1 / 22

Systematic Based Evaluation

Systematic Based Evaluation. University Relations Division Institutional Effectiveness Workshop Southern University at Shreveport August 16, 2010. Mr. Martin B. Fortner, Director, PAR Ms. Eva J. Harris, IE Coordinator, PAR

jun
Download Presentation

Systematic Based Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Systematic Based Evaluation University Relations Division Institutional Effectiveness Workshop Southern University at Shreveport August 16, 2010 Mr. Martin B. Fortner, Director, PAR Ms. Eva J. Harris, IE Coordinator, PAR Ms. Linda Evans, Adm. Assistant, PAR Planning, Assessment & Research ‘10

  2. Workshop Outcomes“Conceptualization” Think Analyze Discernment Communication “Marshaling Evidence” Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  3. SACS Core Requirement 2.5“Systematic Based Evaluation” Vision 2020 Vibrant Balanced Economy With a Well-Educated Workforce and Improved Life Quality. Act 1465/ BOR Strategic Master Plan: Establish Annual Performance Targets In Support of Vision 2020, Emphasizing Student Access, Academic Quality & Matriculation Success. Southern University System:Establish Annual Performance Targets In Support of BOR Master Plan with Emphasis on Academic Excellence, Access,Achievement, Accountability & Assessment . SUSLA Institutional Strategic Plan: Establish Annual Performance Targets In Support of Act 1465, which Include Access & Success, and Collateral Strategic Initiatives Consistent With Institutional Mission . . Planning, Assessment & Research ‘10

  4. SACS Core Requirement 2.5“Systematic Based Evaluation” Divisional Strategic Plans: Establish Annual Performance Targets In Support of SUSLA’ s Strategic Initiatives, Consistent With University Mission, Intergovernmental Institutional Support Programs and Academic Program Accreditation Requirements . Institutional Effectiveness Plans: Seventy – Three Budgeted Reporting Units Required toEstablish Annual Performance Objectives In Support of SUSLA’ s Strategic Initiatives, Consistent With University Mission , Intergovernmental Institutional Support Programs and Academic Program Accreditation Requirements. (IE)Plans Must Include Evidence of Attainment Activities Related to Core Learning Competencies. Consistent With SACS Comprehensive Standards (3.3.1& 3.5.1) Planning, Assessment & Research ‘10

  5. SACS Core Requirement 2.5“Systematic Based Evaluation” Planning Budget Priorities Committee: Recommend Funding of Critical Operational Recommendations Originating form the Institutional Effectiveness Process. Operational Recommendations Critical to Attainment of SUSLA’ s Strategic Initiatives. Annual Report Card: Documented Evidence of Supporting SUSLA’S Concept of an Ongoing, Integrated, and Institutional–wide Research–Based Planning and Evaluation Processes that Incorporate a Systemic Review of Programs and Services that (a) Results in Continuing Improvement and (b) demonstrates that the SUSLA is Effectively Accomplishing its Mission. Planning, Assessment & Research ‘10

  6. "Opening the Loop" VISION Institutional Effective Plan Institutional Effective Report (9/15) (5/30) MISSION UNIVERSITY STRATEGIC PLAN "Closing the Loop" Planning & Priorities (Budget Planning) (April Meeting) DIVISIONAL STRATEGIC PLAN Annual I E (Report Card) (End of Year) December SUSLA Institutional Effectiveness Model Overarching Goals Institutional Initiatives IE Model Consistent With State Fiscal Year Planning, Assessment & Research ‘10

  7. Strategic Profile • By fiscal year 2012/13, SUSLA is projected to have an average annual enrollment approximating 2,500 students. • With the presence of student housing and enhanced student support services, SUSLA’s is projected to maintain a first time freshman retention rate of sixty-four (64) percent. • Ultimate improvements in student retention and academic persistence are expected to increase graduation completion rates. By 2012, SUSLA expects to maintain an annual average completion rate of twenty-four (24) percent. • Graduates must demonstrate competencies in Written and Oral Communications, Critical Analysis and Reasoning, Scientific and Quantitative Reasoning, Technological Competency, Leadership and Deportment. Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  8. Linking Strategic Initiatives to Institutional Effectiveness Baseline Year FY 2007/08 Through FY 2012/13 Goal I. Access and Success Establishment of an Student “Entry to Exit” Data Decision Continuum Which Assesses Effectiveness in the Areas of Enrollment, Retention, and Completion Rates. Goal II. Ensure Quality and Accountability Assessment of Institutional Processes Supporting Student Learning and Successful Academic Matriculation. Performance Documentation: Baseline Data Reports: Statewide Student Profile Reporting System Process Improvement: Institutional Effectiveness Plans & Reports Feedback Linkages:Annual Report Card on Strategic Initiatives Planning Priority Budget Committee Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  9. Strategic Initiative IStudent Access(’06/07-09/10) • Environmental Profile (Condition) • Open Admission Postsecondary Institution • Predominate African American & Female Population • Fifty Percent Twenty Five Years or Older • Significant Population Academically At Risk • Assumptions(Factors Affecting Performance) • Market Sensitive Academic Programs • Improved Recruitment & Enhanced Instructional Relevance • Improved Efficiency: Admission, Enrollment & Persistence • Performance (How Did We Do?) • 26 Percent Enrollment Increase From ‘06/07 Baseline • Significant Increase Between ‘08/09 & ‘09/10 • Similar Increases for Minority Enrollment Planning, Assessment & Research ‘10

