Skip to Main Content
Office of Institutional Effectiveness

Undergraduate and Graduate Academic Learning Compacts Feedback Form Review

The elements of a high quality, mature assessment plan for the program-level assessment of student learning outcomes (SLOs) are the following:

  1. Mission statement
    The program articulates a mission statement. The mission describes the purpose of a given program in serving students. If applicable, the statement lists external partners or pertinent areas of program-based faculty research.
  2. Assessment approaches statement
    A brief description of how the program faculty approach program-level assessment. How does the program plan to collect learning artifacts from students and faculty to reflect on students’ learning throughout the curriculum? The statement concisely and accurately communicates a list of the types of assessments that students might encounter in the program. The description uses language that people outside the program (e.g., students) can understand.
  3. Plan to assess all SLOs at least every four years
    A schedule has been established for assessing all program outcomes at least once every four years.
  4. Curriculum map aligning all SLOs to courses
    Every SLO is linked to at least one course. The map also articulates how the learning in the linked course influences students’ master of the given SLO (e.g., introduces, reinforces, demonstrates mastery, or assesses student learning in that course as it is related to the SLO).
  5. Minimum of two SLOs assessed each year
    Assessing two or more SLOs annually is required.
  6. SLOs align with university categories
    At least one SLO is established in each of the areas required by the Florida Board of Governors. For ALCs, the required areas are critical thinking, communication, and discipline-specific knowledge. For GALCs, the required areas are knowledge of the literature of the discipline and ability to engage in independent research or professional practice.
  7. SLOs are clear and specific
    All outcomes are articulated with clarity and specificity. SLOs feature precise verbs and a concise description of what students should know, think, or do.
  8. Relationship between measures and SLOs
    Each SLO is aligned to a measure, and details are provided about how that measure will collect learning artifacts from students. Specific items on the test, assignment, or survey are logically and comprehensively linked to SLO(s). The alignment could easily be affirmed by faculty subject experts (e.g., through a backwards translation).
  9. Direct measures
    All SLOs are assessed using at least one direct measure (e.g., test, essay, course embedded assignment).
  10. Specification of desired results
    Desired results are specified and, ideally, are also justified. Specifying desired results means saying something like “we expect that our students will score about a faculty determined standard, and that standard is x.” Note that justification requires multiyear data. Justifying desired results means saying something like, “last year the typical student scored 20 points on measure x. The current cohort underwent more extensive coursework in the area, so we hope that the average student scores 22 points or better.”
  11. Data collection and research design
    The data collection process includes a clear description of how many students were assessed, who assessed their performance, and how they assessed it. The data collection process yields quality information that enable faculty to determine whether students achieved faculty’s desired results.
  12. Presentation of results
    Results are clearly presented, and they directly relate to the SLO(s).
  13. Interpretation of results
    Interpretations of results seem reasonable given the outcomes and methodology. Interpretation includes discussion of how classes, activities, or measurement methods might have affected results. Student learning and the assessment process are critically evaluated, including acknowledgment of flaws. If appropriate, results are compared to prior results.
  14. Sharing results with faculty/stakeholders
    Information about the results is provided to the faculty in your department and/or college. The mode and details of the communication (e.g., program meetings, emails) is clear. (attach documentation as needed)
  15. Continuous improvement/actions to be taken
    Substantive examples of program modifications (or plans to modify) are documented and are directly related to the assessment results. These modifications, which can be curricular, pedagogical, and/or assessment-related, are very specific (e.g., approximate dates of implementation and where in the curriculum they will occur).