Evaluation Committee Concerns: The NWCCU Evaluation Committee also noted some concerns:
• Learning Outcomes for Minors and Certificates: Learning outcomes are not available for all minors and certificates. The university should provide clearly defined outcomes that are accessible, assessable, and understandable to its various stakeholders. • Graduate Program Learning Outcomes: Learning outcomes are not available for all graduate programs. The university should provide clearly defined outcomes that are accessible, assessable, and understandable to its various stakeholders. In addition, assessment objectives, as distinct from program review objectives, should be clearly adhered to by all academic programs. • Advising Roles, Responsibilities, and Workload: The uncertainties in roles and responsibilities between the faculty and professional staff advisors have created apparent inequities in faculty workload expectations. The evaluation committee is also concerned that some students may have access to more advising resources than they need, while others are under resourced. • RCM: It should be noted that in discussions with faculty and administrative staff there were concerns voiced that they were not involved in the budget development and that the RCM model used to develop budgets “took away” funds from their units for both positions and operations and swept them into the administrative function and overhead. Faculty stated that they lost positions as a result of the RCM implementation resulting in uncompensated increases in workload. Administrative staff commented that funds were swept to central administration at the fiscal year end, preventing the ability to “accumulate” funds for larger expenditures. A review of the evidence indicates otherwise which suggests a disconnect in communication between deans and unit leaders. • Core Theme Planning: o Planning for each of the core themes should be informed by appropriately identified data that are analyzed to evaluate the accomplishment of institutional goals and objectives. Further, the core theme plans should be aligned with or integrated into a comprehensive institutional strategic plan that is tied to the core themes and assessment data. (Standards 3.B.1 and 3.B.3). o For all of the core themes, the evaluation team found that the institution has not aligned its data assessment for core theme achievement with the planning process for programs and services meant to help achieve those outcomes (Standards 4.A.3 and 4.B.2). • The Faculty Senate and the Division of Academic and Student Life (ASL) are holding open forums this term to gather faculty and staff feedback about potential enhancements to CWU’s advising structure and effectiveness. Workload will be a part of these discussions. • For the past two years, an Advising Work Group has laid the groundwork for these university- wide discussions by examining CWU’s current advising structure and effectiveness. • This work group used the CAS (Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education) standards to examine CWU’s current advising structures and to make recommendations for improvement. Summary of Actions to Date and Next Steps re: Recommendations and Concerns Advising Recommendation and Advising Roles, Responsibilities, and Workload Concern
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online