SACS Principles of Accreditation
Red Back Arrow
Report
Red Forward Arrow
Back to Sections    Close Window

Section II: COC Core Requirement

2.5 The institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that

(a) results in continuing improvement and

(b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission.



OFF-SITE REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMENTS

The institution demonstrates initiated processes that will enable it to engage in ongoing, integrated, and institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that incorporate a systematic review of programs and services that (a) results in continuing improvement, and (b) demonstrates that the institution is effectively accomplishing its mission. The institution’s processes have been strengthened greatly over the past four years and the institution documents a commitment to continuing improvement of its processes and the use of their results.  However, the institution is still developing those processes and has not yet compiled results that may be used to document continuing improvements.  The institution needs to document that it has attained results from its institutional effectiveness efforts and used the results for continuous improvements.



JUDGMENT OF COMPLIANCE

Compliance.

NARRATIVE/JUSTIFICATION FOR JUDGMENT OF COMPLIANCE

Texas A&M International University engages in university-wide planning and evaluation processes that are integrated and continuous as well as based on the Institutional Mission.

The University's planning and evaluation processes are in line with the Institutional Mission. Contributions are made by a broad spectrum of members of the University community. The main components of the process are illustrated below:

            1. Strategic Planning and Budgeting
            2. Institutional Goals
              Performance Indicators
              Degree/Unit Plans
            3. Campus-wide Implementation
            4. Assessment Activities
            5. Data Collection and Analysis
            6. Evaluation of Outcomes by Appropriate Entities
            7. Improvements Proposed Based on Outcomes
            8. Implementation of Adjustments or Modification

To complete the process, each department re-evaluates their goals, identifies resources needed for the following cycle and communicates these needs to the appropriate department head for inclusion in the budgeting process.

Integral to the process is the University Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan Committee, appointed by the President, represents a wide variety of constituents from the institution. Members of the committee charged with developing the 2001-2005 Strategic Plan are listed in the following table.


2001-2005 Strategic Plan
Committee Members

Name

Title

Michelle Alexander

Vice President for Institutional Development and Committee Co-Chair

Dr. Norma Cantu

Professor of English

Sonia Casasnovas

Director of Grant Resources and Strategic Plan Editor

Dr. Faridoun Farrokh

Professor of English and Associate Provost

Jose Garcia

Vice President for Finance and Administration

Yolanda Garcia

Director of Student Counseling

Sara Gutierrez

Classified Staff Advisory Council Chair

Dr. Juan Homero Hinojosa

Associate Professor of Physics and Dean, College of Science and Technology

Dr. J. Charles Jennett

President

Dr. Ray M. Keck, III

Associate Professor of Spanish, and Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs

Dr. John Kohl

Professor of Management and Dean,
College of Business Administration

Barbara Lunce

University Registrar

Elizabeth N. Martinez

Director of Human Resources

Jose Moctezuma

Director of Budget, Payroll and Grants

Betty Momayezi

Executive Director of Student Life

Dr. Jerry Thompson

Professor of History and Dean,
College of Arts and Humanities

Mary Treviño

Associate Vice President of Student Services

Dr. Rosa Maria Vida

Professor of Educational Administration and Dean, College of Education

Lakshmana Viswanath

Director of Computer and Telecommunication Services

Rodney Webb

Director of the Killam Library

This group developed the internal process and time line for completing the University's 2001-2005 Strategic Plan. The process incorporated all areas and allowed all members of the University community the opportunity to review the document and provide suggestions and comments. The Strategic Planning process served to focus planning efforts, guide decision-making, and establish indicators for assessing the quality and direction of the work of the institution. 

Through this planning process, the University identified goals and priorities to provide educational access and excellence for the population of the service area and beyond. Long-term goals were clustered into six categories, with goals stated as follows:

  1. Infrastructure:
    To ensure that Phase III of the campus is completed and funds are secured for the construction of Phase IV: a science laboratory building, a support services building, Phase II of the Athletic Complex, as well as the required infrastructure and additional parking to support the facilities. Seek alternative means of non-state external funding for special facilities such as, but not limited to, an early childhood center and an astronomy observatory. Also ensure that the infrastructure includes the latest advances in teaching technologies and information systems.
  2. Academic:
    Ensure mechanisms are in place for (1) the recruitment, admission, advisement, retention, and graduation of qualified students; (2) the expansion of programs at all levels including educational collaborations; and (3) achieving accreditation from national, professional, or specialized accrediting bodies.
  3. Human Resources:
    A well-prepared faculty and staff for the continued delivery of an excellent program to students; this includes faculty and staff development.
  4. Research:
    To ensure that standards of excellence in faculty, staff, and student research are maintained, strengthened, and expanded, especially concerning the Texas-Mexico Border Region and international issues.
  5. Service:
    To ensure that standards of excellence in service are maintained, strengthened, and expanded in the areas such as education, health, the environment, and in international initiatives.
  6. Historically Under-utilized Business (HUB):
    The University is fully committed to its “Good Faith Effort” to increase the participation of Historically Under-utilized Business (HUBs). The University will assure that qualified minority and women-owned business are included in the procurement and contracting process. It is the University’s goal to create an environment that will enhance HUB participation and works aggressively to identify, educate, and assist HUB vendors in a manner designed to encourage participation.

