Service and support all units within Sam Houston State University.
Objective
Assist Various Accreditation Assessments
Provide guidance and technical assistance in defining, validating and documenting assessment processes for reaffirmation of accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools(SACS)
Indicator
Tracking Assistance SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will collect e-mails, sign-in sheets and use the Workorder Request Table to track the level and types of assistance provided to the University community in regards to the SACS reaffirmation process.
Criterion
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will satisfy all requests for assistance re. the SACS reaffirmation process.
Finding
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation Efforts
The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. Our analysis of assistance provided and the clients' satisfaction with that assistance has suggested that individual and small group coaching on demand/request has had some positive impact upon knowledge about, acceptance, performance and documentation of academic, administrative, service and support unit assessment; however, this impact has been insufficient.
As of July 1st, the IRA Office had performed 4 formal OAT Db training Sessions, as recorded on the Workorder Request Table. This marks a decrease in the number of training sessions held. The explanation for this resides with the fact that the IRA Office only conducts formal training sessions when requested by the Programs, Departments, or Colleges. That said, the IRA office continued to provided informal assistance to clients in the form of phone calls and e-mails throughout the entire year. In addition, the IRA office was heavily involved in preparing documentation for, and participating in, the SACS on-sight visit, which occurred in March, 2009. Furthermore, the IRA office has been heavily involved with efforts to improve the OAT DB, as well as providing models and assistance to the Colleges and Departments in preparation for the Universities final SACS report. In particular, the IRA office has been involved with assisting the Dean's of the individual colleges triage the status of their departments assessment efforts, and creating a number of models of performance and learning objectives, which have been provided to the Academic Departments.
Action
Continue Efforts To Assist University Clients With Assessment
As the IRA Office moves forward into 2009-2010, it plans to take a more active role in assisting the University with conducting quality assessment. The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. As a result the following changes are planned:
The Director of Institutional Research will be leading efforts to re-create an Institutional Effectiveness Committee which will assist the Deans and VPs in their "executive oversight" of assessment throughout the university. This committe will assist by annually reviewing and evaluating samples of the University units' assessment documentation in the SHSU OAT DB system and reporting to the Executives who will have the authority and the charge of leadership to address correction with the units in their divisions or colleges.
The IRA office will conduct periodic triages, with related comments and recommendation, of assessment documentation in the OAT Db by college and division and will provide this needs-assessment feedback to both the Executives and the Institutional Effectiveness Committee. The IRA Office will provide technical assistance and support for both the executives and the committee, in identifying areas of general weakness in understanding, execution or documentation of assessment processes, and will provide models, instructional materials, group workshops and other forms of support to facilitate assessment improvement, as requested by executives on behalf of their units, and by the IE committee.
In addition, the IRA office will initiate its own efforts to play a more proactive role in providing assistance to the Departments and Offices around campus in both the areas of program performance and student learning outcomes assessment. These efforts will be especially important in 2009-2010 as the university moves away from having SACS as a direct motivating factor for the need to conduct assessment of this type.
In addition, staff in the IRA office will do a better job of tracking the amount of informal assistance they provide to departments through e-mail logs and call sheets.
Objective
Clients Understand & Use Data
SHSU decision makers will be able to use and understand the data they are provided by the IRA Office
Indicator
Number And Nature Of Repeat Clients
The IRA Office will use the Workorder Request Table to track the number of repeat clients in the 2008-2009 year as a comparison to the numbers gathered in Fiscal Year 2007 and Fiscal Year 2008. The fact the clients are making multiple data requests of our office is an indication that they are not only generally pleased with the quality of the work being done, but that they are able to both understand and use the information being given to them. In addition, analysis of the information recorded in the Workorder Table will be conducted to determine if the the IRA Office is serving clients from across the University.
Criterion
Increase In Repeat Clients
The IRA office would like to see an increase in the number of repeat clients in 2008-2009, over the previous year.
