Faculty utilize three assessment instruments to gather, analyze and articulate SLO assessment for the purpose of improving learning and student success.
Course SLO Reports
Course SLO reports are developed by faculty to document, analyze, and report improvements focused on student success at the course level.
Curriculum maps are developed by faculty and represent where students are given the opportunity to achieve the outcomes, from introduction to mastery, as they proceed through the curriculum. Curriculum maps align individual courses with program outcomes. The process of analyzing the level at which a course teaches to an outcome provides a meaningful review of outcomes and how they align with required courses.
Program review at Peninsula College is framed in Academic Unit Program Reviews (AUP-R). Developed annually, faculty demonstrate mission fulfillment through alignment of program SLOs with course improvements, Area of Study SLOs, lagging indicators and core theme objectives. Data is used to improve student learning and inform strategic planning.
Assessment & Improvement Plan
Completed in late fall, faculty analyze and develop improvements from the previous year.
- PROGRAM ALIGNMENT TO THE COLLEGE MISSION: From the faculty perspective, highlights of how the program, core classes the program review process support the mission of the college.
- CORE THEME OBJECTIVE: Core themes comprise essential elements that collectively encompass the PC mission (Education, Opportunity, Enrichment). PC establishes objectives for each core theme and identifies meaningful assessable and verifiable indicators of achievement that form the basis for evaluating accomplishment of the objectives of its core themes.
- IMPROVEMENTS: Loop closing efforts and improvements based on previous year assessment results and improvement plans.
- LAGGING INDICATORS: Lagging indicators are the big goals affected by what is done to influence the leading indicators such as course success rate.
- PROGRAM STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES: Measurable outcomes at the Area of Study level.
- METHOD OF ASSESSSMENT & CRITERIA: Qualitative or quantitative assessment including course report data, leading indicators or measures of effectiveness of changes from previous year improvement plan.
Analysis of Assessment Results
The analysis of assessment results is completed after the Course SLO Report data has been submitted from the previous year. In early fall, faculty complete the results and analysis section of the AUP-R. Planned improvements are added to the successive year plan and assessed according the to the program level outcome.
- RESULTS: SLO assessment data including direct evidence of student learning and leading indicator data. Leading indicator data can be disaggregated by equity views such as race, gender, and low income.
- ANALYSIS/NARRATIVE OF RESULTS: Faculty are responsible for closing the loop on their own data within their own programs. This includes analysis and assessment of initiatives (improvements) undertaken and a description of closing the loop. Also includes celebration of achievements in student learning.
- IMPROVEMENT PLAN: Narrative of what has been accomplished and what needs to be done to improve program. Include how results are used for improvement and budget. Improvement plan will become Improvements for the next year.
- NEW FUNDING: Description of new funding requests required to improvement plan including cost
Dr. Mia Boster
Dean for Workforce Education
Director of College Analytics and Institutional Research