2017 Four-Year Institution Survey

Switch to Advanced Search
Filters (Optional)

What are other approaches to assessment of institutional goals? (n=71)

Previous QuestionNext Question


  • "Artifacts" are collected from Gen Ed courses for assessment.
  • Students in selected courses submit papers and an assessment group scores them after the academic year ends.
  • There is an assessment of first year writing, advanced writing, and writing in the major
  • The university is still working on a plan to institute assessment across departments.
  • The IT1 review committee assesses all courses that are included in the IT1 part of the core curriculum. The English Department assesses all of our writing courses.
  • The General Education Committee also gathers longitudinal quantitative data based on professors' individual assessments of student writing in a variety of General Education classes.
  • The departments submit writing samples from seniors to the Assessment Committee. That committee assessed the writing of all graduating seniors in all departments.
  • Students submit a paper
  • Students in our two FYEP courses do a common assignment that is assessed by faculty who teach in the program.
  • Two Gen Ed WI interdisciplinary seminars are routinely sampled for Gen Ed writing assessment.
  • Student writing is assessed by WAC
  • Student Learning Outcomes related to writing in the major are assessed at the program level and reported to the Office of Strategic Planning and Institutional Effectiveness and/or the General Education Council
  • student essays are randomly collected and assessment for writing outcomes
  • Senate review every 10 years
  • Samples work is collected from seniors in our capstone GE course and assessed by independent readers.
  • Right now, the goals are assessed in the two required Bridge General Education courses, GEN199 and GEN400; in the future, it’s possible that a portfolio review will be included as well
  • These are all options. The primary methods of assessment will be in development over the next few years.
  • university-level outcomes-based assessment, but addressed at multiple levels. Example: university learning outcome #1 is about written communication, and we are assessing it in FYW and our general education program is assessing it at the 200-level course. We adapted a few criteria from the LEAP rubrics, as did they--but different ones. To my knowledge, our communication in the disciplines courses are only assessed via program/dept assessment.
  • QEP for writing in the disciplines through 3 selected courses for 70% of the programs
  • we cycle through LO's or institutional goals, 4 each year, and instructors who teach to that LO also assess using a rubric based on VALUE, AACU, with 4 levels; each instructor is responsible for assigning values to a percentage of their own student's work for one particular assignment -- the process is neither uses norming of instructors nor blind review--a survey monkey is used
  • Writing is a part of our Liberal Core Assessment. Our first-year writing courses are mapped to this learning outcome. At this point, I collect data relating to the learning outcome from instructors and report to the Liberal Studies director.
  • We have programmatic assessment at the institutional level, headed by the Director and supported by a faculty/librarian committee
  • We have always had portfolio assessment at the course level where proficiency is determined by individual instructors. We are just this year starting to do a larger sampling across sections.
  • We have a institutional written communication outcome and data is collected as to whether students have or have not met the outcome. The outcomes are evaluated through individual courses.
  • We do Middle State assessment for our sophmore writing requirement.
  • We do hit or miss assessment of SLO's when we can. This year we did a tiny part of the SLO about argument--we looked solely at FTS student writing that used evidence to make arguments.
  • We assess FYW annually, and other Core courses comprising part of the writing requirement are assessed periodically (3x in 9 years, for our capstone/R&P courses; 2 x in 9 years, for our WI courses). Core assessments involve cross-disciplinary faculty review of student writing; FYW assessments involve English faculty review of student writing.
  • University-Wide Writing Assessment
  • We assess a different part of the writing program every year, and submit this to the College of Arts and Letters. We have in the past done GE-wide assessments in collaboration with our College, but these aren't part of a set requirements.
  • We are in the process of developing a new university-level writing assessment.
  • We are developing our assessment procedures now. Starting with professors doing ratings using a rubric during a summer assessment session.
  • We are beginning this process. A staff person in the Provost's office is responsible for assessing core curriculum requirements. The first step has been sampling courses whose faculty volunteer to participate. FYC assessment is on a 3-year cycle, also with sampling from sections.
  • W courses are assessed through the Office of Educational Assessment
  • use of LEAP rubric for WR Comm with samples collected from across campus
  • Randomly selected samples from all writing classes as assessed
  • Professors fill out a writing rubric for each student when they complete a writing-intensive course. This rubric applies to one major assignment in the course.
  • A department assessment committee does periodic direct assessment of student writing samples and indirect assessment of course materials and writes a report to submit to university general education committee. I'm not sure how assessment is done for the upper-level writing intensive courses in the gen ed program.
  • Assessment studies
  • departmental assessment / CORE assessment
  • Courses are assessed periodically. We collect papers and assess them according to the GE objectives.
  • Courses across campus certified as Writing Rich are assessed for effective written communication.
  • collection of writing samples
  • Central Curriculum Committee organizes the faculty teaching FYW and WI courses, helping them construct a rubric for each course goal and select samples that come organically from each class (as opposed to asking students to write to a single prompt that is just for assessment purposes) . Faculty groups come together to score the samples as part of a summer workshop on teaching writing.
  • Assessments conducted by the writing program, by institutional assessment person, by departments (at their discretion)
  • Assessment of the WCore (general education) Writing Emphasis, conducted through focus groups, rubrics, and course surveys
  • First-year assessment every four years.
  • Assessment committees for broader curriculum requirements; FYWS assessment committee for FYWS.
  • assessment by various groups is put together, students sometimes take a standardized test
  • Assessment beyond writing instruction program takes place through the General Education Program. Our writing courses are within the Gen Ed Program (hence, the requirement) but they are assessed in Gen Ed and in the WIP.
  • Artifacts are collected as part of General Education assessment and are evaluated by faculty.
  • An assessment committee conducts periodic reviews of writing that is assigned in capstone courses.
  • A faculty senate committee (University Writing Committee) conducts five-year reviews of different aspects of the Writing Program
  • direct assessment of research papers in the FYP by FYP faculty and the University Assessment Committee; Institutional surveys asking students to self-assess their writing skills
  • First-Year Writing is in the process of a program review.
  • Professors assess individual assignments using institutional rubrics for written/oral communication.
  • instructors submit randomized student writing samples for Gen Ed to assess
  • Periodic assessment of writing intensive courses by departments with assistance from WAC committee.
  • Periodic assessment as part of General Education assessment of each GE requirement
  • Outcomes assessment
  • Office of General Education Assessment
  • Now implementing a system of selecting essays from W courses and having a jury read and evaluate them
  • It varies, but generally we collect writing samples from the courses being assessed, and then they are assessed by a committee. We usually use the course instructor as first reader and committee members as second readers. The artifacts being used for the assessment may vary depending on course content and instructor.
  • Instructors are asked to submit sample work from randomly selected students in their writing-intensive classes.
  • first-year writing program reading of student writing
  • Institution-wide assessments like NSSE and CIRP
  • How writing will be assessed at all levels is still being figured out.
  • General Education Assessment Initiative through Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness
  • General Education Assessment
  • FYW courses participate in general education assessments that are based on faculty reporting. Our instruments have ranged from holistic assessment of learning goals related to writing to artifact-based assessments of single documents (e.g. essay or annotated bibliography)
  • For a while, courses that identified Core Communication as a central Principle of Undergraduate Learning would rank students' performance on that PUL in that course. I'm not sure how the goals are being assessed now, as this assessment is diffuse and ever-evolving.
  • Writing program has self-designed assessment using samples from FYC sections.

Basic filters may be applied to this question; advanced filters are unavailable.