Institutional Assessment Plan

The guiding philosophy is that assessment properly rests with the faculty and staff who teach and work in the undergraduate and graduate programs that deliver the academic and student experience. It is the academic administration’s responsibility to assure that assessment is done in a uniform way across the institution and is rigorous, robust, reflective, and used to properly inform ongoing program development.

With that guiding philosophy, Xavier University’s assessment plan is as follows:

1. The University identifies its Core Curriculum Student Learning Outcomes
2. The University orients graduate students to Xavier’s mission and Jesuit education through the Office of the Graduate school, Center for Mission and Identity, and by faculty in their graduate programs
3. For each undergraduate and graduate program, the program area (e.g. department, office, etc.) will:
   1. Determine specific and measurable program student learning outcomes (SLOs)  
   2. Determine specific course learning outcomes  
   3. Establish direct and indirect metrics for each SLO as appropriate and to collect data for these metrics
   4. On a yearly basis, collect and analyze data, and generate an Annual report on assessment outcomes and next steps to address potential programmatic threats. This report will be uploaded into Nexus and reviewed by the Area Assessment Committees for evaluation.
   5. Review and disseminate assessment feedback from the Area Assessment Committee to the program area
   6. Departments, programs, faculty and staff  will generate a one-page report outlining how programs will address assessment processes and programmatic changes relating to the AAC feedback and submit this form back to the Area Assessment Committee (aligns with  3.e)
4. Each operational area that delivers student learning programs (e.g. each of the four colleges, Core Curriculum Assessment Committee, Enrollment Management and Student Success, Student Affairs, Library, etc.) is responsible for:
   1. Establishing an Area Assessment Committee that will be chaired by an administrator in that area and will consist of members of the area that deliver the programming. For example, a college assessment committee will be chaired by an associate dean in the college and its members will consist of faculty and/or staff from the college.  
   2. Reviewing the SLOs for each program area and ensuring that they are rigorous, robust, and measurable. In addition, the committee ensures that each program area has sufficient resources to carry out effective assessment.
   3. Evaluating each program assessment report to ensure that the assessment is rigorous, complete, and effective and providing feedback.
   4. Returning program assessment reports that are deemed unacceptable and instructing the program on how best to correct any deficiencies.
   5. Reviewing the one-page report from the academic or co-curricular areas outlining how the programs will address assessment processes and programmatic changes relating to the Area Assessment Committee feedback and providing an overview of the operational areas’ responses to the Administrative Assessment Group for their review.  
   6. Upload assessment reports deemed acceptable into the Nexus site. 
5. The Faculty Director for Assessment and Assistant Vice President for Provost Budget and Planning are responsible for:
   1. Ensuring that each area assessment committee has the resources necessary to carry out proper assessment and oversight of its program areas.
   2. Establishing  a timetable for assessment
   3. Collecting and reviewing all the program area assessment reports to ensure that assessment is done effectively and uniformly across the University.
   4. Collaborating with university administrators to prepare reports on assessments.
   5. Receiving and reviewing assessment results from the Office of Institutional Research and disseminate to appropriate programs and operational units.
   6. Collaborating and working with the Administrative Assessment Group to oversee the assessment, which includes training and disseminating information about assessment processes and procedures.
   7. With the Assistant Vice President for Provost Budget and Planning, review and address specific program resource needs identified during the assessment process.
6. The Provost’s office is responsible to ensure that a sufficient number of faculty and staff are properly trained in assessment techniques to act as mentors for program areas to carry out an effective assessment process.