The University measures the outcomes of these identified goals each year. The following table is an example of what has been accomplished and where we are now (2005):

Goal

Outcome

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

I

Percent of facilities completed and available for occupancy

Projected

60%

80%

100%

100%

100%

Actual

60%

80%

100%

100%

100%

I

Percent of funding received for Phase IV

Projected

------

100%

------

------

------

Actual

------

100%

------

------

------

I

Amount of funds expended for library resources in support of current and new degree programs, faculty research, and public service programs (in thousands)

Projected

$789.1

$849.8

$915.8

$987.8

$1066.2

Actual $737.4 $854.8 $858.0 $1,056.2 $904.7

I

Amount of funds expended for continued library automation (in thousands)

Projected

$122

$129

$136

$140

$145

Actual
$68
$139
$70
$66
$56

I

Percent of external support received for areas of prioritized and identified need

Projected

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

Actual
64%
65%
31%
31%

I

Percent of publicized University events

Projected

80%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Actual

80%

100%

100%

100%

100%

II

Percentage of students who apply and are accepted

Projected

49%

53%

53%

55%

58%

Actual 49.5% 55.1% 62.4% 62.4%  

II

Percentage of accepted students who enroll

Projected

57%

60%

62%

65%

68%

Actual
67.4%
63.1%
59.5%
62%

II

Percentage of increase in financial aid available and provided to students

Projected

5%

5%

10%

10%

10%

Actual
88.73%
41.66%
1.35%
3.7%

II

Retention rate of first-time, full-time, degree seeking freshmen students after one academic year

Projected

63%

65%

67%

67%

70%

Actual
66%
64%
67%
63%

II

Percent of students involved in extracurricular activities

Projected

5%

10%

10%

10%

10%

Actual 18.2% 15.7% 16.2% 15.8%  

II

Pass rate of state education ExCET exam

Projected

75%

77%

80%

80%

80%

Actual
66%
72%
87%
84%

II

Percent of education classes containing ExCET proficiencies

Projected

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Actual

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

II

State licensure pass rate of Nursing graduates

Projected

90%

95%

100%

100%

100%

Actual
86%
100%
92%
94%
 

II

Percent of nursing classes containing nursing exam proficiencies

Projected 100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

Actual

100%

100%

100%

100%

100%

II

Number of degree proposals approved for implementation

Projected

3

3

2

2

2

Actual
4
3
3
3
 

II

Number of joint programs approved for implementation

Projected

1

1

1

1

1

Actual
0
0
0
1

II

Number of distance learning courses

Projected

5

5

8

8

10

Actual
0
0
1
11
22

II

Number of degree programs with additional accreditation

Projected

2

3

3

3

4

Actual
0
0
2
2

II

Fall semester 12th class day enrollment

Projected

3575

3790

4020

4260

4473

Actual
3372
3724
4078
4269

II

Fall semester 12th class day semester credit hours generated

Projected

31530

34868

36100

38400

40257

Actual
32455
36726
39770
42503

IV

External/sponsored research funds as a percent of state appropriations

Projected

3%

4%

5%

5%

5%

Actual
.85%
.54%
.71%
.19%

IV

Percent increase in funding for operation of institutes and centers

Projected

5%

5%

10%

10%

10%

Actual 4.8% -5.9% 30.1% 8.7%  

IV

Number of contacts/meetings among TAMIU, Texas and Mexican librarians

Projected

2

2

3

3

4

Actual
4
3
4
5
3

IV

Number of collaborative projects and grants

Projected

6

8

8

10

10

Actual
32
30
11
40
26

VI

Percent of procurement and contracts awarded to HUBs

Projected

40%

40%

40%

40%

40%

Actual 14.41% 8.98% 25.72% 37.19%  

Planning and evaluation initiatives currently underway at the University include revision of the Institutional Mission and the 2006-2010 Strategic Plan. The Institutional Mission is scheduled to be reviewed at The Texas A&M University System Board of Regents meeting on March 24, 2005. The Strategic Plan is currently being updated and should be completed by the end of March 2005. Members of the committee charged with developing the 2006-2010 Strategic Plan are listed in the following table:

