Plan for Assessing Student Success
Executive Summary

This progress report provides a description of an assessment process which places the faculty, individually and collectively, in charge, and defines an administrative structure which will promote and support assessment activities.

By using various planning tools such as surveys, exercises, meetings, and electronic communications, the plan represents an institution-wide conceptualization of the assessment process shaped by the faculty. The conceptual framework presented in this report has been implemented and tested within the institution and proven to be realistic. The assessment process originates and returns back to the unit mission, goals and objectives. It also considers inter-unit impact of the assessment process and opens up channels which could lead to a change in institution's mission, goal and objectives. Inclusion of all decision-making units in the assessment process will definitely increase the likelihood of leading to institutional improvement.

The plan aims to integrate assessment with the academic functions of the institution and to support and strengthen assessment as part of the academic culture. The report shows that assessment is already a part of the academic culture of GPC. At the same time, the campus needs a common language which will ease the communication between units and create an infrastructure which will promote, motivate and support the units.

Implementation of the assessment process showed that the timeline is realistic and fast enough to produce reliable input in the direction of institutional improvement. The administration of the academic assessment process operates through the Executive Committees of the College, with guidance from the Office of the Vice-President of Academic and Student Affairs and the Center for Teaching and Learning Academic Assessment division. This organizational structure places the assessment where it belongs, underscores faculty ownership, and emphasizes that student learning is an outcome of faculty teaching and can not be improved without addressing faculty instructional development.

As it is well known, assessment is an ongoing process. We hope to see many changes in the process which would be an indication of improvement. The plan promotes a modest start and improvement over time by faculty learning from each other, instead of one which promotes a "perfect" plan with a dead-end. Modified: