IV. ACADEMIC POLICIES 3

Andrews University believes that assessment is an integral part of good educational practice. Assessment occurs at admission, in the classroom, in departments, in schools, and at the administrative level. Routine assessments are made of faculty and staff effectiveness, and quality of services offered across the university. Assessment is also conducted within non-academic programming and residence halls.

The ultimate goal of assessment at Andrews University is the improvement of student learning. This includes not only competence and skills in one’s field, but also goals relating to spiritual and ethical development, service, and the ability to work with people of diverse backgrounds. Results from a well thought-out assessment plan provide evidence of how well students are learning what is expected of them. They also identify areas where students may not have learned as well as intended. This information provides a starting place for useful discussions among faculty to inform teaching and improve learning. Assessment results also assist administrators as they develop strategies and policies to help ensure an institutional culture and environment that facilitates improvement and change.

Effective assessment is cyclical in nature. Assessment of student learning is an ongoing process of:

• Establishing clear, measurable, expected outcomes
• Ensuring that students have sufficient opportunities to achieve those outcomes
• Systematically gathering, analyzing, and interpreting evidence to determine how well student learning matches expectations
• Using the resulting information to understand and improve student learning; (Suskie, 2009, p. 4)

Effective assessment utilizes a variety of methods. These methods may be quantitative or qualitative, direct or indirect, objective or subjective, embedded within courses or add-on assessments, and may be formative or summative. There is a place for standardized tests and for the informed professional judgment of faculty.

Assessment at Andrews is integrated across all levels. Assessment in courses includes routine measures such as assignments, quizzes, and tests. The aggregation and examination of these measures provides comprehensive information about students’ progress towards mastery of key points of instruction. At the program level, assessments indicate not only students’ mastery of knowledge and skills learned in courses, but also the ability to apply what they’ve learned to the broader context. Program assessment, the assessment of co-curricular programs and campus environment, and university-wide assessments, such as major field tests and student surveys, inform the institution how well it is achieving its mission that students will Seek Knowledge, Affirm Faith, and be prepared to Change the World.

Andrews University believes that assessment information should be shared at several levels. Student learning outcomes are shared with students in course outlines, program handbooks, and in program descriptions in the bulletin. Assessment results are shared with program faculty to facilitate discussions on program improvement. Program goals, outcomes, and results are evaluated during regular program reviews by external reviewers. Assessment results that span entire schools are shared with school faculty, who discuss what improvements may be needed. Institutional assessments are shared in committees, general faculty meetings, and board meetings, as well as electronically with all faculty. Through an electronic recording system, all assessment information is available for review by the Office of Institutional Assessment, the deans, the provost, and our external accreditors. Highlights of assessment results and improvement initiatives are shared on the university’s assessment website, and more details are available on request.

At Andrews University, the systematic collection and analysis of data on student learning in order to improve the instructional experience is part of our routine practice. Andrews believes that assessment is an important part of good teaching and learning. Assessment results substantiate the quality of an Andrews education so that students, parents, employers, and other stakeholders can feel assured that their investment in the institution is of value.

Bibliography

Suskie, L. (2009). Assessing student learning (2nd ed.) San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Walvoord, B. E. (2004). Assessment clear and simple: A practical guide for institutions, departments, and general education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

The University’s assessment processes are linked to the mission and goals of the University. Assessment plans of programs across the University are periodically evaluated for relevance to the University mission, as well as for reliability, validity, and usability, by the Committee for Institutional Assessment. Assessment plans of academic programs are also evaluated through the routine academic program review process facilitated by the Program Development and Review Committee. Proposals for new programs are submitted to the same committee, and are required to include an assessment plan. These committees include faculty from across the University at both the undergraduate and graduate levels. In addition, the Committee for Institutional Assessment includes representatives from administration, Student Life, and other support services. Recommendations are sent to program faculty and/or staff for their review, input and where appropriate, implementation.

Assessments of personnel, students, courses, programs, and the University follow a regular cycle. Staff, faculty, and administrators undergo a review each January, with staff evaluated by their supervisors, faculty by their department chairs, department chairs by the deans, deans by the provost and faculty in their schools, and administrators by their peers. Areas for improvement and personal goals are noted in faculty files, and are reviewed the following year. Faculty and courses are assessed by students at the end of each semester through course evaluations. Throughout the year, faculty evaluate assessment data in courses for student achievement of course and program outcomes. Course outcomes are in harmony with program outcomes, and program outcomes are linked to University goals. Support programs and offices assess indicators of how well they are supporting the operations of the University, in order to facilitate student learning. Data for each program are aggregated and compiled by the departments at the end of each school year. Assessment summaries are reported in the University’s assessment management system by the end of summer or shortly thereafter, and are shared with and reviewed by program faculty and/or staff. Any changes for program improvement are drafted and voted on by the appropriate group in early fall. Academic changes are included in the new Andrews University Bulletin.