2006-2010 Strategic Plan
Committee Members

Name

Title

Dr. Susan Baker

Professor of Nursing and Director of the Dr. F.M. Canseco School of Nursing

Dr. Mohamed A. Ben-Ruwin

Associate Professor of Political Science and President of the Faculty Senate

Dr. Jeff Brown

Associate Professor of Psychology and Director of the Graduate Studies

Dr. Jeff Cass

Associate Professor of English and Associate Provost

Dr. Tom Corti

Vice President for Student Affairs

Ron Eichorst

Comptroller

Jose Garcia

Vice President for Finance & Administration

Dr. Steven Garippa

Director of Athletics

Leebrian Gaskins

Interim Associate Vice President for Information Technology

Dr. Humberto Gonzalez

Associate Professor of Education and Dean, College of Education

Dr. Terence P. Hannigan

Director of Student Counseling Services

Steve Harmon

Director of Public Affairs and Information Services

Candy Hein

Vice President for Institutional Advancement

Cristina Hernandez

Director of Grant Resources

Dr. Ray M. Keck, III

Professor of Spanish and University President

Dr. Dan Jones

Professor of English and Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs

Fred Juarez

Director of Budget, Payroll, Grants & Contracts

Elizabeth N. Martinez

Associate Vice President for Administration

Veronica G. Martinez

Director of Institutional Effectiveness

B. J. Mathieu

Executive Director of Development

Betty Momayezi

Executive Director of Student Life

Dr. Nasser Momayezi

Professor of Political Science and Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

Mario Peña

University Webmaster

Sandra Peña

Director of Human Resources

Minita Ramirez

Executive Director of Enrollment Services

Oscar Reyna

University Registrar

Dr. Jacky So

Professor of Finance and Dean, College of Business Administration

Mary Treviño

Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs

David VerMilyea

Director of International Student Services

Dr. Frances Waters

Associate Professor of Political Science and Public Administration and Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences

Rodney Webb

Director of Killam Library

Institutional Effectiveness has always been an important part of the University culture; however, prior to the creation of a designated department, this responsibility was assigned to the Special Assistant to the President. Unfortunately, because of tremendous change and growth, there were not enough opportunities to dedicate a concerted effort to this process. The Office of Institutional Effectiveness was therefore established as a campus based initiative in Fall 2000 and has become an integral part of the University's administrative structure. This department serves as the cornerstone for the assessment and evaluation processes across campus by providing services and resources for the assessment of academic programs and administrative and educational support units through the use of national and locally developed surveys, instruments, and examinations.

In an effort to establish a comprehensive and uniform assessment process across the institution, Dr. James Nichols and Karen Nichols of Institutional Effectiveness Associates were invited to visit the campus in June 2002 to present workshops on implementing assessment and institutional effectiveness activities. The entire campus community benefited from these workshops because they established a sense of understanding of the importance of conducting assessment activities on a consistent basis, documenting these activities, and using the data to implement change and improvements. The report templates provided by the Nichols allowed the institution to develop and implement its own model for a uniform reporting process.

The University has implemented an institution-wide process of assessment and evaluation that engages all degree programs, administrative, and educational support units. In July 2002, the University Assessment Committee (UAC) was established by the University President with a charge of reviewing outcomes and measurements of each academic program and administrative and educational support unit and assisting them in initiating and using the assessment process effectively. The UAC consists of fourteen faculty and administrators from all colleges/school and divisions.

University Assessment Committee Members
2003-2005

Dr. Carol Waters
Committee Chair,
Associate Professor of Political Science and Public Administration,
Associate Dean of College of Arts and Sciences
Dr. Ron Anderson Associate Professor of Education, College of Education
Dr. Susan Baker Professor of Nursing,
Director of Dr. F.M. Canseco School of Nursing
Dr. Jeffrey Cass Associate Professor of English, College of Arts and Sciences
Associate Provost
Conchita Hickey

Executive Director,
Programs for Academic Support and Enrichment

Dr. Ned Kock Associate Professor of International Business, College of Business Administration
Interim Chair, Department of Management Information Systems and Decision Science
Dr. Juan Lira Regents Professor of Education, College of Education,
Chair, Department of Curriculum and Instruction
Veronica Martinez Director of Institutional Effectiveness
Betty Momayezi Executive Director of Student Life
Dr. Dan Mott Associate Professor of Zoology, College of Arts and Sciences
Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
Chair, Department of Biology and Chemistry
Dr. Bonnie Rudolph Associate Professor of Psychology, College of Arts and Sciences
Director of Counseling Psychology
Dr. Chen-Han Sung Professor of Mathematics, College of Arts and Sciences
Chair, Department of Mathematical and Physical Sciences
Mary Treviño Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs
Director of Title V Program
Rodney Webb Director of Killam Library

The four subcommittees to the UAC allow members the time and ability to review the reports, give expertise to a specific area. The four subcommittees include:

Subcommittee 1: Degree Programs of the College of Arts and Sciences; as well as General Education.

Subcommittee 2: Degree Programs of the College of Business Administration, the College of Education and the Canseco School of Nursing.

Subcommittee 3: Administrative Support Units which include the divisions of Academic Affairs, Finance and Administration, Student Affairs, Institutional Advancement, Public Affairs, Special Programs and research centers such as the Center for the Study of Western Hemispheric Trade and the Texas Center for Border Economics and Enterprise Development.

Subcommittee 4: Educational Support Units which include the Killam Library, the division of International Programs, and the division of Programs for Academic Support and Enrichment (Developmental Studies, Testing, Writing Center, etc.)

Membership in the University Assessment Committee is staggered and rotated on a two-year cycle to allow opportunities for other faculty and administrators to participate and learn about the assessment process. The UAC meets regularly during the fall and spring semesters and on an as-needed basis during the summer to review and discuss all issues pertinent to the University assessment process. (UAC Minutes)

The Organizational Chart reflects the current structure and reporting pattern of the University. The assessment process is in accord with this structure.

