HLC Day February 13, 9:30am - 2:00pm, TUC Great Hall

Criterion 4 – Teaching and Learning: Evaluation and Improvement The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs, learning environments, and support services, and it evaluates their effectiveness for student learning through processes designed to promote continuous improvement.

Steering Committee Members Name Title Amy Lind (Chair) Provost Fellow for Assessment, Professor and Chair, Women’s Gender and Sexuality Studies, College of Arts & Sciences Bryan Smith (Chair) Director of the Center for the Enhancement of Teaching & Learning Regina Sapona Senior Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, College of Education, Criminal Justice, Human Services & Information Technology Carney Sotto Adjunct Associate Professor and Program Director, Communication Sciences and Disorders, College of Allied Health Sciences Nicole Mayo Assistant Vice President, Student Affairs Stephanie King Assistant Professor, College of Nursing Alex Maries Assistant Professor, Physics, College of Arts & Sciences Ricardo Moena Professor and Assistant Head, Mathematical Science, College of Arts & Sciences

Summary of 4.A The institution demonstrates responsibility for the quality of its educational programs. Regular program reviews Evaluation of all transcripted credit Evaluation of the quality of accepted transfer credits Maintains authority over prerequisites, rigor, expectations for student learning, access to learning resources, and faculty qualifications Maintains specialized accreditation for appropriate programs Evaluates the success of graduates

How UC Meets 4.A Requirements Opportunities of semester conversion along with regular program review eCurriculum 2.0 Robust evaluation of credit in-house and via Transferology Ohio Articulation and Transfer Policy Transfer credit quality assurance processes and policies eCurriculum 2.0 workflow, including prerequisites, SLOs, multi-stage approvals Reappointment, Promotion and Tenure, teaching evaluations Discipline-based professional accreditations Regular and robust collection of student employment data through IR

Summary of 4.B The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational achievement and improvement through ongoing assessment of student learning. Clearly stated learning goals and effective assessment processes Assessment of achievement of learning outcomes Regular improvement efforts based on assessment Assessment processes and methodologies reflect good practice

How UC Meets 4.B Requirements General education core assessment, success data, and analysis for program improvement Shared governance and budgetary processes include assessment data for the purposes of improvement Numerous examples of assessment-based improvements Regular academic and co-curricular assessment processes with faculty as leaders. Assessment included in the annual budgeting processes Wide participation of faculty and staff in governance and assessment processes, adoption of national rubrics (VALUE)

Summary of 4.C The institution demonstrates a commitment to educational improvement through ongoing attention to retention, persistence, and completion rates in its degree and certificate programs. Ambitious but attainable goals for retention, persistence, and completion Collect and use data on retention, persistence, and completion Improvements based on data Processes and methodologies reflect good practice

How UC Meets 4.C Requirements Fully vetted and approved Completion Plan in alignment with Academic Strategic Plan Institutional Research analyses and publication of relevant data Annual review of assessment through Strategic Enrollment Management, Complete College Ohio plan, regular tracking of outcomes due to easily accessed data Declining DFW rate 15-to-Finish dashboard Partnership with Ohio Dept. of Job and Family Services and National Student Clearninghouse for robust reporting of job placement Use of IPEDS in cohort identification for retention and graduation

Questions?