1. Presented by Rob Till, Chair UAC Craig Bain, Chair UCC Bruce Fox, Chair LSC & member of UAC Niranjan Venkatraman, member UGC & UAC 1 3/10/14

2. PROCESS  Summer 2013: Curriculum & Assessment Work Group  Two “Rounds” of Feedback (beginning Sept. 2013) 1. Faculty Senate Committees and Academic Leadership Committees 2. Faculty Senate Committees and College Curriculum Committees  Purpose of proposal:  To articulate (or set) Degree Program Expectations for Curriculum & Assessment  Modify curriculum and assessment processes to support and sustain expectations  Obtain support from academic leaders for degree programs and curriculum and assessment processes 2

3. Strengths of the proposal:  Formal adoption of expectations  Connection of curriculum & assessment  Alignment of curriculum & assessment processes  Incorporation of Expectations into the Academic Program Review process  Satisfy requirements of NAU’s regional accreditor (Higher Learning Commission) 3

4. Two Rounds of Revisions Addressed the following Areas of Concern:  Implementation: Extended implementation timeline  Workload: Implementation Committee will identify needs of departments and committees, and develop approaches to provide support  Continuous Course Improvement Documents: removed from the proposal  Perceived duplication of reporting requirements: Implementation Committee will work to ensure there is no duplication in reporting requirements.  Perceived limitations on curricular design: Expectations focus on ensuring intentional planning of curriculum to achieve the best learning outcomes for students. 4

5. REVISED PROPOSAL  Expectations for Degree Program Curriculum will frame the development, approval, and review of curricula.  Modifications to curriculum and assessment committees  Request of support to academic leaders Details 5

6. Expectations for Degree Program Curriculum  Mission and Purpose of a Degree Program *  Degree Program Student Learning Outcomes *  Curriculum Design with a Curriculum Map  Strategic Course Learning Design which supports Degree Program Student Learning Outcomes  Systematic Assessment of Degree Program Student Learning Outcomes *  Use of Assessment Findings for Continual Improvement * * Already required as part of current policies 6

7. Re-structured Curriculum/Assessment Committees 7 University Curriculum & Assessment Council Faculty Members Degree Programs (Chairs, Academic Unit Leaders, Etc.) College Curriculum &Assessment Processes And Deans *University Graduate Committee *Liberal Studies Committee *University Curriculum Committee *Extended Campuses Curriculum Committee

8. Charge to Academic Leaders 1. Identifying and providing support and training to all committees and committee members 2. Identifying and providing support to degree programs:  to prepare for their Academic Program Reviews and  to implement their Action Plans following the Academic Program Review process 3. Examining the extent to which degree programs achieve faculty-driven curricular expectations 8

9. The proposal being set forth for a Faculty Senate vote on May 5 includes:  The Degree Program Expectations for Curriculum and Assessment  The proposed modifications to curriculum and assessment processes  The charge to academic leaders to support degree programs in achieving the goals of this proposal 9

10. QUESTIONS? 10