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

2. 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.

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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)

8. 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

9. 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

10. Questions?