A uniform assessment reporting process and template allows for the efficient use of time, information, and resources. Informational sessions are conducted with all employees involved in the assessment process to explain the format and report submission process. Academic programs submit their assessment plans each semester; while administrative and educational support units submit their plans on an annual (September to August) basis. At the beginning of the academic year, all academic departments meet and review their educational programs. Faculty members of each department lead the assessment efforts in their areas. In a similar fashion, all administrative and educational support units review and revise their assessment procedures. All assessment plans are in line with the Institutional Mission as well as the college/school and department unit mission.

From the initial implementation of the uniform assessment reporting process to the present time, a great deal of progress has been made in the development of effective assessment plans. The UAC has worked diligently to provide guidance and leadership to the University community and to foster a better understanding and appreciation of the importance of the assessment process. Each year, the UAC reviews the effectiveness of the assessment process and the templates used for reporting, and makes modifications and improvements to the process as needed.

The current method for submitting assessment plans is outlined below:

  • Each degree program and administrative/educational support unit visits the Institutional Effectiveness (IE) web page to obtain the appropriate template, either Program Assessment Form for academic programs or Unit Assessment Form for administrative and educational support units. The template is a user-friendly Microsoft Word document that is easy to access and complete.

  • Once the template is completed, the degree program or administrative/educational support unit coordinator sends the assessment plan as an e-mail attachment. All e-mail correspondence pertaining to assessment is sent to a general e-mail address, assessment@tamiu.edu, which routes a copy of each message to all UAC members, ensuring an even flow of communication.

  • Once the assessment plans are submitted, they are loaded to WebCT. A WebCT directory identifies the plan as an academic program or an administrative/educational support unit plan.

  • Once the plan is on WebCT, the UAC subcommittee members review the plan and post their comments.

  • After reviewing the format and content of the plan, the UAC recommends to either post the plan on the IE web page or send the plan back to the appropriate coordinator for revisions. Once all plans have been reviewed by the UAC, they are posted on the IE web page to allow departments to have easy access to them.

  • At the end of the semester or fiscal year, depending on which timeline applies, the departments submit their completed plans (with use of results) to the UAC for review. Upon final review of the completed plans by the UAC, all department plans are posted to the IE web page. This process allows departments to view their current plans as well as all the previous completed assessment reports.

The IE web page now serves as the central repository of all assessment materials, including forms, plans, and reports. This approch provides the opportunity to learn about assessment methods and instruments used by other University departments. The Assessment Plan Reporting Process illustrated in the chart below:

A timeline is distributed by the UAC to the University community with specific information on the activity and the due date. A sample of the timeline is provided below:

Texas A&M International University
University Assessment Committee (UAC)
Fiscal Year 2005 Assessment Plans Timeline

Academic Reports

Fall 2004 Semester  
  Preliminary Plans
By October 15, 2004
    Objectives (3 minimum)
Means of Assessment (1 or 2 per objective)
Criteria for Success (Benchmark)
       
  Review of plans by UAC Subcommittees October 20 to 28, 2004
       
 

UAC Subcommittees Feedback to UAC
and Departments

By October 29, 2004
       
  Revised Plan from Departments Submitted to
UAC Subcommittees
By November 15, 2004
       
  Final Plan Submitted to UAC By January 31, 2005
   

Summary of Data
Use of Results

 
       
  UAC Reviews Final Plans First week of February 2005
       
Spring 2005 Semester  
  Preliminary Plans By March 15, 2005
   

Objectives (3 minimum)
Means of Assessment (1 or 2 per objective)
Criteria for Success (Benchmark)

 
       
  Review of plans by UAC Subcommittees March 22 to 29, 2005
       
  UAC Subcommittees Feedback to UAC
and Departments
By March 30, 2005
       
  Revised Plan from Departments Submitted to
UAC Subcommittees
By April 15, 2005
       
  Final Plan Submitted to UAC By September 15, 2005
   

Summary of Data
Use of Results

 
       
  UAC Reviews Final Plans Last week of September 2005
       
Administrative/Educational Support Units  
       
Fiscal Year 2004-2005  
     
  Preliminary Plans By October 15, 2004
   

Objectives (3 minimum)
Means of Assessment (1 or 2 per objective)
Criteria for Success (Benchmark)

 
       
  Review of plans by UAC Subcommittees October 20 to 28, 2004
       
  UAC Subcommittees Feedback to UAC and Departments By October 29, 2004
       
  Revised Plan from Departments Submitted to UAC Subcommittees By November 15, 2004
       
  Final Plan By September 15, 2005
   

Summary of Data
Use of Results

 
       
  UAC Reviews Final Plans Last week of September 2005
       

The University, through the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, provides resources for assessment of programs and services. Resources are provided in a variety of formats such as: the purchase and processing of standardized examinations and surveys; assistance with the cost of mailing and collection of departmental surveys; and the development and collection of locally developed surveys.