Finding
55 Repeat Clients In FY 2009
Upon conducting a detailed analysis of the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Workorder Tracking Table, it was concluded that the IRA Office served 55 repeat clients in FY2009 as of the middle of June. This marks a 14.58% increase in repeat clients from the previous year (FY 2008) and a 48.65% increase since FY 2007. In addition, the IRA Office provided assistance to all 6 Divisions (Academic Affairs, Finance and Operations, University Advancement, Enrollment Management, Student Services, and Athletics), and nineteen of the twenty-nine Academic Departments, throughout the year.
Action
Continue To Improve Clarity Of IRA Data And Continue To Serve The Entire University
Over the last several years, the IRA Office has made great strides in improving the clarity of the data it provides to its clients. In 2009-2010, the IRA Office will continue to make improvements on how it completes and documents data requests in order to ensure we continue improving in this area. The IRA office will take greater efforts to communicate with clients before beginning their workorders in order to clarify any possible questions. Additionally, a greater emphasis will be placed on the training of IRA Graduate Analysts. They will receive extra instruction on how they should thoroughly label the data and define all variables in clients data requests, as well as how they should document their work in the IRA files. In addition, the IRA office will continue to keep detailed records of the Divisions, Colleges, Offices, Departments, and Programs to which it provides assistance in an effort to make sure it continues to complete its mission of serving the entire University. While it is not possible for the IRA office to actively solicit the Departments, it can make the services it provides more clear and better known through a variety of methods, including word of mouth, direct communication with Dean's, Vice President's, and Department Heads, Committee Meetings, and through the IRA Website.
Objective
Mandated Reporting
Provide information and conduct research studies to comply with federal, state and other reporting mandates
Indicator
Tracking Mandated Reports
The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment will use the IRA Workorder Table to track when mandated reports, such as IPEDS, THECB reports, Petersons, NSF/NIH reports, US News and World Reports, etc., are received by the IRA Office, who they are assigned to, when they are completed and the locations of any relevant files.
Criterion
100% Completion of Mandated Reports
100% of mandated reports received by the IRA office will be completed.
Finding
100% of Mandated Reports Completed
100% of mandated reports requested of the IRA office from Federal, State, and Private agencies were completed by their required dates. While completing these mandated reports, it has come to the conclusion of the IRA Office that many of them, especially those from Private Agencies or Companies, are unnecessarily time consuming and redundant. In addition, the current method of tracking these mandated reports is inefficient, sometimes causing the need to ask the reporting organization for an extension for completing the report or survey.
Action
Continue To Complete Mandated And Important Reports And Surveys
The IRA Office will continue to complete all reports and surveys that are either mandated by Federal and/or State agencies, as well as those non-mandatory reports or surveys identified by the University as being vital. The IRA office will endeavor to identify those reports or surveys that are not necessary to complete, in order to more efficiently utilize the offices time and resources. Furthermore, over the summer, the IRA office will attempt to develop a new method of tracking mandated and important reports and surveys in order to more efficiently track progress on them and ensure that they are always completed accurately in a timely and efficient manner.
Goal
Evidence-based culture
Promote evidence-based reflection, planning, and action on behalf of the university.
Objective
Assist Various Accreditation Assessments
Provide guidance and technical assistance in defining, validating and documenting assessment processes for reaffirmation of accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools(SACS)
Indicator
Tracking Assistance SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will collect e-mails, sign-in sheets and use the Workorder Request Table to track the level and types of assistance provided to the University community in regards to the SACS reaffirmation process.
Criterion
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will satisfy all requests for assistance re. the SACS reaffirmation process.
Finding
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation Efforts
The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. Our analysis of assistance provided and the clients' satisfaction with that assistance has suggested that individual and small group coaching on demand/request has had some positive impact upon knowledge about, acceptance, performance and documentation of academic, administrative, service and support unit assessment; however, this impact has been insufficient.
