1. WASC Orientation and Discussion September 2, 2009 Graham Benton, WASC Coordinator, Accreditation Liaison Officer gbenton@csum.edu

2. Agenda WASC Overview and Accreditation Timeline Cal Maritime’s Status in the timeline WASC Recommendations The “Culture of Evidence” Stages of Assessment Institution-wide Student Learning Outcomes Institution-wide Assessment this year Rubrics for Assessment Resources for Assessment

3. WASC Overview The Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) is recognized as one of six regional associations that accredit public and private schools, colleges, and universities in the United States. The accreditation process is intended to: Assure the educational community, the general public, and other organizations and agencies that an accredited institution meets the Commission’s Core Commitments to Institutional Capacity and Educational Effectiveness and has been reviewed under Commission Standards; Promote institutional engagement on issues of educational effectiveness and student learning Develop and apply standards to review and improve educational quality and institutional performance, and validate and revise these standards through ongoing research and feedback; Promote within institutions a culture of evidence, through which indicators of performance are regularly developed and data are collected to inform institutional decision making, planning, and improvement; Develop systems of institutional review and evaluation that adapt to institutional context and purposes, build on institutional evidence, support rigorous reviews, reduce the burden of accreditation, and add value to the institution

4. The Institutional Re-Accreditation Process 1)The Institutional Proposal 2)The Capacity and Preparatory Review 3)The Educational Effectiveness Review

5. The Capacity and Preparatory Review An examination of Institutional Capacity enables the institution to consider resource issues from a holistic perspective Looking at itself through a “lens” of institutional capacity enables the institution to examine what it is in terms of its capacity to fulfill its aspirations An important dimension of institutional capacity is the institution’s readiness to define and sustain educational effectives, as reflected in the name assigned to this review: the Capacity and Preparatory Review

6. The Educational Effectiveness Review The institution evidences clear and appropriate educational objectives and design at the institutional and program level. The institution employs processes of review, including the collection and use of data, which ensure delivery of programs and learner accomplishments at a level of performance appropriate for the degree or certificate awarded. The institution assesses whether its systems, such as course and program design, faculty support, and program review, are effectively linked to evidence of student learning and are consistent with the educational goals and academic standards of the institution.

7. WASC Timeline January, 2009: Capacity and Preparatory Review Report Submitted Spring, 2009:Capacity and Preparatory Review and Visit Summer, 2009: WASC Commission Report on CPR Review July, 2010:Educational Effective Review Report submitted October, 2010:Educational Effective Review June, 2010WASC Commission meets to discuss accreditation of Cal Maritime

8. The Ten Actions the WASC Commission can take: Once the Commission has made a decision regarding the candidacy or accreditation of an institution, it will notify the institution in writing as promptly as possible. The forms of possible Commission action with regard to institutions are: »Grant Candidacy or Initial Accreditation »Deny Candidacy or Initial Accreditation »Defer Action »Continue Accreditation between the Capacity and Preparatory Review and the Educational Effectiveness Review »Reaffirm Accreditation »Issue a Formal Notice of Concern »Issue a Warning »Impose Probation »Issue an Order to Show Cause »Terminate Accreditation

9. From the Report of the WASC CPR Visiting Team: Eighteen specific recommendations in the following areas: –Diversity –Student Life –Shared Governance and Internal Communications –Leadership –Globalism –Assessment –External Communications –Planning –Educational Effectiveness

10. Two recommendations of high importance for ALL faculty: “Cal Maritime must create a culture of evidence through the effective assessment of data and to facilitate institutional decision-making.” “The Cal Maritime Educational Effectiveness Self-Study must include text describing in detail how the plans and actions comply with the WASC Standards and CFRs, as well as a thorough review of Cal Maritime’s overall institutional and academic assessment strategy.”