  10. Headcount Enrollment ( FY 2006/07 - 2011/12) Source : BOR Statewide Student Profile Report/PAR ‘10

  11. Minority Headcount Enrollment ( FY 2006/07 - 2011/12) 9/10 Revised Source : BOR Statewide Student Profile Report/PAR ‘10

  12. Strategic Initiative IIStudent Success(’06/07-09/10) • Environmental Profile (Condition) • Academically At Risk Student Population • Learning Defects With Emphasis on Developmental Ed. • Time to Degree High For Certificate & Associate Awards • Reduced State Financing • Assumptions(Factors Affecting Performance) • Presence of Student Housing in 08/09 • IE Emphasis on Instructional Competencies & Persistence • SACS/QEP: Structured Advisement Affecting Student Success • Performance (How Did We Do?) • Retention Rate Above National Comm. College Average • Certificate/Associate Degree Performance Highest in State • Grad Act Success Projections Revised Downward in 09/10 Planning, Assessment & Research ‘10

  13. First Time Freshman Retention ( FY 2006/07 - 2011/12) Source : BOR Statewide Student Profile Report/PAR ‘10

  14. 3/6 Year Graduation Rate ( FY 2006/07 - 2011/12) 09/10 Revised Source : BOR Statewide Completers Report/PAR ‘10

  15. Granting Resources & Autonomy for Diploma (GRAD ACT 2010) Student Success (Data Indicators: Targeted, Tracked, & Descriptive) - Retention, Graduation Rates, Increase Degree Attainment Productivity - High School Partnerships, Number of Students Enrolled & SCHs Generated - Performance: Licenses/Certification Exams, Number of Workkeys Certificates Articulation/Transfer (Data Indicators: Tracked & Descriptive) - Transfer Student Retention Rates - Community College Referral Program for Non Qualifying Students (Selective Adm.) - Matriculation of Transfer Students Enroll Degree Program (Assoc/Baccalaureate) Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  16. Granting Resources & Autonomy for Diploma (GRAD ACT 2010) Work Force & Eco. Dev. (Data Indicators: Tracked, & Descriptive) - Number of Program Elimination/Modification - Number of Distance Learning Course & Program Offerings With Headcount - Employment and Job Placement Rates Institutional Effectiveness & Accountability (Data Indicators: Tracked) - Discretion to Establishing Non Resident Tuition Rates - Centers of Excellence & Specialized Partnerships (Eco Stakeholders & Peers) - Exceeding State Average for Graduates and Academic Completers Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  17. Granting Resources & Autonomy for Diploma (GRAD ACT 2010) Reporting Requirements (Data Indicators: Descriptive) - Number of Students By Classification, Inst./Non Inst. Staff & Ratios - Number of Staff in Administrative Areas With Organization Charts - Salary Information of Staff in Administrative Areas Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  18. System: Southern University SystemInstitution: Southern University at ShreveportDate: August 9, 2010GRAD Act Template for Establishing Initial Performance Agreement Baseline, Benchmarks, and 6-Year Targets*Baseline will be submitted in the first Annual Report.**insert each applicable award level in a separate row, expand with additional rows if necessary.

  19. Degree Production Projections FY 2009/10 - 2015/16 Assumption : 5% Growth Rate From ‘08/09 Aggregate Baseline 313 Source: BOR Statewide Completers File /PAR ‘10

  20. Division of University Relations Strategic Plan (FY 2009/10- 2012/13) • Goal I: To develop a creative Marketing and Communication Strategy that positively impacts enrollment at Shreveport by 5% from the 2009/10 baseline year of 3,014 to 3,165fall2012/13. • Goal II: To implement a series of evaluation systems designed to facilitate strategic planning, accountability, institutional effectiveness, and continuous process improvement and to annually educate faculty and staff in reference to the aforementioned framework. • Goal III: Initiate and support efforts that will increase the number of annual donors by ten (10) percent and corporate gifts and private donations by five (5) percent annually. Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  21. Institutional Effective Planning & Reporting Linking Strategic Initiatives Direct/Collateral Relationships Strategies for Attainment Barriers Affecting Attainment Institutional Implications Performance Assessment Indicators Communicating Results Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

  22. Dialogue With Reporting Units Planning, Assessment, & Research ‘10

More Related