Criteria for Review 4.4

The institution employs a deliberate set of quality assurance processes at each level of institutional functioning, including new curriculum and program approval processes, periodic program review, ongoing evaluation, and data collection.  These processes involve assessments of effectiveness, track results over time, and use the results of these assessments to revise and improve structures and processes, curricula, and pedagogy.

Links to Evidence and Related Topics

• Associated Students Annual Reports
• 95% of Departments have reported that they have mission statements, Learning Goals and Student Learning Outcomes in place and use these for assessment purposes. These materials are now being collected by AURA collected and are available for review.
• CSU, Chico Continuous Quality Improvement Reports (in progress)
• Curriculum review procedures are in place in every department and for every academic program. The levels of review include department/program committee review; college curriculum committee review; review at the level of the Provost's Office, together with reviews by academics from off-campus.  The present template used to structure the content of these reviews is available for review.
• First Year Experience has initiated a process of evaluating campus-wide evidence. Their reports will be available shortly.
• The campus has undertaken broad-based assessment of curriculum, course assessment, and learning initiatives through college-based groups (college curriculum committees. The Writing Center in HFA, a spring 2003 Need Assessment Study sponsored by BSS) and CELT initiatives and workshops. At least one college (BSS) reported on the Student-centered research that it sponsored and had this information disseminated to all BSS Chairs and discussed in EC. Ongoing assessment of both CELT initiatives and college-based initiatives is being evaluated.
• General Education revision process:  In recent years a faculty task force worked in conjunction with the Academic Senate to produce a new Executive Memorandum (EM 99-05) which was released in February of 1999.  Subsequently an MOU was produced for the "Administration of General Education policy" in May of 2001 and revised once in November 2002. This memo lays out the structure and the substantive concerns of General Education review and is in the process of being used for the most recent program and course reviews.   Provost and Academic Senate are currently working together to re-examine this process.
• Educational Policies and Programs Committee (EPPC)
• General Education Advisory Committee (GEAC)
• Guidelines for Proposals for Significant Changes in Curriculum
• Guidelines for Proposals for Minor Changes in Curriculum
• Guidelines for Proposals New or Changes to Existing Credential Programs    
• Guidelines for Proposals New Degree Programs 
• Guidelines for Proposals New Options and Advising Patterns  
• Guidelines for Proposals New Minors 
• Guidelines for Proposals New Certificates 
• Guidelines for Proposals For Addition, Deletions and Changes in Courses
• Guidelines for Undergraduate Five Year Program Review
• Guidelines for Graduate Five Year Program Review
• Institutional Research
• NSSE
• Periodic Surveys/Public Image Surveys
• Student Affairs Annual Goals and Outcomes
• University Budget Committee (UBC)