As of July 1st, the IRA Office had performed 4 formal OAT Db training Sessions, as recorded on the Workorder Request Table. This marks a decrease in the number of training sessions held. The explanation for this resides with the fact that the IRA Office only conducts formal training sessions when requested by the Programs, Departments, or Colleges. That said, the IRA office continued to provided informal assistance to clients in the form of phone calls and e-mails throughout the entire year. In addition, the IRA office was heavily involved in preparing documentation for, and participating in, the SACS on-sight visit, which occurred in March, 2009. Furthermore, the IRA office has been heavily involved with efforts to improve the OAT DB, as well as providing models and assistance to the Colleges and Departments in preparation for the Universities final SACS report. In particular, the IRA office has been involved with assisting the Dean's of the individual colleges triage the status of their departments assessment efforts, and creating a number of models of performance and learning objectives, which have been provided to the Academic Departments.
Action
Continue Efforts To Assist University Clients With Assessment
As the IRA Office moves forward into 2009-2010, it plans to take a more active role in assisting the University with conducting quality assessment. The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. As a result the following changes are planned:
The Director of Institutional Research will be leading efforts to re-create an Institutional Effectiveness Committee which will assist the Deans and VPs in their "executive oversight" of assessment throughout the university. This committe will assist by annually reviewing and evaluating samples of the University units' assessment documentation in the SHSU OAT DB system and reporting to the Executives who will have the authority and the charge of leadership to address correction with the units in their divisions or colleges.
The IRA office will conduct periodic triages, with related comments and recommendation, of assessment documentation in the OAT Db by college and division and will provide this needs-assessment feedback to both the Executives and the Institutional Effectiveness Committee. The IRA Office will provide technical assistance and support for both the executives and the committee, in identifying areas of general weakness in understanding, execution or documentation of assessment processes, and will provide models, instructional materials, group workshops and other forms of support to facilitate assessment improvement, as requested by executives on behalf of their units, and by the IE committee.
In addition, the IRA office will initiate its own efforts to play a more proactive role in providing assistance to the Departments and Offices around campus in both the areas of program performance and student learning outcomes assessment. These efforts will be especially important in 2009-2010 as the university moves away from having SACS as a direct motivating factor for the need to conduct assessment of this type.
In addition, staff in the IRA office will do a better job of tracking the amount of informal assistance they provide to departments through e-mail logs and call sheets.
Goal
Provide Resources To Measure Excellence
Support the pursuit of excellence within university units by providing assistance with self-improvement assessment.
Objective
Assist Various Accreditation Assessments
Provide guidance and technical assistance in defining, validating and documenting assessment processes for reaffirmation of accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools(SACS)
Indicator
Tracking Assistance SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will collect e-mails, sign-in sheets and use the Workorder Request Table to track the level and types of assistance provided to the University community in regards to the SACS reaffirmation process.
Criterion
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will satisfy all requests for assistance re. the SACS reaffirmation process.
Finding
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation Efforts
The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. Our analysis of assistance provided and the clients' satisfaction with that assistance has suggested that individual and small group coaching on demand/request has had some positive impact upon knowledge about, acceptance, performance and documentation of academic, administrative, service and support unit assessment; however, this impact has been insufficient.
As of July 1st, the IRA Office had performed 4 formal OAT Db training Sessions, as recorded on the Workorder Request Table. This marks a decrease in the number of training sessions held. The explanation for this resides with the fact that the IRA Office only conducts formal training sessions when requested by the Programs, Departments, or Colleges. That said, the IRA office continued to provided informal assistance to clients in the form of phone calls and e-mails throughout the entire year. In addition, the IRA office was heavily involved in preparing documentation for, and participating in, the SACS on-sight visit, which occurred in March, 2009. Furthermore, the IRA office has been heavily involved with efforts to improve the OAT DB, as well as providing models and assistance to the Colleges and Departments in preparation for the Universities final SACS report. In particular, the IRA office has been involved with assisting the Dean's of the individual colleges triage the status of their departments assessment efforts, and creating a number of models of performance and learning objectives, which have been provided to the Academic Departments.