The feedback loop consists of formative feedback, plans for improvement, summative feedback, evaluation decisions, and revisions and renewal. The sequence of these elements leads toward improved student outcomes and may be recursive. For example, summative feedback leads to making evaluation decisions, which may lead back to further plans for improvement. The decisions may also lead to student advancement through a program, faculty/staff members’ advancement on the salary scale or in rank, administrators’ advancement on the salary scale, or revisions of University programs or operations. In any case, these evaluation decisions are treated as steps on the path to re-visioning and renewing University persons and programs. After action plans are developed for re-visioning or renewing, these plans are shared with key stakeholders in the programs. These stakeholders may provide corrective feedback that leads to re-thinking these plans. Eventually the feedback from the University’s partners helps ensure that the University maintains quality programs for the preparation of qualified graduates.

The University gathers follow-up information on all graduates and programs through such means as exit interviews or surveys, alumni surveys, and employer surveys. Exit interviews or surveys are conducted by some programs or departments prior to students’ graduation. The University regularly conducts surveys of alumni after they graduate from their programs. Some programs also conduct their own alumni and employer surveys at intervals determined by the program faculty or their own external accreditation requirements. Follow-up studies gather information on job placement and the attainment of University goals, as well as information related to program quality.

Three different entities are responsible for managing the assessment of unit operations: the provost, the school deans, and the Director of Human Resources. The Provost is responsible for managing the processes related to evaluation of the deans and directors of academic support units or programs. The official records for the relevant administrator Performance Reviews are kept in the Office of the Provost. The school deans are responsible for managing the processes related to budget accountability and chair evaluations. Department chairs are responsible for managing the processes related to faculty evaluations. Official budget records and the Faculty Annual Report documentation for chairs and faculty are kept in the offices of the school deans. The Director of Human Resources is responsible for managing the processes related to support staff evaluations. Official records of support staff evaluations are kept in the Human Resources Department.

The deans are also responsible for monitoring the assessment of unit operations that relate to overall program quality in their schools. The Assessment Director, in cooperation with the deans, assists department chairs and program coordinators in developing and refining program assessment plans, and reviewing results. The Assessment Director monitors assessment activity and makes regular reports to the deans regarding the progress of each of the programs in their schools. Department chairs and program coordinators submit annual assessment reports to their deans each fall, including any recommendations program faculty have made for areas for improvement. The deans take these recommendations into consideration as they prepare the budget for the upcoming year. The school deans submit major recommendations for their schools to the provost. Together in Dean’s Council, the provost and deans make decisions for improvements to be made at the University level. (See Academic Assessment Process Map, Figure 2:1)

Download Figure 2:1

Similarly, directors of academic support units and programs are responsible for the assessment of their areas, with the support of the Assessment Director. The Assessment Director reports the progress of these units to the provost. Directors submit their assessment reports to the provost annually each fall, along with recommendations from their faculty or staff for program improvement. Major improvements and budget decisions are made in consultation with the provost.

All students have the right to learn in an environment conducive to learning. Maintenance of classroom discipline shall be the responsibility of the faculty member. A student may be suspended from the class by the faculty member for serious or repeated disorderly and disruptive behavior. The faculty member shall then report the situation to the department chair and the dean. The dean may, upon the recommendation of the faculty member, disallow the student to continue being enrolled in the class. Problems of discipline which are particularly serious or involve an area wider than the classroom shall be reported to the vice president for student life by the dean of the school.

In harmony with its mission statement, Andrews University expects students to demonstrate the ability to think clearly and exhibit personal moral integrity in every sphere of life. Honesty in all academic matters is a vital component of personal integrity, which explains why breaches in academic integrity principles, are taken seriously by the university.

Academic dishonesty includes but is not limited to the following:

• Falsifying or presenting falsified documents;
• Plagiarizing, which includes copying others’ published work, and/or failing to give credit properly to other authors and creators;
• Misusing copyrighted material and/or violating licensing agreements (actions that may result in legal action in addition to disciplinary action taken by the University);
• Using media from any source or device, including the internet (e.g., print, visual images, music), with the intent to mislead, deceive or defraud;
• Presenting another person’s work as one’s own (e.g., placement exams, homework assignments);
• Using materials during a quiz or examination, other than those specifically allowed by the teacher or program;
• Stealing, accepting, or studying from stolen quizzes or examination materials;
• Copying from another student or any other source during a regular or take-home test or quiz;
• Assisting others in acts of academic dishonesty, such as falsifying attendance records or providing unauthorized course materials;
• Acting deceitfully in any other academic matter.

The university is committed to principles of trust, accountability, clear expectations and consequences. It is also committed to redemptive efforts, which are meaningful only in light of these principles. Students will be granted due process and the opportunity for an appeal (see student grievance procedures in the Student Handbook; http://www.andrews.edu/services/studentlife/handbook/).

