Submission Timelines – Both Committees

Generally, the timeline for new courses shall be a four week process:

• Week #1 – first reading at AC.  Master syllabi should be submitted to AC Chair at least 24 hours before the meeting.
• Week #2 – first reading at CAS. 
• Week #3 – second reading at AC and hopefully approval of course.
• Week #4 – second reading at CAS.  CAS will not give final approval until AC Chair has given final approval.

Criteria for Reviewing Master Syllabi: Assessment Committee

Prologue:

The Assessment Committee (AC) is first and foremost concerned only with the learning outcomes and the means to assess those outcomes.  Thus, the AC are interested in only a few sections of the syllabus.  Additionally, only courses that are part of the General Education curricula will be brought to the whole committee.  The AC Chair or someone designated by the Chair will examine those courses that are part of a certificate or AAS degrees. 

Guidelines:

The learning outcomes are an important part of the syllabus.  They represent what the faculty believes are the essentials for a learner to master by the end of the semester.  The assessment of those learning outcomes, then, represents proof that students in the course have mastered the outcomes. 

Items that the AC is looking for:

• Key words used in the learning outcomes should reflect the level expected of the learner.  See Bloom's taxonomy for the list of key words.
• If a learning outcome reflects also a General Education (GE) Learning Outcome, then that code for the GE Learning Outcome should also be present. 
• Courses that meet a GE (as in a IAI course) requirement should have at least one of GE Learning Outcomes listed in the syllabus.
• A syllabus should have only the most important GE Learning Outcomes listed.  Having more than three is not recommended.
• The course evaluation should contain a recommended system for grades.  These can be approximate percents or point values. 
• The syllabus should include a means to assess the outcomes.  This should be a three column table that shows each learning outcome, any GE Learning Outcome, and how each will be assessed.
• A syllabus with a GE Learning Outcome should address how these outcomes will be assessed as well as reported. 
• The required writing (and reading) section should be reflected in the evaluation system and the means to assess.  For example, if writing in the form of an essay is required, then that should be mentioned in both the evaluation as well as the means to assess the students. 

In conclusion, the AC hopes to insure that a new or revised course addresses the assessment issues in the course.  While individual faculty members may still assess learning outcomes utilizing different methods from those recommended in a master course syllabi, having an assessment plan in writing helps to insure that new faculty are aware of the assessment requirements for all courses.