Academic Programs

The assessment and continuous improvement of academic programs is the largest component of NJIT’s assessment initiative. All undergraduate, masters, doctoral, and certificate programs that are not externally accredited are assessed through this process.

 

Assessment

The Academic Programs Assessment Cycle

Stages of the Assessment Cycle

The self-assessment report is to be completed at least every four years for all academic programs that are not externally accredited. This assessment is conducted by program directors with the guidance and support of the assessment and accreditation coordinator who initiates and facilitates the assessment process. This report is the fundamental tool of continuous improvement, empowering program directors to examine trends and analyze their program outcomes to determine if program missions and goals are being achieved. Subsequently, program directors recommend actions to improve aspects where targets are not being met. The process of conducting the full self-assessment report is as follows:

  1. Assessment Initiation: The assessment & accreditation coordinator provides the program director with guidance documents, the assessment template, and high-level program data for the last five years. The program director confirms the program’s mission, goals, and outcomes, maps courses and experiences to those outcomes, determines how each outcome will be measured, and sets benchmarks and targets for each measure that will inform and facilitate continuous improvement. The program director then collects or requests institutionally-held data to compare with set benchmarks and targets to establish their findings for each measure. Where the set targets have not been met, these findings inform recommended actions to improve future outcomes. These recommendations guide and inform the subsequent collaborative action planning process.
  2. OIE Review & Feedback: The assessment & accreditation coordinator provides ongoing feedback to the program director to ensure a high-quality and impactful program assessment, provides institutionally-held data to inform findings, and otherwise guides and supports the program director’s assessment efforts.
  3. Chair & Dean Approval: Once the assessment report is ready and the review & feedback cycle is completed, the report is submitted to the program’s chair and dean for review and approval, or feedback as they deem necessary for updates.
  4. Assessment Committee Approval: Once the assessment report has been finalized and approved by the program’s chair and dean, the report is submitted to the Faculty Senate Committee on Academic Assessment for review and approval. The purpose of this committee is to tap into shared governance at the institutional level by allowing faculty peers and other stakeholders to provide feedback from a perspective outside the program’s department and college. The assessment committee either approves the report as is or requests revision to ensure a high-quality and impactful assessment. Feedback statements from the committee are also recorded and provided to program directors upon notification of their report’s approval status.
  5. Provost Submission: Approved  assessment reports are submitted to the provost, the program’s chair and dean, and archived to inform the action planning phase of the assessment process as well as resource allocation.

Resources for the Full Self-Assessment Report

The action planning process is initiated upon final approval of a program’s assessment report by the Faculty Senate Committee on Academic Assessment. This is a collaborative process that is led by the program director, facilitated and supported by the assessment & accreditation coordinator, and informed by the contributions of the action planning team. The action planning team is composed of program faculty, department leadership, and other appropriate program stakeholders. The action planning process gives contributors  the opportunity to process the findings and recommendations of the assessment report and plan for continuous improvement. The process of conducting the action planning process is as follows:

  1. Assessment Report Review: The first step of the action planning process is to establish  the action planning team which processes the program’s assessment report, findings, and the program director’s recommendations.
  2. Collaborative Action Planning: Informed by the program director’s recommendations, the planning team develops a formal action plan to improve student outcomes over the remainder of the assessment cycle. Where appropriate, resources that are needed to implement the planned actions are identified.
  3. OIE Review & Feedback: The assessment & accreditation coordinator provides ongoing feedback to the action planning team to ensure a high-quality and impactul action plan, and otherwise guides and supports the group’s efforts.
  4. Chair & Dean Approval: Once the action plan has been ready and the review & feedback cycle is completed, the plan is submitted to the program’s chair and dean for review and approval, or feedback as they deem necessary for updates.
  5. Provost & Assessment Committee Submission: Once the action plan has been approved by the program’s chair and dean it is submitted to the provost, the assessment committee, and archived to inform the implementation phase of the assessment process.
  6. Action Plan Implementation: The finalized action plan is implemented by the program director and faculty with the support of the department and college as appropriate. Check-in reports are conducted on an annual basis to track the progress of the action plan and its impact on the relevant outcomes and measures.

Resources for the Action Planning Process

Annual check-in reports track the efforts outlined in the action plans, prompting program directors to periodically reflect on the progress made since their last full report and determine if adjustments to action plans are needed. Check-ins are initiated by the assessment & accreditation coordinator and conducted by the program director. Any adjustments to the action plan are made in consultation with the program’s action planning team. The process of conducting the annual check-in report is as follows:

  1. Check-In Initiation: The assessment & accreditation coordinator provides the program director with guidance documents, the check-in template, and high-level program data. The check-in report is focused on the outcomes included in the program’s action plan, as well as any new developments that have arisen since the finalization of the action plan. The program director collects or requests institutionally-held data to compare with set benchmarks and targets to establish their findings for each measure included in the program’s action plan. The program director then analyzes the provided high-level program data and, in combination with his own knowledge of the program, has the opportunity to address larger trends and concerns. These findings inform the program director of any changes in the program’s outcomes, which informs any subsequent action plan adjustments.
  2. OIE Review & Feedback: The assessment & accreditation coordinator provides ongoing feedback to the program director to ensure a high-quality and impactful check-in report, provides institutionally-held data to inform findings, and otherwise guides and supports the program director’s efforts.
  3. Action Plan Adjustments: The check-in report is disseminated to the program’s action planning team, which determines whether any adjustments to the action plan are warranted.
  4. Chair & Dean Approval: Once the check-in report is ready and the review & feedback cycle is complete, the plan is submitted to the program’s chair and dean for review and approval, or feedback as they deem necessary for updates.
  5. Provost Submission: Once the check-in report has been approved by the program’s chair and dean, it is submitted to the provost and archived to inform the remainder of the assessment process.

Resources for Check-In Reports

In the Fall 2022 semester, we will initiate an extensive effort to facilitate, for all internally reviewed programs, a collaborative review of mission statements, program goals, and student learning outcomes. These updates will inform more precise and effective program assessments and continuous improvement using by using the new assessment components definitions as a guide for this revision and refinement process. Each component definition was developed based on the MSCHE standards, the current academic consensus on assessment, and NJIT's particular context. This process is expected to take at least a year to complete and will be facilitated by the Assistant Director for Assessment and Accreditation, however the goal is to finalize each program's revision prior to its next full assessment.

Guidance for Assessment Component Revision

Templates for Assessment Component Revision