University of Colorado Division of Student Affairs CAS/Program Review

1. University of ColoradoDivision of Student AffairsCAS/Program Review Jim Davis Rosenthal, Ph.D., Director of Orientation and Assessment

2. Student Affairs Program Review History 2000 Accreditation Prep for 2010 Accreditation SAAOC formed in 2008 (Student Affairs Assessment Oversight Committee, chaired by Jim Davis Rosenthal, Director of Orientation) Dean of Students/AVC purchases CAS Self Study Guides for whole division. (Now own 2012 version) SAAOC prepares report reviewing assessment efforts since 2000. • Campus asked to place more focus on assessment • Large departments, such as Housing/Dining Services, have program review rotation schedules. • UMC (Student Union) conducts CAS Program Review in 2005 • Counseling & Psychological Services and Wardenburg Health Center have accrediting bodies and regular schedule for reaccreditation.

3. Student Affairs Program Review Recommendations Program Review for all SA Depts • CAS for departments that have CAS standards or appropriate national standard where none exists. Some departments use the model from their national organization. • No additional program review requirement for departments that have accreditation requirements because these are rigorous, but, over time, an increase in reporting/assessment of contributions to student learning outcomes and campus mission. • Modify existing CAS standards to work for departments that have none, e.g., Interactive Theatre. • Requested some departments to volunteer to pilot, with aim of having examples for small, medium and large departments. • Creation of a division-wide schedule.

5. Student Affairs Program Review CASE STUDY OFFICE OF ORIENTATION CAS PROCESS

6. Student Affairs Program Review Orientation CAS Process Establishing the Committee: a minor miracle • Attempt to represent all constituencies and a diverse committee: • Faculty member with advising experience • Advising Administrators from A&S and Engineering • Two students, both double majors in two different colleges each, so 4 colleges represented, both orientation leaders, one a participant in a special academic program for underrepresented students, both “Greek” • Assistant Director Parent Relations • Assistant Director Residence Life • Orientation professional staff • Ethnically diverse group, women overrepresented.

7. Student Affairs Program Review Orientation CAS Process Setting meeting schedule and process • One initial meeting to establish/explain process, set meeting schedule, and review of the Mission component (one of 14). • 7 biweekly meetings in spring semester, each with approximately 2-3 criteria to review. • Components were divided amongst orientation professional staff to gather documentation. • Component templates and associated documentation were provided to committee electronically for review at least one week before the discussion of those criteria. • Green process: All documentation was supplied electronically—no printed documents. Review was done using a projector. • Following each meeting, committee members were asked to complete survey on each CAS component, also electronically (via StudentVoice [now Baseline]).

8. Orientation CAS Process: Example

9. Student Affairs Program Review Orientation CAS Process Data analysis and final report: • Each component survey was exported and each criteria was coded green, orange or red, depending on the degree to which the committee felt a criteria was complete. • Based on those results and discussion notes, we identified strengths, areas for development and action items. • The final report contains a short introduction, executive summary including top three priorities emerging from the review, an explanation of the process, and the body of the document is a collection of summary documents for each component, followed by appendices with the actual survey results.

10. Orientation CAS Process: Example

11. Orientation CAS Process: Example

12. Student Affairs Program Review Orientation CAS Process Planning for External Review • External reviewers need the self-study as a basis for beginning their inquiry. • Because budgets are limited, plan for expenses within the department’s budget. Office of Student Affairs Assessment does not have budget to support external reviewers, but a department can request temporary funds through their reporting channels (may or may not be available). It’s perfectly acceptable to recruit locally to save money. • It’s helpful to give guidance to external reviewers about the goals of the review, but, don’t expect them to limit their inquiry to those goals. • A variety of models—extensive like the UMC (multi-day, many meetings with constituents, national reviewers) or more limited (1 day, local reviewers from regional campuses). Plan for travel, accommodations, meals and honoraria. • SAAOC has asked the senior leadership to be aware of the results of assessment efforts and program reviews, to promote effective practices and encourage deep inquiry, and to use program reviews especially to uncover development priorities. So far, this has proved a priority for the leadership.