Action
Continue Efforts To Assist University Clients With Assessment
As the IRA Office moves forward into 2009-2010, it plans to take a more active role in assisting the University with conducting quality assessment. The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. As a result the following changes are planned:
The Director of Institutional Research will be leading efforts to re-create an Institutional Effectiveness Committee which will assist the Deans and VPs in their "executive oversight" of assessment throughout the university. This committe will assist by annually reviewing and evaluating samples of the University units' assessment documentation in the SHSU OAT DB system and reporting to the Executives who will have the authority and the charge of leadership to address correction with the units in their divisions or colleges.
The IRA office will conduct periodic triages, with related comments and recommendation, of assessment documentation in the OAT Db by college and division and will provide this needs-assessment feedback to both the Executives and the Institutional Effectiveness Committee. The IRA Office will provide technical assistance and support for both the executives and the committee, in identifying areas of general weakness in understanding, execution or documentation of assessment processes, and will provide models, instructional materials, group workshops and other forms of support to facilitate assessment improvement, as requested by executives on behalf of their units, and by the IE committee.
In addition, the IRA office will initiate its own efforts to play a more proactive role in providing assistance to the Departments and Offices around campus in both the areas of program performance and student learning outcomes assessment. These efforts will be especially important in 2009-2010 as the university moves away from having SACS as a direct motivating factor for the need to conduct assessment of this type.
In addition, staff in the IRA office will do a better job of tracking the amount of informal assistance they provide to departments through e-mail logs and call sheets.
Objective
Clients Understand & Use Data
SHSU decision makers will be able to use and understand the data they are provided by the IRA Office
Indicator
Number And Nature Of Repeat Clients
The IRA Office will use the Workorder Request Table to track the number of repeat clients in the 2008-2009 year as a comparison to the numbers gathered in Fiscal Year 2007 and Fiscal Year 2008. The fact the clients are making multiple data requests of our office is an indication that they are not only generally pleased with the quality of the work being done, but that they are able to both understand and use the information being given to them. In addition, analysis of the information recorded in the Workorder Table will be conducted to determine if the the IRA Office is serving clients from across the University.
Criterion
Increase In Repeat Clients
The IRA office would like to see an increase in the number of repeat clients in 2008-2009, over the previous year.
Finding
55 Repeat Clients In FY 2009
Upon conducting a detailed analysis of the Office of Institutional Research and Assessment Workorder Tracking Table, it was concluded that the IRA Office served 55 repeat clients in FY2009 as of the middle of June. This marks a 14.58% increase in repeat clients from the previous year (FY 2008) and a 48.65% increase since FY 2007. In addition, the IRA Office provided assistance to all 6 Divisions (Academic Affairs, Finance and Operations, University Advancement, Enrollment Management, Student Services, and Athletics), and nineteen of the twenty-nine Academic Departments, throughout the year.
Action
Continue To Improve Clarity Of IRA Data And Continue To Serve The Entire University
Over the last several years, the IRA Office has made great strides in improving the clarity of the data it provides to its clients. In 2009-2010, the IRA Office will continue to make improvements on how it completes and documents data requests in order to ensure we continue improving in this area. The IRA office will take greater efforts to communicate with clients before beginning their workorders in order to clarify any possible questions. Additionally, a greater emphasis will be placed on the training of IRA Graduate Analysts. They will receive extra instruction on how they should thoroughly label the data and define all variables in clients data requests, as well as how they should document their work in the IRA files. In addition, the IRA office will continue to keep detailed records of the Divisions, Colleges, Offices, Departments, and Programs to which it provides assistance in an effort to make sure it continues to complete its mission of serving the entire University. While it is not possible for the IRA office to actively solicit the Departments, it can make the services it provides more clear and better known through a variety of methods, including word of mouth, direct communication with Dean's, Vice President's, and Department Heads, Committee Meetings, and through the IRA Website.
