The first major area of evaluation of academic programs is the Academic Unit Assessment Plans with assessment of the 32 programs of study offered by the College. The Academic Unit Assessment Plans were developed by the Discipline Committees, which were renamed and reconfigured in 2000 to become the College Executive Committees.

Every academic program at GPC must prepare/revise an academic unit assessment plan each academic year. Each department chair or program director shall prepare the plan and forward it to the Academic Dean on each campus. In turn, it is forwarded to the Center for Teaching and Learning, Division of Academic Assessment. Academic Program Assessment Plans should be included as part of each discipline's annual planning process and used for both budgetary and curricular changes.

Each plan consists of a mission statement that is consistent with that published in the College catalog, a program goal statement that flows and is consistent with the College's mission statement, intended outcomes/objectives, multiple assessment criteria and procedures for each intended outcome/objective and an analysis of use of results. Departments are encouraged to use multiple measures for each objective and to blend quantitative and qualitative measures. Because of this, departments should formulate plans that reflect their disciplines, both in measurement, evaluation techniques and tradition. These may include but are not limited to nationally normed and standardized objective measures, locally developed objective and essay tests, exit interviews, oral exams, portfolios, projects, performances, course embedded measures, and locally developed surveys, questionnaires of employers, and alumni surveys.

The original discipline committees developed a matrix relating planning and evaluation of academic units and programs of study. Each developed matrix has the purpose of the unit, defines it goals and results, describes means of evaluation and use of the evaluation results. The results are used in the budgetary and planning process by department chairs, and the College Executive Team.

The cycle originates with the unit's goal/mission and returns to this stage as the cycle is completed. Through various actions taken by a unit, the cycle interconnects with cycles from other units and with the institutional assessment cycle as a whole. Since the model cycle will be employed by all the units, the assessment process will be consistent across the campus. In addition, the similarity among assessment cycles will have the beneficial effect of providing multiple measures of effectiveness of the academic program as a whole. Rather than impose a new approach upon units, it is intended that the cycle provides a conceptual framework for assessment which is compatible with appraisals currently being carried out in most units within a less formalized structure.

Unit Goal/Mission

The cycle begins with a statement of the mission and goals particular to that unit. While they should be compatible with the institutional mission, the unit goals may be quite specific and initially may not take into consideration the mission and goals of other units. The institutional assessment cycle is designed to integrate the goal and mission of all units. Even if it is not true at the beginning, this dynamic process will in time integrate unit and institutional goals.

Learning Objectives

Learning objectives will flow from the unit's mission and goals and will be detailed enough to cover the different functions of the unit. Based upon the unit's goals, an individual instructor for a course, or the discipline faculty in the case of a major, will identify the specific learning objectives. They may be as specific as those for a particular course (for example, understanding a cost/benefit analysis) or as general as those for the major (for example, provide students with a basic understanding of the nature and functioning of the economic system).

Expected Outcomes

Units must next specify, based upon their learning objectives, a variety of expected outcomes, measurable in qualitative or quantitative terms. Depending upon the unit's goals, the expected outcomes may be stated as cognitive, behavioral, or attitudinal characteristics. The outcomes can be as specific as being able to solve differential equations, being able to integrate trigonometric functions, or being able to interpret the results of a factor analysis, or as broad as being able to explain how the development of mathematics has been part of the evolution of civilizations and is intimately interwoven with their cultural and scientific development. At this stage in the assessment cycle the expected outcomes represent predictions of how student learning will be demonstrated.

Assessment Methods and Tools

Each unit will select or develop its own assessment methods and tools. Assessment methods may be based on descriptive or experimental data collection processes. These methods will include portions of examinations in key courses, recitals, locally-developed examinations, surveys, oral examinations, professional licensure examinations, standardized comprehensive examinations, portfolios, alumni follow-up surveys, and the like.

Different units may select and develop differing assessment methods and tools to measure the same or similar expected outcomes. This will have the advantage of creating multiple assessment measures more likely to capture the complete range of student achievements and promote innovative and "better" assessment techniques as their results are shared during the assessment cycles with other units.

Observed Outcomes

When the assessment method, tools, and techniques have been utilized with the appropriate students, the results will be analyzed by the unit itself and interpreted in terms of the expected outcomes identified earlier during the planning phase. The results will become part of one or more assessment outcome documents. These may include discipline or program self-study reports, annual discipline/division/committee reports, institutional data summaries, and accreditation self-study reports.

Neither the process of appraisal nor knowledge of the results automatically leads to constructive change and improvement. The assessment model must include an action stage, providing for a response to the results of the assessment of student achievement. The most direct action, and that which routinely occurs at the present time, is for the results to be provided to students and used in improving their achievement. Action may occur as the modification by faculty of a course or a discipline curriculum, or by a governance committee of a program or administrative unit. In particular, the assessment process must, as a matter of policy, influence the institution's decision-making processes which determine curriculum, pedagogy, and resource allocation. At the action stage the cycle provides for sharing recommendations for change based upon documented results of the assessment process.