|
The annual planning process of Big Sandy Community and Technical College (BSCTC) allows the institution to identify expected
outcomes for its educational programs and its administrative and educational support services; to assess whether it achieves
these outcomes, and to provide evidence of improvement based on analysis of those results. BSCTC has developed an
Institutional Effectiveness Flowchart to facilitate the annual
planning process [1].
Throughout this narrative, examples will be provided to further explain the process.
Identification of Expected Outcomes
Toward the end of each academic year, members of the BSCTC Planning Council meet to review the outcomes of the prior year's core indicators, measures, and targets
[2].
The analysis of the prior year's activity is utilized to develop the Annual Plan with expected outcomes (goals) for the ensuing year. It is during this process that each unit of the College develops an Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report
[3]. Each unit identifies expected outcomes and each educational
program develops specific learning outcomes which students are expected to successfully demonstrate. Each program and each unit sets objectives to ensure the outcomes are achieved. Each unit and program submits a n Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report which includes 1) Expected Results which contains statements reflecting Student Learning Outcomes, Academic Program and/or Unit Outcomes, 2) Assessment Measures/Data Summary which includes the list of assessment measures, the actual data gathered, the source of the data and the time-period covered by the data, 3) Data Analysis which conclusions drawn from the data as well as implications for students, programs and/or units, and 4) Improvement Actions which lists all actions taken and/or planned in response to the data analysis. Planned improvement actions are listed as expected results on the following year's Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report…..e.g. Automotive Technology
[4],
Dental Hygiene [5],
and Office Systems [6].
Planning and Assessment for Ongoing, Continuous Improvement
The annual planning process of BSCTC is ongoing and continuous. The mission and strategic plan are annually reviewed and assessed for improvement. During the June 12-13, 2006 Planning Retreat
[2],
the mission statement [7]
and the 2006 - 2010 Strategic Plan
[8]
were revisited and discussed. The Strategic Plan was
expanded [9]
and finalized during the
August 2006 [10]
meeting of the Planning Council. The college leadership continually emphasizes an "all-inclusive" process to
faculty and staff by disseminating the institutional effectiveness instruments, which include, but are not limited to,
the mission statement, 2006-2010 Strategic Plan and the 2006-2010 Expanded Strategic Plan. Planning Council meetings
focus on institutional effectiveness processes
[2],
[11],
[12]
and a Planning, Assessment, and Budgeting calendar
[13]
that emphasized the relationship between these three processes is distributed annually to all employees
[14].
The Planning Council met on December 1, 2006
[15]
to revisit the college mission statement and to develop the biennial budget request (Strategic Needs Analysis)
[16]
based on the 2006-2010 Strategic Plan and the 2006-2010 Expanded Strategic Plan. The Strategic Needs Analysis (SNA)
identifies those elements needed for the next biennium in order to accomplish college strategic objectives. Each identified
need is linked directly to the Goals and Outcomes of the 2006-2010 Strategic Plan
[8] and the
2006-2010 Expanded Strategic Plan)
[9].
As part of the budgeting process, each unit is required to complete a Recurring and Non-Recurring Budget
Request Form [17],
[18]
to request funding on an annual basis. Each request also must be linked to a
BSCTC goal [19].
KCTCS Administrative Policy
5.4.1 [20]
requires that the Biennial Budget Requests be related to specific program objectives. BSCTC's 2008-2010 Biennial Budget Requests (
Strategic Needs Analysis)
[16]
includes the link to the BSCTC goals and outcomes listed in the 2006-2010 BSCTC Expanded
Strategic Plan [9].
To continually improve academic programs, the institution initiated a detailed three-year cyclical academic program review
process. Academic programs are divided into three groups. Each one of the three groups will complete the Program Review.
In this way, every three years, all academic programs are reviewed. The three-year cycled review does not replace the
Institutional Effectiveness Annual Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report previously described. Rather, this program review is an
additional means to assess, review and improve student learning outcomes. The program review identifies trends that affect the
academic program, provides data for local and state level review, identifies successes and opportunities for improvement and
determines the need to continue or alter an existing academic program and is discussed further in
Core Requirement 2.5. The Director of the Office of Institutional Effectiveness shares
responsibility with program coordinators for collecting and analyzing data included in the three-year review
[21a]
[21b]
[21c].
Assessing the Achievement of Expected Outcomes
One of the key pieces of the initial annual Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report
[3],
are the assessment measures to be used related to the expected outcomes. Academic and administrative units use both qualitative and quantitative instruments to measure success. These assessment measures gauge the achievement of the expected outcome. Examples of assessment measures for particular units or programs include, but are not limited to,
student surveys [22],
retention data [23],
and transfer surveys [24].
Each expected outcome uses several assessment measures to gather effectiveness data. When these data are obtained, individuals within the
academic or administrative unit analyze the information to determine if the outcomes have been accomplished and to identify any improvement
actions for the following year.
Improvement Actions
The primary focus of the Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report is to identify the improvement actions - both executed within the current year and planned for the coming year. Analysis of the data allows each academic and administrative unit to monitor and continuously improve the application of action plans for the improvement of the particular unit. The unit will use the planned improvements as the basis for the Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report for the following academic year. Examples of continuing monitoring and improvement actions follow this section.
Evidence of Improvement/Continuous Monitoring
The 2005-2006 Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report for Business Services
[25]
reflects an Expected Result in the Financial Aid unit of a reduction to the Return to Title IV amounts of 20% per semester
over the FY05 figures. The identified assessment measure was the actual amount of Return to Title IV per semester. A summary
of the data for the Fall 05 Return to Title IV amount revealed a 35% reduction from Fall 04. Analysis of the data indicated
that the goal was met for the Fall 05 semester. However, the data summary for Spring 06 revealed an 11% reduction over
Spring 05. Analysis indicated that the goal of a 20% reduction was not met for Spring 06. The data analysis led the Business
Services unit to identify the need to continue to strive to reduce the Return to Title IV amount. However, staff recognized
that the 23% average reduction in Return to Title IV for the 05-06 academic year was a one-time, large-scale reduction that
occurred as a result of new procedures in tracking student enrollment and retention. Analysis of these data led staff to set
a more realistic on-going goal for Return to Title IV of 5% per semester. Thus, this goal was listed again as an improvement
action on the 2005-2006 Report. This 2005-06 improvement action became an Expected Result on the 2006-07 Institutional
Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes
Assessment Report [26],
and as a Goals/Results Expected item on the Director of Financial Aid's 2006-07 Performance, Planning, and
Evaluation (PPE) document [27].
The 2005-2006 Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report for
Automotive Technology [4]
reflects an Expected Result of "at least 70% of students earning the offered Brakes Repairer certificate, diploma or AAS degree…have the ability to demonstrate basic knowledge of hydraulic principles and design". The identified assessment measures were Performance Exams, Employer Surveys and ASE Certification. A summary of the data for the 05-06 academic year indicated that 83% of students performed at or above passing level on the Performance Exam; the average response of employers to employee performance on this task was a 1 on a scale of 1-5 (1 being the highest skill) and two completers successfully achieved ASE certification. (ASE certification is industry approved testing of skills in the automotive industry.) Analysis of these data indicated employers were satisfied with the performance of completers in this area in the field. However, faculty felt that the 83% success rate on the Performance Exam could be improved. As a result of this data analysis, program faculty reviewed and updated reference materials and hands-on activities as an effective improvement action for student learning outcomes. This improvement action appears as an Expected Result in the 2006-2007 Institutional Effectiveness Plan and Outcomes Assessment Report
[4].
|
Section Home