Some of the major assessment initiatives for academic programs include the use of standardized examinations, such as:

  • Area Concentration Achievement Tests (ACAT)
    Curriculum specific standardized examinations administered to senior students to measure their competency in the disciplines of Art, Biology, Criminal Justice, History, Literature in English, Political Science, Psychology, and Social Work.

  • Collegiate Assessment of Academic Proficiency (CAAP)
    Assesses academic achievement in the area of reading comprehension and is administered to all students enrolled in PSCI 2306, American State Government, a sophomore level reading intensive course.

  • California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST)
    Assesses critical thinking skills and is administered to senior students enrolled in the Bachelor of Applied Arts and Sciences degree program. This degree is designed to afford academic depth to individuals who possess recognized competency in an occupational or technical field.

  • Health Education Systems Incorporated Exit Exam (HESI)
    The HESI is a nationally-normed comprehensive examination administered to nusing students in their final semester. It is used to predict success on the National Council Licensure Examination for Registered Nurses (NCLEX-RN).

  • Major Field Tests from Educational Testing Service (ETS)
    Reflect the basic knowledge and understanding of senior undergraduate study gained in the areas of Business, Chemistry, Literature in English, and Mathematics plus graduate students in the area of Master of Business Administration.

  • National League for Nursing Mobility Profile II Exams (NLN)
    These subject specific, nationally-normed examinations are used to validate competency and award credit upon admission to licensed Registered Nurses for nursing clinical course work in Adult Health, Mental Health, and Maternal/Child Health Nursing.

  • Texas Examinations of Educator Standards (TexES)
    The state’s teacher certification examination program, required for entry into teaching.

In lieu of national or local testing, some degree programs have developed a capstone course or other types of instruments to measure their students’ success. The following chart illustrates some of the instruments used by disciplines and their use of results:

Discipline

Standardized
Exam

Locally Developed Exam

Other
Local
Items

Use of
Results

Accounting

  

Course Exam

 

Recommendation by the faculty that a required lab be added in accounting applications and taken concurrently with the first intermediate financial accounting course.

Bachelor of Applied Arts and Sciences Degree

California Critical Thinking Skills Test

   

Test results indicated that a more defined substantive area focus was necessary. Curriculum changes reflecting new content emphasis have been initiated.

Biology

 

Embedded questions in major course final exam

 

Curriculum revised and new lab exercises added.

Business Administration

ETS Major Field Test in Business

Course Final Exam

 

As part of exam, writing assignment is randomly selected and evaluated by faculty committee with emphasis on clarity, style, and grammar. Corrective actions taken if necessary.

Chemistry

 

Embedded questions in major course final exam

Research Presentations

Curriculum revised. Biochemistry I, Physical Chemistry II, and Inorganic Chemistry were added as required courses.

Criminal Justice

 

Locally developed comprehensive exam for graduate students

 

To strengthen student writing and critical thinking skills, the CRIJ 5303 course was modified to include two new writing assignments.

Curriculum and Instruction

 

Locally developed comprehensive exam for graduate students

 

Graduates completing the program scored high on the exams; however, to improve program two minors, Special Education and Early Childhood Education, have been added to allow for more flexibility in the program.

Early Childhood Education Reading

TExES Exam

   

Benchmark met for Domain I (Designing Instruction and Assessment to Promote Student Learning); however, data indicated below average scores on Domain III (Implementing Effective, Responsive Instruction, and Assessment). Additional focus will now be given to that domain.

Educational Administration

TExES Exam

   

After review of the results, faculty decided to increase the field and course activities that help students apply their knowledge about school community leadership and increase research activities.

English

   

Analytical Rubric

Sub scores on rubric identified two areas of concern – Organizing and Developing Ideas. Increased emphasis on the writing process began Fall 2004.

English with Grades 8 to 12 Certification

TExES Exam

   

Score reports suggested that some students were testing poorly in areas related to reading instruction; therefore, a new text (Teaching Reading in High School English Classes) was added to the course.

Finance

 

Objective Test developed by department faculty

 

Recommendation that labs be added to the investments and bank management course to address learning deficiencies.

Fitness and Sports with All-Level Certification

TExES Exam

   

Based on students not meeting the 70% criteria, all students must complete all program courses before taking the exam. The weakest area identified was Domain I (Promoting Learner’s Physical Development).

General Education

CAAP Exam

University Writing Assessment; Common Course Examination in College Algebra

 

Results for all three areas: Reading, Writing, and Math were analyzed and implementations were made in the areas of tutoring and early intervention.

History and History with Grades 8 to 12 Certification

ACAT Exam; TExES Exam

 

Graduating Senior Survey; Post-Graduate Survey

Degree plan was revised as of the 2003-2004 University Catalog by creating two new courses to place particular emphasis on chronological courses.

Information Systems

 

Objective Test developed by department faculty

Capstone course

Test administered as part of capstone course. Of five general areas, only one area, Networking Concepts, did not meet the benchmark. New faculty with expertise in the area of networking are joining the department.