Objective
Mandated Reporting
Provide information and conduct research studies to comply with federal, state and other reporting mandates
Indicator
Tracking Mandated Reports
The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment will use the IRA Workorder Table to track when mandated reports, such as IPEDS, THECB reports, Petersons, NSF/NIH reports, US News and World Reports, etc., are received by the IRA Office, who they are assigned to, when they are completed and the locations of any relevant files.
Criterion
100% Completion of Mandated Reports
100% of mandated reports received by the IRA office will be completed.
Finding
100% of Mandated Reports Completed
100% of mandated reports requested of the IRA office from Federal, State, and Private agencies were completed by their required dates. While completing these mandated reports, it has come to the conclusion of the IRA Office that many of them, especially those from Private Agencies or Companies, are unnecessarily time consuming and redundant. In addition, the current method of tracking these mandated reports is inefficient, sometimes causing the need to ask the reporting organization for an extension for completing the report or survey.
Action
Continue To Complete Mandated And Important Reports And Surveys
The IRA Office will continue to complete all reports and surveys that are either mandated by Federal and/or State agencies, as well as those non-mandatory reports or surveys identified by the University as being vital. The IRA office will endeavor to identify those reports or surveys that are not necessary to complete, in order to more efficiently utilize the offices time and resources. Furthermore, over the summer, the IRA office will attempt to develop a new method of tracking mandated and important reports and surveys in order to more efficiently track progress on them and ensure that they are always completed accurately in a timely and efficient manner.
Objective
Data Consistency
State and TSU System consumers of SHSU data will perceive consistency across reports and surveys in SHSU data for common key indicators and outcomes provided by the IRA Office
Indicator
Multi-source Datapoint Checks
Consistency Check with Common key-indicators used by State Agencies and TSU System. Data and reports produced by the IRA office will be compared with comparable data contained in various GUI, Nell, THECB, and IPED's reports.
Criterion
Consistency Of IRA Data
Data produced by the IRA office will not be significantly inconsistent with other date sources, when the timing and definitions of the data do not vary.
Finding
Consistency Of IRA Data
In general, the IRA Office met its objective of providing consistent data. In general, IRA Clients reported via the Client Satisfaction Survey (88.89%) that they were satisfied with the consistency of the data provided to them from the IRA Office. Throughout the year, while crosschecking its data with various other Federal, State, and University sources, the IRA Office did identify areas where its data was inconsistent; however, in each case the appropriate steps were taken to identify why the inconsistency existed (usually the result of timing differences or differences in variable definitions) and correct the issue.
Action
Continue To Improve IRA Data Consistency
As the the IRA Office moves forward into 2009-2010, it will continue to strive to maintain as consistent data as possible. To this end, the IRA Director, Analysts, and Database manager will continue to perform multiple crosschecks with outside data sources. In order to further facilitate this process, the IRA office will continue to intimately involve itself with the implementation of Banner interface. Furthermore, IRA will continue to work with Computer Services, utilizing a newly created shared Database Manager, to ensure that IRA data is consistent with other University data.
Additionally, in an effort to better measure this objective, the IRA Office will endeavor to create better indicators for measuring the consistency of IRA data.
Goal
Provide Accurate, Consistent, And Timely Data
The IRA Office will serve both the University and the broader community by providing, as requested, accurate, consistent, and timely data.
Objective
Client Satisfaction
Federal, State, TSU System, and SHSU administrative and academic consumers of SHSU data will be satisfied with the accuracy of the information provided to them by the IRA Office, its consistency with other data sources, and the timeliness of its delivery.
Indicator
SHSU Client Feedback Survey
The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment will conduct a year-end "Client Satisfaction Survey" of its clients, both internal and external, from that year. This survey will include items addressing satisfaction with accuracy, timeliness, and usefulness of data provided by the IRA Office, as well as client perceptions of the office's efforts regarding assistance with unit assessment. This survey was created by the staff of the IRA Office, and a meeting is held yearly to make sure that the survey is up-to-date.
