college through activities that may include, but are not limited to, the following:
      1. Including program student performance data discussions at college meetings.
      2. Showcasing use of program student performance data to make program improvements.
      3. Monitoring faculty participation in competing program assessment responsibilities in the University’s online assessment platform.
      4. Highlighting academic program assessment in performance evaluations.
    5. Program Coordinators. Academic Program Coordinators, or designees, shall complete academic program assessment through the University-designated system.
      1. Develop, in collaboration with faculty, the academic program assessment plan, including, but not limited to, course mapping to PLOs, program learning outcome (PLO) assessment, cross-curricular skills assessment, and SDBOR program review.
      2. Coordinate the annual reporting of PLO student proficiency level results.
      3. Complete the SDBOR Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation every year.
      4. Complete the SDBOR Year-Three Mid-Cycle Review per the University’s schedule.
      5. Complete the SDBOR Year-Six Comprehensive Program Review self-study and peer review (external review or internal review) per the University’s schedule or as applicable a specialized Program Accreditation Review following the accrediting body requirements.
      6. Lead program faculty in identifying the root causes of student performance gaps and developing plans to eliminate/reduce those gaps.
      7. Coordinate the reporting of academic assessment program PLO and SDBOR review results into the University’s online Trojan Assessment Profile (TAP).
      8. Monitor proficiency results of the BOR cross-curricular skills identified for the academic program.
    6. Faculty. Full-time and part-time faculty shall participate in academic program evaluation responsibilities upon request, including but not limited to, the following activities:
      1. Providing PLO student proficiency results.
      2. Collaborating with Program Coordinators to identify in what courses PLO expectations will be introduced, developed, and assessed for proficiency.
      3. Participating in discussions focused on analyzing student performance trends and implications for curriculum and instruction.
      4. Supporting the year-six comprehensive program review process throughout the self-study and onsite visit.
      5. Making program adjustments informed by program review to improve student results.
    7. Office of Institutional Research (IR). For purposes of this policy, the responsibilities of this office include, but not limited to, the following:
      1. Creates the individual program data reports needed for the SDBOR Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation.
      2. Provides data and data analyses as needed to programs undergoing Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Review or specialized Program Accreditation Review.

Exclusions

If an academic program maintains specialized external accreditation, the University can use the Program Accreditation Review in lieu of the Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Review.

Exceptions

The Provost may extend the timeline for a program’s year-six comprehensive program review under special circumstances.