International Banking

 

Objective Test developed by department faculty

 

Only International Finance met the benchmark. Course in international banking is being reviewed for content and coverage.

Mathematics and Mathematics with Grades 8 to 12 Certification

ETS Major Field Test and TExES Exam

   

Due to continuing low scores on these exams, a variable credit review course will be offered each semester.

Master of Business Administration

ETS Major Field Test

   

Major area of concern was the students' desire for greater accessibility to computer resources. Scheduling is being reviewed to accommodate greater accessibility to computing facilities.

Nursing

NCLEX/RN; HESI (Health Education Systems Incorporated) Exit Exam

 

Capstone course; pre-graduate and post-graduate surveys

Modified score required to pass institutional Exit Exam in nursing; revised capstone review course; revised testing format to reflect new test item format for NCLEX/RN.

Political Science

ACAT Exam

   

Restructured the program to include a capstone seminar, PSCI 4351.

Professional Accountancy

 

Objective test developed by department faculty

 

The areas of code of conduct and taxation did not meet the benchmark. The courses in accounting ethics and taxation will be reviewed.

Psychology

ACAT Exam

   

A lab course, PSYC 3102, was added to enhance PSYC 3302, Research Methods. Instituted reviews and mini-workshops by faculty teaching in the discipline.

School Counseling

TExES Exam

   

Emphasis was placed on Domain II (Planning and Implementing the Developmental Guidance and Counseling Programs). All first-time test takers passed this domain.

Social Studies with Grades 8 to 12 Certification

TExES Exam

 

Graduating Senior Survey; Post-Graduate Survey

More focused attention will be directed at student performance in the SOST 4392 course aimed at determining subject areas of weakness in order to develop appropriate remedial measures.

Spanish

   

Analytical Rubric for Research Papers

Created a sophomore level introduction to literature course required for all majors to develop a three-tiered system to help students with their writing skills at each level of instruction.

Spanish with Grades 8 to 12 Certification

TExES Exam

   

Since 1998, Spanish students have achieved a 100% pass rate on this exam.

Special Education

TExES Exam

 

Portfolio Defense

Changes made to the undergraduate curriculum to align the degree to the new domains and standards of the Texas Examination of Educator Standards.

Social Work

ACAT Exam; State Licensure Exam

 

Field Evaluation and Alumni Survey

Curriculum was modified to support sequential learning; the research text was changed; a research module was added to the field component; students who are doing poorly are called in to see how they can be helped.

Faculty members review the results of these assessments to recommend and implement changes to the curriculum. The recommendations are discussed at the departmental curriculum committee meetings and continue through the college level curriculum committees. A formal recommendation is submitted for review to the Provost and to the University Curriculum Committee. (UCC Minutes) Upon approval, the recommended changes are implemented and included in the University Catalog.

In addition, administrative and educational support units administer nationally recognized as well as locally developed surveys such as:

  • The National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
    This is a national survey that assesses the extent to which undergraduate freshmen and senior students are involved in educational practices empirically linked to high levels of learning and development. NSSE results fall into five key clusters of activities that research studies show are linked to desired outcomes of college: Level of Academic Challenge, Active and Collaborative Learning, Student-Faculty Interaction, Enriching Educational Experiences, and Supportive Campus Environment. An analysis of the survey results are shared with the University community, in particular, the Executive Committee, the Faculty Senate, and the Deans and Department Chairs. A complete report is available online at the Institutional Effectiveness (IE) web page. (Online Survey Summaries) Changes are implemented based on results; for example, the institution has chosen to focus on a specific benchmark, Level of Academic Challenge, to address a concern within the area of writing assignments and will focus on increasing short writing assignments within all disciplines.
  • ACT Student Opinion Survey
    This is a national survey that assesses students’ perceptions of the importance of, and satisfaction with, a full range of programs, services, and environmental factors at the institution they are attending. The survey is administered every two years during the spring semester to randomly selected courses across disciplines and levels from freshmen to graduate student status. An analysis of the survey results is disseminated to the appropriate entities across campus, especially to areas providing with student services. A complete report is available online at the Institutional Effectiveness (IE) web page. (Online Survey Summaries) Changes are implemented based on results; for example, to address concerns about police visibility on campus, the University Police Department purchased a patrol vehicle and golf carts to provide higher levels of outer and inner campus patrol and purchased patrol bikes for increased patrol activity and visibility on campus.
  • Survey of Organizational Excellence
    This national survey assists organizational leadership by providing information about work force issues that impact the quality of service delivered to all customers.  The data provide information not only about employees' perceptions of the effectiveness of their own organization, but also about employees' satisfaction with their employer.  Understanding issues such as the perceived comparability of the pay and employment benefit package is vital to attracting and retaining a competitive workforce. An analysis of the survey results is shared with the University community. A complete report is available online at the Institutional Effectiveness (IE) web page. (Online Survey Summaries) Changes are implemented based on results; for example, to address issues about the benefits and compensation package, the Office of Human Resources has expanded the communication and publication of compensation rules to employees and evaluates entry-level positions to ensure competitiveness with comparable positions, taking into consideration internal and external equity.
  • Finance and Administration Division Service Quality Survey
    This survey is administered on an annual basis to all University employees to assess their level of satisfaction with services provided by the Division of Finance and Administration, which includes the following departments: Budget, Payroll, Grants & Contracts; Business Office; Computer and Telecommunications Services, Human Resources, Physical Plant, Purchasing, Support Services, Receiving, and University Police. An analysis of the survey results is shared with the appropriate departments. A complete report is available online at the Institutional Effectiveness (IE) web page. (Online Survey Summaries) Changes are implemented based on results; for example, to provide better communication about policies, procedures, and proper use of forms, the Business Office completely revamped the department web page to include downloadable forms with instructions, travel guidelines, checklists, policies and procedures, and links to other web pages and websites.
  • Graduating Student Survey
    This locally-developed survey is administered to all graduating students and it serves three purposes: (1) to assess the students’ level of satisfaction with their educational experience; (2) to obtain employment or graduate school information and to measure their level of satisfaction with the assistance provided by the Career Services department; and (3) to obtain current biographical information for the alumni office. An analysis of the survey results for the first section is shared with the appropriate departments. This report is available online at the Institutional Effectiveness (IE) web page. (Online Survey Summaries)
  • Locally Developed Department Surveys
    Within the University, several departments develop their own satisfaction surveys to measure the quality of their services. Some of the departments that use locally developed surveys include: Admissions, Business Office, Career Services, Enrollment Management, Financial Aid, Institutional Advancement, Institutional Research, Physical Plant, Public Affairs, Purchasing, Receiving, Special Programs, Student Activities, Student Center, Student Counseling, Student Health, Support Services, Texas Center for Border Economic and Enterprise Development, University Police, Western Hemispheric Trade Center, Center for Advancement of Scholastic Achievement, First Year Success Program, International Education, and Writing Center.