Academic dishonesty offenses generally are subject to incremental disciplinary actions. Some first offenses, however, receive severe penalties, including dismissal from the university or degree cancellation. Some offenses are subject to legal action, in addition to university disciplinary action. Discipline may be retroactive if academic dishonesty becomes apparent after the student leaves a course, a program, or the university. If evidence of academic dishonesty becomes apparent after a degree has been granted, the degree may be annulled and a notification affixed to the student’s official transcript record.

The following is a non-comprehensive list of possible actions apart from dismissal from the university: denial or revocation of admission; warning from a teacher, a department chair, program director or academic dean; a lower or failing grade on an assignment, test or course; suspension or dismissal from the course; suspension or dismissal from the academic program.

Some academic dishonesty offenses call for specific disciplinary actions. The following have been identified:

• Falsification of documents: Students who falsify or present falsified documents may be dismissed.

Prospective students who are discovered to have presented falsified admission documents prior to admission shall be denied admission to any of the programs of the university. Should it be discovered after admission that a student had presented falsified documents for admission, such admission may be annulled and the record of academic achievement removed from the academic record, with appropriate notations. Such annulments or denials may be reviewed after one year.

• Dishonesty in course requirements: Course work (a quiz, assignment, report, examination, research paper, etc.) in which a student has been dishonest generally will receive zero points towards the grade in fulfillment of a course requirement, and/or the student may receive a failing grade for the course. The professor of the course determines the appropriate consequence.
• Final degree assignment: When a student cheats in a major or final degree assignment such as a comprehensive examination or presents plagiarized material in a major or final degree assignment such as a senior project, honors thesis, master’s thesis or doctoral dissertation/project; that student shall be dismissed and barred from completing or receiving the degree.

A standing committee on academic integrity appointed by the provost shall consider and decide cases of repeated and/or more serious academic dishonesty. This committee shall include faculty representatives from the schools of the university. The Vice President for Student Life or his/her appointee shall be a regular member of the committee, which shall also include student representation. See policy # 1:610:8.

The committee on academic integrity shall develop and maintain a table of levels of infractions and potential penalties or a set of principles and guidelines to direct their work.

Faculty members who believe an act of dishonesty has taken place in one of their classes shall make all reasonable efforts to first address the situation with the student(s) in question. Discussions with the relevant academic advisor, department chair(s), program director(s) and/or dean(s) are also encouraged. Faculty members are advised to keep written records of such discussions and copies of relevant documents.

If evidence confirms that a significant infraction indeed occurred, the faculty member shall write a report of the incident, which is signed by the chair and dean; and sent to the Office of the Provost.

When an academic dishonesty report is received in the Office of the Provost, a file shall be created and a case number assigned. A letter of censure signed by the provost shall be sent to graduate and undergraduate upper division students upon the first offense and to undergraduate lower division students upon the second offense. When a graduate or an undergraduate upper division student incurs a second offense or an undergraduate lower division student incurs a third offense, the committee on academic integrity shall be called to consider the matter. When an infraction is serious enough to require it, the case shall be immediately sent to the committee.

All cases sent to the committee on academic integrity; shall be identified by case number. The student’s name shall not be provided to committee members, to provide confidentiality and facilitate objective decisions.

When the committee determines that suspension or dismissal from the university is appropriate, such recommendation shall be forwarded to the provost. Upon examination of the relevant evidence, the committee action; and in consultation with the Vice President for Student Life and the appropriate academic dean(s); the provost shall make a decision and proceed with implementation.

Plagiarism is a serious form of academic dishonesty for which a student may be expelled. Plagiarism may occur whenever a student fails to properly indicate direct quotations or credit the source of material used, including use of material in paraphrased form, or when presenting another’s line of thinking and ideas as if they were one’s own.

The university therefore endorses the following requirements of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 5th Ed., pages 349, 350, and 395; for avoidance of plagiarism:

• Quotation marks should be used to indicate the exact words of another.
• Summarizing a passage or rearranging the order of a sentence and changing some of the words is paraphrasing. Each time a source is paraphrased, a credit for the source needs to be included in the text.
• Substantial portions or elements of another’s work or data should not be presented as one’s own, even if the other work or data source is cited occasionally.
• Students who in the presentation, distribution, or publication of written material in their own name for academic credit neglect to specifically or generally acknowledge their indebtedness to sources used, shall be guilty of plagiarism and liable to discipline.

Scholarship awards, fellowships, and assistantships are made by the relevant dean on the basis of donor specifications (if appropriate) and policies voted by the faculty of the school, upon the recommendation of the department chair in whose department the student will be studying. The dean will also confer with Student Financial Services to confirm financial need. The implementation of all financial aid is done by Student Financial Services.

The Registrar is responsible for preparing diplomas, certificates, and citations, including honorary doctorates, which are awarded at graduation exercises.