11. WASC Criteria for Review, 2008 Consult the handout: CFR 1.2: The institution develops indicators for the achievement of its purposes and educational objectives at the institutional, program, and course levels. CFR 2.3: The institution’s student learning outcomes and expectations for student attainment are clearly stated at the course, program, and, as appropriate, institutional level CFR 2.7: All programs offered by the institution are subject to systematic program review. CFR 2.10: The institution collects and analyzes student data disaggregated by demographic categories and areas of study. CFR 2.11: Consistent with its purposes, the institution develops and assesses its co-curricular programs

12. Cal Maritime’s Proposal for the Educational Effective Review (What was told to WASC in the conclusion of the CPR). CMA will: –Ensure all programs conduct program review –Establish Institution-wide student learning outcomes –Expand student research opportunities –Ensure CSU general education requirements in all programs –Expand global awareness events on campus

13. Assessment Steps 1.Develop Learning Outcomes 2.Check for alignment between the curriculum and the outcomes 3.Develop an assessment plan 4.Collect assessment data 5.Use results to improve the program 6.Routinely examine the assessment process

14. Assessment Step 1: Develop Learning Outcomes The first step in any assessment plan is to develop Student Learning Outcomes –On the Level of Course –On the Level of Program –On the Level of Institution

15. Assessment Step 1: Develop Learning Outcomes Assumptions when addressing Student Learning Outcomes: Student learning outcomes need to be addressed within the context of this nation’s decentralized, mission-based system of higher education What counts as evidence of success with respect to student learning outcomes is properly the province of each institution or program Accreditors set standards, but, in general, should not prescribe the nature of the evidence to be provided

16. Assessment Step 1: Develop Learning Outcomes Accrediting organizations are responsible for establishing clear expectations that institutions and programs will routinely define, collect, interpret and use evidence of student learning outcomes Accrediting organizations are responsible for using evidence of student learning outcomes in making judgments about academic quality and accredited status Institutions and programs share responsibility with accrediting organizations for providing clear and credible information to constituents about what students learn

17. Assessment Step 2: Check for alignment between the curriculum and the outcomes Occurs at multiple levels More specialized learning outcomes at the course level It’s not “what you teach”; it’s “what the students’ learn.” Course Outcomes Program Outcomes Institution-Wide Student Learning Outcomes

18. Assessment Step 2: Check for alignment between the curriculum and the outcomes Does every course you teach this semester have student learning outcomes? Are these learning outcomes clearly stated in the syllabus? Have these course outcomes been aligned with program outcomes? Can you align these program outcomes with our new Institutional Student Learning Outcomes?

19. Institution-wide Student Learning Outcomes Were developed in the spring semester of 2009 by a subcommittee of the Academic Senate Curriculum Committee, with the intent of developing a set of broad attributes to be attained by all graduates of the Academy. These outcomes are based upon the AACU’s Liberal Education Outcomes and Learning Outcomes of Cal Poly Pomona, but contain significant modifications and additions tailored to Cal Maritime’s unique mission. Within this document, each of Cal Maritime’s Student Learning Outcomes are defined and organized philosophically within four broad categories which speak to the complete development of all Cal Maritime graduates: 1) Knowledge of human development and the physical and natural world; 2) Intellectual and Practical Skills; 3) Personal Skills and Civic Responsibilities; 4) Life-Long Learning Skills.

20. Assessment Stage 3: Develop an Assessment Plan Each Program develops its own assessment plan, incorporating data collected from individual course assessement. The assessment plan itself is then incoporated into the Program Review There is, in addition, an assessment plan for the Institution-wide student learning outcomes Course Assessment Program Assessment Institution Assessment

21. Assessment Stage 3: Develop an Assessment Plan In the summer of 2009, the Department Chairs, the Academic Dean, and the Accreditation Liaison Officer met to outline an institution-wide assessment plan It was decided to start with assessing three areas: –1.B.1: The ability to demonstrate an understanding of fundamental concepts in the physical world and to apply these concepts to modern life –1.B.2: The ability to demonstrate an understanding of fundamental concepts in life sciences and to apply these concepts to modern life –2.F.2: The ability to coherently and persuasively share information with others via written communication The other institution-wide student learning outcomes will be assessed in a cyclical time-frame

22. Institution-wide writing assessment Identify how many courses being taught in the Fall semester require writing Assess the general quality of student writing through a rubric The Writing Program faculty will collect the data, and analyze it along with assessment data collected from within the Program itself

23. Physical and Natural World Assessment Mechanical Engineering and Engineering Technology Program Student Learning Outcomes have been aligned with Institution- wide Student Learning Outcomes, and data will be collected from these respective Assessment Plans The Math and Science Department will collect assessment information from their Science courses to submit

24. Conclusion What faculty development assistance (human, intellectual, and/or financial resources) would help up with assessment? What challenges do you see that may impede the implementation of the assessment plan or the WASC Report? Other questions?