Through the combined efforts of the University Assessment Committee, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness and all academic and department units, the University established a comprehensive and continuous planning process in 2002 that continues in operation and has become an integral part of each campus entity. Each degree program and administrative, and educational support unit evaluates its performance outcomes and uses those outcomes for continuous improvement.

Assessment of academic programs is conducted every semester with the results being used to improve the programs in the following semester. Some examples of improvements include:

  • In nursing, concern about the effect of changing national standards on pass rates for the nursing licensure examination (NCLEX-RN) resulted in nursing faculty raising the standard for passing on the HESI exit examination.
  • In psychology, the Senior Practicum (PSYC 4321) was modified to include five mini-workshops that address deficiencies in subject knowledge areas for the ACAT standardized examination.
  • All undergraduate degree programs in the College of Education were reconfigured using the new domains and standards of the Texas Examinations of Educator Standards (TExES).
  • In response to lower than expected results on a locally developed course examination given by the Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, the courses in accounting ethics and taxation have been revised for content and coverage.
  • In the area of environmental science, low scores on the embedded questions in the major course final exam, prompted faculty to assign additional readings, add new laboratory exercises, and revise the curriculum in Principles of Environmental Science (ENSC 2410) and changed it to an advanced course, Environmental Science (ENSC 3401).
  • To facilitate future assessment of the graduate students of the Master of Arts in Political Science program, the faculty agreed to restructure the program to include a capstone seminar.
  • To address low attainment rates on the Accounting course exam in the managerial and financial area, the department voted to adopt a financial/managerial split for teaching the principles of accounting and add a required laboratory to be taken concurrently with the first intermediate course.
  • In the area of Finance, low scores on the competency of using financial calculators prompted faculty to revise the course assignments and examples provided to enhance the skill of solving financial problems using financial calculators.
  • To address low scores on the common course exam in College Algebra, more emphasis has been placed in the areas of tutoring and early intervention. In addition, attention will be given to the traditional college algebra content, including general problem solving, inequalities, quadratic optimization problems, and inverse functions.

Each administrative and educational support unit conducts assessments on an annual basis with results used to improve services. Some examples of this process include:

