1. Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research 2010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research Assessment Review Committee Report College of Nursing Mary Holland June 2, 2014 1 2013 Institutional Planning, Assessment, and Research

2. Mentoring/Review Process Structure Sub-committee of the CON Unit Assessment and Evaluation Committee Robin Webb Corbett----Graduate Faculty Claudia McCann---------Director of Assessment and Information Management Cathy McLean------------Undergraduate Faculty Erin Rogers---------------Executive Director Office of Student Services Mary Holland--------------Executive Director of Program Evaluation/Chair UA&E Committee Kristen Dreyfuss---------IACC Representative Process Met monthly from September through February Team Training in October Reviewers paired to review 5 support units and 3 educational programs for completion in December 22013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

3. 2012-13 Component Data DevelopingAcceptableProficient Outcome2418 Means of Assessment 31215 Criteria for Success 51015 Results4818 Actions Taken91011 Follow-Up to Actions Taken 13611 32013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

4. Data Visualization 42013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

5. 2012-13 Best Practices – “Closing the Loop” [can use more than one slide] Outcome: Students completing the BSN will integrate knowledge and experience to make sound judgments. Means of Assessment: Assessment of student learning rubric completed by preceptors and faculty for students in the clinical capstone course. Criteria for Success: 100% of students will receive a rating of 3 or more (4 point scale) on the critical thinking assessment of NURS 4511 clinical capstone course preceptor/faculty evaluation. 2012-2013 Results: 100% of students completing NURS 4511 received a score of 3 or above on the critical thinking section of the rubric utilized by preceptors and 52013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

6. Best Practice continued… Faculty to assess midterm and final competencies in critical thinking. The mean score for AY 2012-2013 was 3.68. Actions Taken (Use of results): Faculty noted consistency in the outcome for students at this level, and have identified additional opportunities to demonstrate and measure critical thinking behaviors using the simulation labs. Faculty and lab staff met to discuss development of additional simulation experiences for students across all levels to enhance development of critical thinking (or clinical reasoning skills). 62010 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

7. Substantive Changes (For example: All new Outcomes/MOAs or a reorganization of the assessment unit) Program/Unit: Doctor of Nursing Practice Program Description of Changes: Faculty in this practice doctorate program developed an initial assessment plan based on their program objectives. The initial MOA was the clinical scholarly project portfolio and presentation delivered in the final synthesis course. As the first cohort was admitted in fall 2014, there are no outcomes at this time. Plan was revised to reflect some formative assessment. Justification for Changes: Provided initial assessment of this developing program. 72013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research

8. Rubric and Review Process Feedback WORKED Assignment of the ARC process to a sub-committee of the Unit Evaluation an Assessment Committee was appropriate to that Committee’s function. Team approach worked in review but was time intensive. PROBLEMS Rubric not linked to assessment plan Form lengthy and confusing InfoPath FOLLOW UP Team members provided personal support and guidance to their assigned areas. 82013 Institutional Planning, Assessment & Research