Undergraduate Academic Program Review (UAPR) Assessment Plan Dimensions
Bresciani, M. J. and Allen, J. (2002)
Category	Exemplary	Accomplished	Developing	Beginning
OBJECTIVES
Clarity	They clearly are all broad, general statements of [1] what the program wants students to be able to do and to know or [2] what the program will do to ensure what students will be able to do and to know.	Well defined broad, general statements of [1] what the program wants students to be able to do and to know or [2] what the program will do to ensure what students will be able to do and to know.	Fairly well defined broad, general statements of [1] what the program wants students to be able to do and to know or [2] what the program will do to ensure what students will be able to do and to know.	Not well defined.
Evaluatable	They all are evaluated directly or indirectly by measuring specific outcomes related to the objective.	Most are evaluated directly or indirectly by measuring specific outcomes related to the objective.	Some are evaluated directly or indirectly by measuring specific outcomes related to the objective.	None are evaluated directly or indirectly by measuring specific outcomes related to the objective.
Relatedness	They all are related to the mission and goals of the department and college in which the program resides, and to the mission and goals of the University.	Most are related to the mission and goals of the department and college in which the program resides, and to the mission and goals of the University.	Some are related to the mission and goals of the department and college in which the program resides, and to the mission and goals of the University.	No relation to mission and goals.
OUTCOMES
Derivable	Outcomes are detailed and specific action statements derived from the objectives, used to determine the presence or absence of, amount of, or level of the behavior or knowledge specified by an objective.	Overall, a clear vision for and relationship between outcomes and objectives	Generally clear distinction between outcomes and objectives	No clear discernment between objectives and outcomes
Distinguishing	Outcomes clearly distinguish between the things the program wants students to know (cognitive), ways students think (affective/attitudinal), or things students should be able to do (behavioral, performance, psychomotor).	Outcomes generally match objectives with only minor discrepancies	Outcomes sometimes misalign with the comprehensiveness of the objectives	Outcomes often incongruent with the objective
Observable	Outcomes are consistently observable, measurable results or evidence of the educational experience.	May have modest problems with the criteria of observable and/or measurable	Some outcomes not observable and/or measurable	Outcomes not observable and/or measurable
Detailed	Outcomes are consistently detailed and meaningful enough to guide decisions in program planning and improvement and decisions about pedagogy and practice.	Provides enough details to be generally meaningful and useful in decision-making regarding planning, improvement, pedagogy, and practice	Outcomes suggest some general directions for some decisions but not uniformly or comprehensively	Outcomes lack detail to be useful in decision-making
APPLICATION OF ASSESSMENT METHODS/TOOLS TO OUTCOMES
Appropriate	Consistently used appropriate assessment methods to measure all outcomes in support of all objectives	Generally able to identify, use, and defend appropriate assessment methods to measure the outcome	Able to produce assessment methods to fit most outcomes, though sometimes the methods did not measure the outcome	Often used methods that didn't measure the outcome
Applied	Consistently able to apply relevant method(s) appropriately (as intended by developers) and interpret  results in light of decisions affecting continuous improvement	Generally able to apply method(s) appropriately (as intended by developers) and interpret results	Generally able to apply method(s) appropriately (as intended by developers) but may not understand results	Misapplication of the method(s)
Multiple	Multiple sources of evidence used to provide distinctive perspectives on the assessment question; clear understanding of competing methods and their suitability for addressing the question	Use both indirect and direct measures to provide perspective on outcomes; can defend selection of measures	Occasional use of multiple methods/tools to measure specific outcomes but sometimes unable to defend the difference or the selection of methods	Limited use of multiple methods to provide additional perspectives on measuring a particular outcome; often unable to defend method(s) in reference to a particular outcome
Criteria	The outcome has been reviewed and criteria for identifying that the outcome has been met are articulated in the assessment method.	The outcome has been reviewed and criteria has been identified, but it is not complete.  Some key criteria are still missing.	The outcome has been reviewed and criteria has been identified, but the assessment method does not measure the articulated criteria.	There is no criteria articulated for identifying that the outcome has been met.
APPLICATION OF RESEARCH FACTS/EVIDENCE TO MAKE DECISIONS FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT
Applied Facts	Consistently used appropriate and verifiable facts throughout to defend well-organized concepts and/or principles in support of decisions made for continuous improvement	Generally able to use researched facts to support a decision for continuous improvement	Able to produce facts/evidence to fit most decisions, though sometimes the facts/evidence are not the best (most persuasive, best organized, etc.) support for the decision	Often stated opinion without evidence, unable to align facts that with the decision; facts/evidence seem out of context; unable to defend a decision with evidence
Sharing	Sharing of assessment strategies, facts, and resulting decisions regarding continuous improvements with relevant constituents and stakeholders was thorough, collaborative, well-timed, and effective	Sharing of assessment strategies, facts, and decision making with relevant constituents and stakeholders was well-timed and effective	Some evidence of consultation and collaboration with constituents and stakeholders regarding some assessment strategies and/or some decision making	Little or limited evidence of consultation and collaboration with constituents and stakeholders regarding assessment strategies and decision making
PROCESS PLAN AND CONTROL
Continuation	Demonstrated commitment to continue the assessment cycle (timeline and milestones established; search for improved strategies, data sources, and decision-making processes)	General understanding of the need and commitment to continue the assessment cycle	Some evidence of an understanding of the need and/or commitment to continue the assessment cycle	Little or limited understanding of the need and/or commitment to continue the assessment cycle
Total Process	Plan clearly establishes and communicates the ongoing nature of the entire assessment cycle from plan through study through implementation and review; participants and their roles are clearly delineated; all aspects of the process are well-timed and reflect appropriate milestones	An acceptable plan for the study and implementation; clear designation of participants in the process; process is well-timed and has established appropriate milestones	Evidence of a plan for the study and implementation; some sense of who does what; some evidence of appropriate timing and milestones	Limited outline of the planning, study, and implementation process; little direction in who does what; weak sense of appropriate timing and milestones
Bottom to Top	Demonstrated ongoing commitment to bottom-to-top team approach and established resources for continuous assessment (i.e. evidence of faculty involvement, allocation of resources to develop and administer assessment instruments, etc.)	Clear evidence of faculty role and inclusion at all ranks; adequate resources established for ongoing process	Some evidence of faculty role as initiators; some evidence of some established resources	Limited demonstrated commitment to bottom-to-top team approach and established resources for continuous assessment