  • The Office of Human Resources implemented an automated time-keeping system for vacation and sick leave to alleviate the record-keeping burden on employees. Training sessions are provided to all employees on the automated leave system as well as on the timecard process.
  • To improve accessibility to and visibility of police officers, the University Police Department purchased patrol bikes and golf carts to facilitate access in all areas of the campus.
  • In response to high demand for library orientation and training in the use of databases, the Texas A&M International University Killam Library developed and published a schedule of orientation sessions at the start of each semester.
  • To address the need for better communication about policies, procedures, and proper use of forms, the Business Office completely revamped the department web page to include downloadable forms with instructions, travel guidelines, checklists, policies and procedures, and links to other web pages and websites.
  • In an effort to increase participation in grant writing, the Office of Grant Resources enhanced their web page to assist faculty and staff in their search efforts for external funding. In addition, the director meets with each department to develop a grant-seeking plan and to determine factors for participation or non-participation in grant applications.
  • Based on feedback from a service satisfaction survey, the Purchasing Department implemented workshops to address concerns in the following areas: Updates and changes in FAMIS, expenditure codes, tracking a requisition, and following the FAMIS manual. FAMIS is the Financial and Accounting Management Information System administered by The Texas A&M University System and is the primary accounting system for the University.
  • The Property Management and Receivables Department implemented modified their notification process from paper-based to e-mail to advise departments of merchandise arrivals. This process has reduced the turn-around time for merchandise pickup from seven days to a range of two to four days, increasing efficiency.
  • Implementation of internal departmental of process of express mail requisitions has greatly improved the processing of air bills and requisitions for payment. This new process allows for a more efficient flow of documentation and for a decrease in past due invoices.
  • For continuous improvement of the tutors' level of subject knowledge, the Center for Advancement of Scholastic Achievement (CASA) expanded training to include role-playing scenarios in which the specific rating areas were emphasized and highlighted.
  • To increase the percentage of students who meet the Texas Success Initiative standards by passing developmental courses, the Office of Developmental Studies faculty met with the English faculty to align the curriculum of DENG 0370, Basic Grammar and Composition, with ENGL 1301, English Composition I.
  • In an effort to increase the effectiveness of the annual Study Abroad Fair, the Office of International Education re-scheduled the study abroad fair to the fall semester and moved it to the Student Center during high traffic hours. In addition, they coordinated with NAFSA (Organization of International Educator’s Section on U.S. Students Abroad, Region III) to select a date not conflicting with other Texas institutions.
  • To encourage students to persist toward completion of their academic programs and increase retention, the TRIO Student Support Services initiated a mentoring program that pairs freshmen with upper level students with like majors to discuss issues that pertain to their academic goals and any difficulties that may be affecting their success.
  • To address needs of students, the Writing Center added new workshops to their schedules to target areas identified by students and faculty. The new workshops focus on fragments, verb forms, comma splices and run-ons, prepositions, using sources, and Chicago documentation style. In addition, workshops were scheduled at times that are more convenient for students, in particular, evenings and weekends.

All academic, administrative and educational support unit assessment reports may be found on the Office of Institutional Effectiveness web page. To provide an easier identification of use of assessment data, assessment matrices have been compiled that outline the progress and improvements made by degree programs and administrative, and educational support units. The assessments of degree programs are inherently different from those of administrative, and educational support units. In particular, the outcomes of degree programs reflect the expectations of graduates of those programs. The outcomes of administrative and educational support unit assessments are expressed in terms of service and service satisfaction. This difference is directly related to the mission of the administrative and educational support units to provide the resources students and faculty need to accomplish the Institutional Mission. The Assessment Outcomes Matrices provide detailed information on all degree programs and administrative and educational support units and can be found online. (Assessment Outcomes Matrix - College of Arts and Sciences, Assessment Outcomes Matrix - College of Business Administration, Assessment Outcomes Matrix - College of Education, Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Dr. F. M. Canseco School of Nursing, Assessment Outcomes Matrix - General Education, Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Athletics, Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Administrative Units, Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Educational Support Units)

Establishing the current mode of uniform assessment has been challenging; however, the strong support of the University community and the education and training provided by the University Assessment Committee and the Office of Institutional Effectiveness, have allowed for a steadily maturing, collegial process. The process in place at our institution has grown out of our own experiences and works well on our campus. It is a model that can be implemented easily and modified as the need arises, allowing for continued growth and technological advances.

The implementation of a uniform assessment reporting process has been beneficial in a number of ways:

  • It provides a better understanding of the importance of assessment throughout the University.
  • It allows all departments/units to participate in discussions about their goals and the information they acquire through their assessment methods.
  • It allows students to participate through various types of assessment methods and provide information to the University on how to make the programs and services more beneficial to them.
  • It serves as a basis for institutional improvement by using the results of the assessment reports for improving programs and services.
  • It makes assessment an integral part of the planning and budgeting process, for data-based decision making and identifying resources needed to implement improvements.

The University’s planning and evaluation processes are constantly undergoing change, in keeping with a rapidly growing institution, an increasing number of degree programs, and administrative reorganization. However, the supportive and effective campus leadership and institutional commitment to these processes allow for continuous improvement and alignment to the mission and goals of the institution

.





SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION


SOURCE

LOCATION/Special Instructions

Institutional Mission http://www.tamiu.edu/general.shtml#mission
2001-2005 Strategic Plan http://www.tamiu.edu/strategic_plan.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Office of Institutional Effectiveness http://www.tamiu.edu/adminis/ie/
University Assessment Committee Minutes http://www.tamiu.edu/adminis/ie/uac/
Online Survey Summaries http://www.tamiu.edu/adminis/ie/surveys.shtml
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - College of Arts and Sciences http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/coas.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - College of Business Administration http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/coba.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - College of Education http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/coed.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Dr. F. M. Canseco School of Nursing http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/cson.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - General Education http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/gened.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Athletics http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/ath.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Administrative Units http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/admin.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.
Assessment Outcomes Matrix - Educational Support Units http://www.tamiu.edu/archives/matrix/edusup.pdf This is Adobe PDF file.


Red Back Arrow
Report
Red Forward Arrow
Back to Sections    Close Window