Institutional Effectiveness Plan Evaluation Rubrics

Transcription

1 Institutional Effectiveness Plan Evaluation Rubrics January 2018

2 Institutional Effectiveness Plan (IEP) Evaluation Guidelines and Rubrics General Each component of the IEP is scored using a standard rubric. For a proposed IEP to be acceptable, the following must be true: A Mission Statement must be included for the planning unit. A minimum of three goals must be specified. For each goal: a) Desired outcomes must be clearly specified. b) Each outcome must align to a specific MCC Institutional Priority. c) Each outcome must align with at least one MCC Strategic Plan item. d) An appropriate measure is specified, along with a target value. Qualitative outcomes are acceptable if they are both measurable and align with the of the College. e) Findings are reported that document achievement of each outcome with primary data. Each finding must include steps that close the loop in an Action Plan: a) The actual outcome measure is included and documented. b) Specific and relevant findings are cited from the outcomes information. c) Sufficient analysis of the findings is completed to inform future actions and decision making. Criteria When evaluated using the standardized rubrics, each IEP component must yield a score 2 or better. Rubrics for each component follow. Our office will work with planning unit managers as needed to evaluate progress and provide feedback that encourages success. Application Rubrics are applied to IEPs during specific portions of the planning cycle, as follows: Planning Execution Phase of Cycle Rubrics Applied Mission Statement, Goals, Outcomes Specific Findings, Action Plans 1

3 Mission Statement Rubric The statement is a concise outline of the ultimate principles that guide the work of the unit, who the unit serves, in what ways the unit serves, and what results are achieved. 1. Clear and concise 2. Specific to the unit (differentiates the special function of the unit) 3. Addresses the larger impact of the unit 4. Identifies stakeholders 5. Aligns with district initiatives and (and HLC standards where appropriate) 1. Gives unit s purpose and who it serves 2. Aligns with district initiatives and 3. Identifies stakeholders 1. Gives unit s functions, but not greater purpose 2. Does not identify stakeholders 3. Fails to demonstrate clear alignment with district 4. Language fails to encapsulate the entire Goals Rubric Goals represent the intended results, expressed in general terms, which must be accomplished to fulfill the of the College. Each IEP must have at least three goals. 1. The intended results are clearly described, along with consideration of any collateral effects, positive or negative 2. The desired results are realistic given the resources of the operating unit 3. The goal aligns with the of the planning unit and College 4. Implications for the institution beyond the goal (where it could lead to) are explored or implied 1. Intended results are clearly evident 2. The desired results are realistic given the resources of the operating unit 3. The goal aligns with the of the planning unit and College 1. Describes something that s not a goal (such a measurement or outcome) 2. The goal is not realistic given the unit s available resources or resources haven t been considered. 3. The goal doesn t align with the of the College or planning unit 2

4 Outcomes Rubric Outcomes reflect the desired or target conditions that will result from executing a tactical activity. 1. Observable, measurable, feasible, time bound (SMART) 2. Reasonable number of outcomes identified, but not so many that measurement is impeded 3. Aligns with at least one Institutional Initiative and one Strategic Initiative or HLC criterion 4. Aligns with of planning unit 5. Target values readily discernable and related to institutional, unit and priorities 1. Observable, measurable, feasible, time bound (SMART) 2. Aligns with of planning unit 3. Aligns with district 4. Target values readily discernable 5. Aligns with at least one Institutional Initiative and one Strategic Plan item. 6. May need minor revisions to language 1. Describes something that s not an outcome (such a process, resource) in isolation. 2. SMART outcomes are not evident - - immeasurable, not feasible, etc. 3. Outcomes don t align with of unit or district (no alignment with District Initiatives or unit statement) 4. Incomplete target values not evident, measurements not stated, etc. Specific Findings Rubric Specific findings are a concise summary of results obtained by execution of a specific tactic. They must be evidence or data-based and well organized and give clear indication that targets were met, partially met, or not met. 1. Concise and well-organized 2. Provides solid evidence that targets were met, partially met, or not met 3. Compares new findings to past trends as appropriate 4. Supporting documentation (surveys, more complete reports, etc.) is included in the document repository. 5. Provides meaningful interpretation of results along with next steps for 1. Addresses achievement targets 2. Complete and organized 3. Appropriate instruments used for measurements 4. Aligns with language and methodology of the corresponding achievement target 1. Not clearly related to achievement targets 2. Appears to offer excuses for results rather than meaningful interpretation or next steps for 3. No findings, or too many (scattered/fragmented) findings to manage 4. Too general; lacks details (time, people, resources, outcomes, etc.) 3

5 Action Plans Rubric Action plans are steps to be taken to improve the unit or assessment process based on analysis of achieved outcomes. 1. Reflects an understanding of the implications of the IEP findings 2. Identifies a specific area that needs to be improved, monitored, remediated, or enhanced and defines logical next steps 3. Contains completion dates 4. Identifies resources and people needed, along with responsibilities 5. Number of action plans are manageable 1. Reflects on what was learned during the IEP cycle 2. At least one action plan in place per Goal 1. Not clearly related to findings 2. Plan appears to offer excuses for results rather than meaningful interpretation or next steps for unit 3. No action plans, or too many action plans to manage 4. Too general; lacks details (time, resources, people, etc.) 4