Faculty Toolkit for Assessment

If you have any additional questions, please contact your Dean or Division Chair for more information.

Faculty Assessment Checklist*

1. Develop program-level student learning outcomes (SLOs) and link appropriately to: (a) National Park College (NPC) institutional General Education Objectives (GEOs); (b) accreditation standards; (c) criteria identified by professional organizations; (d) industry standards; and/or (e) strategic plans. These outcomes must be approved by the Curriculum and Assessment Committee (CAC) prior to implementation.
2. Identify the various courses or co-curricular activities where outcomes are learned by students in your program.
3. Identify the assignments, experiences, activities, etc. that promote the achievement of the learning outcome.
4. Designate the points in a student’s educational curriculum when outcome assessment and outcome achievement data collection can occur.
5. Define the components of successful achievement of the learning outcome and the evaluative criteria (rubrics, minimum standards, etc.) for each component that can be demonstrated by students.
6. Collect data via Course Level Objectives (CLOs), Program Level Objectives (PLOs), and GEOs data pulled from the Learning Management System (LMS) as required, or through reporting rubrics designed to capture student success in every assessed learning outcome. This process will vary depending on whether you are assessing General Education courses or program courses.
7. Annually discuss with Division Chairs and program faculty the data collected as compared to expected programmatic rigor.

• Identify and implement curricular and/or instructional changes needed to improve student learning.
• Re-assess student learning at the next assessment cycle.
• Re-evaluate assessment processes to maintain effectiveness, efficiency, and programmatic improvement.

*Checklist modified from Kansas State University’s Office of Assessment

Assessment Timeline

The NPC assessment reporting cycle looks like this:

• May – Faculty reports and LMS data is provided to Division Chairs.
• August – Chairs report back to faculty and discuss changes in teaching or resource allocation needed to improve SLOs.
• September – Division Chairs report findings to CAC, which analyze each report. A summary of this process is then reported by the CAC to the Vice President of Academic Affairs (VPAA).
• October – The VPAA reports assessment findings to cabinet and other stakeholders as needed.

General Education Common Assessment

Faculty implementing a common assessment of NPC Arkansas Course Transfer System (ACTS) courses must have the common assessment completed prior to the start of the semester. It should include input from all full-time and part-time faculty, and have the division chair’s approval. The assessment should be administered in every class section including online and night classes, fall through summer, taught by NPC faculty. Every two years, the chair will ask faculty to review the assessment and recommend any changes if necessary.

While faculty are free to utilize any rubric for internal grading, all reporting of assessment data must come from the institutional GEO rubrics embedded in the LMS. Common assessments must:

• Be utilized by all faculty in all course delivery models.
• Thoroughly and effectively assess a skill critical to the success of the course.
• Report results using the institutional GEO rubrics.
• Be administered in identical fashion in all classes.

To view the institutional GEO rubrics available for common assessment, please see the following link:

• Institutional GEO Rubrics

For additional ideas for developing effective rubrics, please see this Association of American Colleges and Universities website:

• AAC&U VALUE Rubrics

Program Assessment

Program assessment should be coordinated between the deans/division chairs and the faculty to identify the required student outcomes to be measured. PLO data may be pulled from the college LMS. Therefore faculty are required to ensure proper alignment of all CLOs to PLOs in the course, and to link the appropriate assignments to their CLOs so that gradebook data can be accessed.

For additional program assessment, faculty should use a reporting form that allows capture of specific skills or competency testing, and licensure or certification pass/fail rates. The college provides a reporting rubric on the standard four point Likert scale. This scale allows faculty to set the appropriate achievement values for that assessment, as well as reporting the number of students for each value.

Program assessment will typically consist of several types of assessment, as guided by their accrediting body and other specific program requirements. It is possible that program reviews will necessitate assessment collection at times outside of the NPC assessment timeline. Division Chairs should communicate to faculty when assessment data will be needed for specific site visits, or any information updates requested by outside agencies.

Please talk to your dean or division chair for more information regarding program assessment. Generally speaking, program assessment will require:

• Identification of all student outcomes needed to properly evaluate program success.
• Grade data pulled from the LMS at the CLO and PLO level.
• Additional reporting of skill/competency testing using reporting rubrics.
• Documentation of licensure and certification testing when applicable.
• Clear understanding of program review timelines for outside accreditors.

To report your information within the LMS system, please contact the LMS administrators to run reports for specific CLOs and PLOs in the classroom. You may use the isntitutional GEO rubric for reporting.

For individual assessment items, please use the institutional Likert scale to report data to your dean/division chair.

• Program Artifact Reporting Rubric

Program Assessment Example Using Likert Scale

1. Determine what competencies need to be assessed for proper evaluation of program success—especially those elements required for accreditation.
2. Make a list or spreadsheet of these competencies, and utilize the following reporting tools for each assessment item.
3. Meet with D2L team to discuss data collection and reporting options within D2L.

Achievement Values

*Please note your grade range for each competency. The default college GEO attainment score will be set at Standard Performance (Benchmark II), which is 80% or better. So, converting to percentages, on this rubric 4 = 90% and above; 3 = 80-89%; 2 = 70-79%; and 1 = less than 69%.

If, in your case, you utilize a different standard of attainment, please provide whatever value is appropriate to this assessment in the field below.

Provide a numeric range for each assessment item. Pass/fail may be marked 4 and 1 on the table.

Reporting Student Achievement

For each assessment artifact, tabulate all grade data and submit the following:

Name of Competency:

Course Name:

List Instructors and Sections:

Required for Accrediting Body?      Yes or No

Number of student submissions: 

Mean student score (using the 1-4 range): - OR - Number of Pass (4)? Number of Fail (1)?

Please show the score distribution of achievement levels for this assessment:

Co-Curricular Assessment

All faculty and staff that engage in co-curricular activities, regardless of location, are expected to fill out the co-curricular assessment form. The process requires the following:

• Determine if your event is co-curricular or extra-curricular. Co-curricular events provide an opportunity for student learning beyond the classroom setting. Extra-curricular events do not require assessment.
• Make sure your event objective(s) is measurable, and that you have a process in place to collect student data (survey, quiz, etc.).
• Fill out the co-curricular assessment form PRIOR to the event; submitted objectives will be approved via a CAC subcommittee.
• Upon completion of the event, you have ten (10) days to attach your data results to your co-curricular form.
• Each May, you will discuss any co-curricular experiences with your Dean/Division Chair as part of the annual assessment review. 
• Faculty Co-Curriculum Assessment Worksheet