Criterion
75% Client Satisfaction
A minimum 75% of survey respondents will not only be satisfied with the IRA office in general, but also with the accuracy, timeliness, and usefulness of the data they receive as a result of their work orders/data requests.
Finding
Client Satisfaction Survey Results
The 2008-2009 IRA Client Satisfaction Survey was sent to 99 former clients, from which was received 23 responses. This equates to a response rate of 23.23%.
The responses from the participants who were able to form an opinion are summarized as follows: 85.71% (12 of 14) felt that the IRA Office provided them adequate support to complete quality assessment.
77.78% (7 of 9) agreed that the IRA Office provided them with valuable technical assistance with accreditation assessment processes (i.e. SACS).
85.71% (12 of 14) felt that the information provided to them by the IRA Office was completely understandable.
75% (9 of 12) felt that the research/assessment information they received was completely accurate.
88.89% (8 out of 9) felt IRA results were almost always consistent with other data, or were the standard by which other data was judged.
93.33% (14 of 15) were satisfied with the time it took to receive their results.
87.5% (14 of 16) were greatly satisfied with the quality of service provided to them.
After reviewing this data, the IRA Office concluded that it has continued to meet or exceed its general requirements in regard to client satisfaction. In fact, it improved in all measures from the previous year except one, which was the area of providing clients with assistance with accreditation assessment processes. In that measure the IRA Office saw a decrease of satisfaction, but still exceeded its requirement of 75%.
Following discussion of the findings, the IRA Office has concluded that, while the results of the assessment are positive, it is dissatisfied with the manner in which this Client Satisfaction Data is being collected, and that the Office should attempt to collect this data in more of a real-time manner, and thus hopefully not only receive a higher response rate, but also better quality data.
Action
Continue To Ensure The Satisfaction Of IRA Clients
The review of the findings from the IRA Client Satisfaction Survey clearly indicated that, while the IRA office is currently meeting its standards, improvements can be made in three areas. Client satisfaction with the assistance provided to them in the area of accreditation assessment decreased. The IRA office will take steps in 2009-2010 to be more proactive with their assistance, thus hopefully increasing clients positive opinions in this area. Second, only 75% of IRA Clients perceived that their requested information was completely accurate. While this did meet the Criterion for the Objective, and was an increase over the previous year, the IRA office would like to see it climb higher. To this end, the IRA office will endeavor to implement more quality control checks to ensure the information being sent to the client is as accurate as possible. Finally, the IRA Office is not satisfied with the manner in which Client Satisfaction Data is being collected. To this end, beginning in Fall 2009, a modified version of the Client Satisfaction survey will be sent to each client upon the completion of their data request. Not only will this method hopefully yield a greater amount of client feedback, but it will also allow for the IRA office to receive real-time feedback from its clients, thus allowing our office to make any necessary changes throughout the year.
Objective
Data Consistency
State and TSU System consumers of SHSU data will perceive consistency across reports and surveys in SHSU data for common key indicators and outcomes provided by the IRA Office
Indicator
Multi-source Datapoint Checks
Consistency Check with Common key-indicators used by State Agencies and TSU System. Data and reports produced by the IRA office will be compared with comparable data contained in various GUI, Nell, THECB, and IPED's reports.
Criterion
Consistency Of IRA Data
Data produced by the IRA office will not be significantly inconsistent with other date sources, when the timing and definitions of the data do not vary.
Finding
Consistency Of IRA Data
In general, the IRA Office met its objective of providing consistent data. In general, IRA Clients reported via the Client Satisfaction Survey (88.89%) that they were satisfied with the consistency of the data provided to them from the IRA Office. Throughout the year, while crosschecking its data with various other Federal, State, and University sources, the IRA Office did identify areas where its data was inconsistent; however, in each case the appropriate steps were taken to identify why the inconsistency existed (usually the result of timing differences or differences in variable definitions) and correct the issue.
