Office of Academic Affairs
Policies and Documents
Office of Academic Integrity
Colleges and Schools
Centers and Institutes
Academic Support Units
Information About UMSL Faculty
Information For UMSL Faculty
Information About UMSL Students
Information For UMSL Students
Assessment at UMSL
Five Year Program Reviews
Assessment of Faculty
Student Assessments and Processes
Charge to the Reviewers
The five-year Quality Review is formative, not summative. That is, the goal is to provide feedback to the unit on the quality of their processes. The External Reviewer is considered the content expert and normally evaluates the processes based on that expertise and knowledge of best practices in the field. The Campus Review Team brings their experience with the campus context to the review.
Writing the Report
There will be two reports, each limited to five pages. The External Reviewer will submit his/her report first, normally within two weeks of the site visit, so that the Campus Review Team may benefit from the expertise of the content specialist in their report. Both reports include the names and campus affiliations of the reviewers and are submitted to the review facilitator.
Reviewers reports often provide observations and consultation on the four areas of quality processes that the unit has considered:
1. What is the unit trying to do? (Do they define quality in terms of outcomes?)
2. How are they doing it? (Do they focus on processes--how things get done?)
3. Who is responsible for doing it? (Do they work collaboratively?)
4. How do they know theyre succeeding? (Do they base decisions on evidence?)
Some reviewers prefer to consider strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and challenges under each of the quality areas.
The format for the reports is flexible. Generally, they include
- A brief explanation of the procedures followed during the review.
- Observations and consultation on
- Quality processes;
- Areas of accomplishment; and
- Areas deserving or requiring organizational attention.
- Evaluations of the Self-Study Report and the review process itself.
The reports may also address other areas defined by either the reviewers or the unit. For example, in the accreditation self-study (Fall 2008) all unitsincluding administrative offices--must address how they promote student learning. Benchmarking by comparing this unit to units in comparable universities is also a useful tool.
After they receive the Campus Review Teams report, administrators in the unit under review will compose a three-page Summary of the review process and findings. They may also consult with the Chancellor regarding the reported findings.