IV. PROCEDURES (MAJOR)

  1. Program Learning Outcome (PLO) Annual Proficiency Reporting. Program Coordinators, or designees, shall annually implement the following procedures for PLO assessment. [See Annual Academic Assessment Calendar in Section V.]
    1. August - October
      1. Facilitate dialogue with faculty about last year’s PLO student proficiency results, cross-curricular skills student proficiency results, and SDBOR program review results from the prior academic year.
      2. Finalize any academic program assessment plan changes for the current academic year.
      3. Develop action plan for the current academic year to address PLO opportunities for improvement to be included in the Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation reported in the Trojan Assessment Profile (TAP).
      4. Finalize the fall term PLO student proficiency data collection process: who, what, when.
      5. Send fall term PLO reporting assignments to faculty through the University’s online Trojan Assessment Profile (TAP) per the academic program’s assessment plan schedule.
    2. December - January
      1. Ensure that all PLO fall term student proficiency results data are collected.
      2. Analyze fall PLO results.
      3. Record the use of PLO results data for program improvement.
    3. February – April
      1. Finalize the spring term PLO student proficiency data collection process: who, what, when.
      2. Send spring term PLO reporting assignments to faculty through the University’s online assessment system (TAP) per the academic program’s assessment plan schedule.
    4. May
      1. Ensure that all PLO spring term student proficiency results data are collected.
  2. Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation. Program Coordinators, or designees, shall implement the following Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation procedures for each degree program (associate, bachelor, master, doctoral) following the University’s program review cycle. [See Annual Academic Assessment Calendar in Section V.]
    1. August – December (Every Academic Program Every Year). Complete the SDBOR Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation in TAP for the previous academic year by the deadline established by Academic Affairs containing, but not limited to, the following:
      1. Student Demand (Applicants, Admitted, Enrolled)
      2. Yield Rate
      3. Enrollment (Total, Three-Year Average)
      4. Retention Rates (All, OL, FT/FT Freshmen, Transfer)
      5. Graduation Rates (FT/FT Freshmen)
      6. Degrees Awarded (Annual, Past Five Years)
      7. Course Efficiency
      8. Instructional Staff (Full-Time, Part-Time, Underload, Overload)
      9. Financial Efficacy
      10. PLO Proficiency
      11. Program Strengths
      12. Opportunities for Improvement
      13. Priority Actions for the Current Academic Year
      14. Program Productivity Risk
  3. Year-Three (3) Mid-Cycle Review. Program Coordinators, or designees, shall implement the following Year-Three (3) Mid-Cycle Review procedures for each degree program (associate, bachelor, master, doctoral) following the University’s program review cycle for that year. [See Annual Academic Assessment Calendar in Section V.]
    1. August – December (Only Academic Programs On Cycle). Complete the SDBOR Annual Health Analytics/Evaluation in TAP for the previous three academic years by the deadline established by Academic Affairs containing, but not limited to, the following:
      1. Student Demand (Applicants, Admitted, Enrolled)
      2. Yield Rate
      3. Enrollment (Total, Three-Year Average)
      4. Retention Rates (All, OL, FT/FT Freshmen, Transfer)
      5. Graduation Rates (FT/FT Freshmen)
      6. Degrees Awarded (Annual, Past Five Years)
      7. Course Efficiency
      8. Instructional Staff (Full-Time, Part-Time, Underload, Overload)
      9. Financial Efficacy
      10. PLO Proficiency
      11. Program Strengths
      12. Opportunities for Improvement
      13. Priority Actions for the Current Academic Year
      14. Program Productivity Risk
  4. Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Review. Program Coordinators, or designees, shall implement the following procedures for each degree program (associate, bachelor, master, doctoral) following the University’s program review cycle. [See Annual Academic Assessment Calendar in Section V.]
    1. August – May (Only Academic Programs On Cycle).
      Complete the SDBOR Year-Six (6) Comprehensive Program Review by the deadline established by Academic Affairs or a specialized program accreditation review if applicable.
      1. Self-Study. The college dean identifies who will write program’s self-study. The self-study content shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
        1. Institutional history (brief)
        2. Program history (brief)
        3. Academic program and curriculum
        4. Program enrollments and student placement
        5. Faculty credentials
        6. Academic and financial support
        7. Facilities and equipment
        8. Assessment Plans and Results (reports accessed in DSU’s online Trojan Assessment Profile)
          1. Data trends from Annual Data Analytics Reviews and Year-Three Mid-Cycle Reviews
          2. Program learning outcomes (PLOs)
          3. Curriculum mapping
          4. PLO student proficiency results trends
          5. Cross-curricular student proficiency results trends
          6. Changes made to curriculum, instruction, and/or program informed by assessment data analyses
        9. Alum placement
        10. Program strengths
        11. Program opportunities for improvement
      2. External Reviewer. The college dean and self-study writer collaborate to locate an appropriate, outside reviewer.
      3. Onsite Visit. The college dean and self-study writer develop an onsite visit schedule and invite interviewees.
      4. Board of Regents Summary Report
        1. The self-study writer completes the summary year-six comprehensive review report for the Board Office.
        2. The Provost’s Office submits the summary report to the Board Office.

V. RELATED DOCUMENTS, FORMS AND TOOLS

VI. POLICY HISTORY

Adopted: 09/09/2024

Policies

Policy Request Form