Action
Continue To Improve IRA Data Consistency
As the the IRA Office moves forward into 2009-2010, it will continue to strive to maintain as consistent data as possible. To this end, the IRA Director, Analysts, and Database manager will continue to perform multiple crosschecks with outside data sources. In order to further facilitate this process, the IRA office will continue to intimately involve itself with the implementation of Banner interface. Furthermore, IRA will continue to work with Computer Services, utilizing a newly created shared Database Manager, to ensure that IRA data is consistent with other University data.
Additionally, in an effort to better measure this objective, the IRA Office will endeavor to create better indicators for measuring the consistency of IRA data.
Goal
Sharing and Exchange
Support and assist in grass roots exchange and sharing of ideas, goals, and objectives amongst units and programs.
Objective
Assist Various Accreditation Assessments
Provide guidance and technical assistance in defining, validating and documenting assessment processes for reaffirmation of accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools(SACS)
Indicator
Tracking Assistance SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will collect e-mails, sign-in sheets and use the Workorder Request Table to track the level and types of assistance provided to the University community in regards to the SACS reaffirmation process.
Criterion
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation
The IRA office will satisfy all requests for assistance re. the SACS reaffirmation process.
Finding
Assistance With SACS Reaffirmation Efforts
The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. Our analysis of assistance provided and the clients' satisfaction with that assistance has suggested that individual and small group coaching on demand/request has had some positive impact upon knowledge about, acceptance, performance and documentation of academic, administrative, service and support unit assessment; however, this impact has been insufficient.
As of July 1st, the IRA Office had performed 4 formal OAT Db training Sessions, as recorded on the Workorder Request Table. This marks a decrease in the number of training sessions held. The explanation for this resides with the fact that the IRA Office only conducts formal training sessions when requested by the Programs, Departments, or Colleges. That said, the IRA office continued to provided informal assistance to clients in the form of phone calls and e-mails throughout the entire year. In addition, the IRA office was heavily involved in preparing documentation for, and participating in, the SACS on-sight visit, which occurred in March, 2009. Furthermore, the IRA office has been heavily involved with efforts to improve the OAT DB, as well as providing models and assistance to the Colleges and Departments in preparation for the Universities final SACS report. In particular, the IRA office has been involved with assisting the Dean's of the individual colleges triage the status of their departments assessment efforts, and creating a number of models of performance and learning objectives, which have been provided to the Academic Departments.
Action
Continue Efforts To Assist University Clients With Assessment
As the IRA Office moves forward into 2009-2010, it plans to take a more active role in assisting the University with conducting quality assessment. The SACS accreditation on-site Review Team's recommendations regarding assessment standards indicated that there was inadequate evidence that correct and systematic assessment was conducted universally thoughout the campus. This finding suggests that measures taken by the IRA Office to promote proper campus-wide assessment and its documentation were NOT effective. As a result the following changes are planned:
The Director of Institutional Research will be leading efforts to re-create an Institutional Effectiveness Committee which will assist the Deans and VPs in their "executive oversight" of assessment throughout the university. This committe will assist by annually reviewing and evaluating samples of the University units' assessment documentation in the SHSU OAT DB system and reporting to the Executives who will have the authority and the charge of leadership to address correction with the units in their divisions or colleges.
The IRA office will conduct periodic triages, with related comments and recommendation, of assessment documentation in the OAT Db by college and division and will provide this needs-assessment feedback to both the Executives and the Institutional Effectiveness Committee. The IRA Office will provide technical assistance and support for both the executives and the committee, in identifying areas of general weakness in understanding, execution or documentation of assessment processes, and will provide models, instructional materials, group workshops and other forms of support to facilitate assessment improvement, as requested by executives on behalf of their units, and by the IE committee.
In addition, the IRA office will initiate its own efforts to play a more proactive role in providing assistance to the Departments and Offices around campus in both the areas of program performance and student learning outcomes assessment. These efforts will be especially important in 2009-2010 as the university moves away from having SACS as a direct motivating factor for the need to conduct assessment of this type.
In addition, staff in the IRA office will do a better job of tracking the amount of informal assistance they provide to departments through e-mail logs and call sheets.