Standard Number 3.3.1: The institution identifies expected outcomes for its educational programs and its administrative and educational support services; assesses whether it achieves these outcomes; and provides evidence of improvement based on analysis of those results.  

Full Compliance

With the adoption of a new strategic planning process (Level I Strategic Plan was completed in 2000), centralized coordination of institutional planning and assessment at Georgia Southern University was initiated. While Level I establishes the overall direction of the University, Level II plans further the strategic goals articulated in the Strategic Plan. These goals include academic distinction, student-centered university, technological advancement, transcultural opportunities, private and public partnerships, and physical environment. Level III plans then translate the goals of the institution to department specific goals and objectives. These Level III plans are tied to Annual Reports.

In 2001, the Office of Strategic Research and Analysis coordinated the creation of an Institutional Effectiveness Assessment Inventory, compiling a list of all assessment tools/techniques currently employed by every reporting unit on campus. Currently, each reporting unit on campus is responsible for producing an annual Institutional Effectiveness Plan (IEP). Each plan must:

1. relate the unit’s mission to the mission of the University;
2. identify learning and programmatic outcomes for the reporting unit;
3. assign responsibility for the outcome;
4. identify assessment processes used to measure progress related to that outcome;
5. present results of the assessment and level of achievement; and
6. list changes made as a result of the assessment.

Commencing in 2004-05, the creation, refinement, and maintenance of these plans will be coordinated by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Strategic Planning, a new unit reporting directly to the President.

In addition to these Institutional Effectiveness Plans, the University annually compiles a summary of achievements related to its mission and strategic objectives (outcomes) into an Annual Report, which is shared with the Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia. These Annual Reports enable the University System to evaluate progress related to outcomes. ( See University System of Georgia Annual Reports.)

Furthermore, as part of the strategic planning process and the regular cycle of program assessment, Georgia Southern made the decision to review ALL academic and non-academic campus programs (over 200) within the same time frame. This ambitious project was completed within a period of 18 months and was consistent with Board of Regents policies regarding the cyclical review of all academic programs. Because of the number and diversity of programs across campus (130 academic programs, 56 business and finance programs, 17 student affairs programs, and 10 advancement and marketing/communications programs), the review process was a strenuous exercise in coordination and planning. First, programs within each division had to be identified as entities that would be reviewed. Second, program members prepared a self-assessment based on appropriate variations of four criteria: centrality to the University’s mission, publics served, viability, and quality. Third, deans and directors across campus provided a separate assessment of all programs within their sphere of responsibility. Fourth, programs were reviewed by university-level “blue ribbon panels” (composed of faculty, staff, and students), one for each division, charged with making an impartial non-parochial university-level review. Fifth, the review process and the recommendations in each division were reviewed by the Strategic Planning Council to ensure the integrity of the process. Sixth, programs were reviewed by each divisional vice president. Seventh, programs were reviewed by the President.

After each level of review, programs would receive one of four recommendations: enhance (programs that with additional resources have the greatest potential to help the University achieve its strategic ambitions), maintain (healthy programs that can be expected to continue to provide strong support for the strategic planning initiatives with resource requirements consistent with current levels of function), reduce (programs that can succeed with fewer resources), and eliminate (programs which do not advance the University’s agenda). The ultimate goal of program review was to ensure that the University remains focused on its strategic objectives while maintaining conscientious stewardship of its human, physical, and financial resources. The results of the reviews were communicated to the campus in Fall 2002. Board of Regents policies require that all academic undergraduate programs be reviewed at least once every seven years and that all academic graduate programs be reviewed once every ten years. In response, the University has developed a cyclical program review schedule. Georgia Southern has taken the additional step of periodically reviewing all non-academic programs. The criteria for non-academic programs include: centrality to mission, quality/productivity, demand, and cost effectiveness.

Several programmatic enhancements have been implemented as a consequence of regular periodic program review of both academic and non-academic programs.

• The Enrollment Management Council, responding to the results of review of the admissions operation, regularly revises admissions criteria, recruitment strategies, and retention efforts to enable Georgia Southern to effectively recruit, admit, enroll, and retain the caliber of students the University seeks for its programs.
• Measurements of usage patterns and student satisfaction surveys informed the design of the Phase II expansion of the Recreation and Activities Center (RAC).
• Based on its program review results, the College of Education merged 10 separate Education Specialist programs into one new interdisciplinary Education Specialist program in Teaching and Learning.
• The College of Information Technology was established based upon the growing demand for programs in these fields and the viability of similar programs in operation across campus. Students in this College participate in a curriculum that allows them to specialize in computer science, information systems, or information technology. Furthermore, collaborative efforts between colleges have been increased based upon program review results, leading to direct benefits for IT students who can now choose between 24 different areas of specialty that involve coordinated course work across colleges.
• Based upon program review results, which have shown that retention and on-campus housing are directly proportional, the University decided to increase the number of students it is able to house on campus. A Housing Master Plan has been developed to guide expansion in this area with an ultimate goal of housing 40% of the University’s students on campus.

See the Board of Regents Policy Manual, § 205, Institutional Effectiveness: Planning and Assessment—which mandates that each institution within the University System establish a strategic planning process and maintain a current strategic plan in which institutional priorities are identified and through which the institution’s mission is implemented. See also Board of Regents Policy Manual, § 205.01, Comprehensive Academic Program Review—which stipulates that each institution within the University System conduct academic program review on a periodic basis consistent with efforts in institutional effectiveness and strategic planning.

Board of Regents Policy Manual, § 205.01.