Looking at quality across campus
Assessment framework encompasses all units, services, programs

October 31, 2008

Quality assurance is the key objective of a new process adopted by the University of Saskatchewan to review all of its academic and administrative units, services, programs and activities.

University Council gave its approval Oct. 23 to A Framework for Assessment: Beyond Systematic Program Review, a process designed to ensure all university activities are continually moving the organization's performance toward institutional goals and priorities through quality improvement, quality assurance and accountability."We expect quality and excellence in what we do," the provost and vice-president academic told Council,"and our publics … expect it of us."

Speaking in support of the adoption motion brought forward by the planning and priorities committee, Brett Fairbairn reminded Council the second integrated plan contains a commitment to quality and accountability, and stressed that the institution cannot plan without assessment. He pointed out the framework, which Council and its committees has been reviewing in draft form since 2006, gives the university the flexibility to conduct the assessments it views as most useful.

"We need to be selective," said Fairbairn,"(and) we need a full range of tools at our disposal."

The new framework replaces Systematic Program Review (SPR), a tool used from 1999-2005 to evaluate instructional programs. The intention now is to expand the scope of review activities to include assessment of the university's administrative processes and units as well as graduate programs. Fairbairn described the new assessment process as"a wider but lighter form of SPR," but stressed the document presented to Council is not a"how-to guide." Instead, it is a framework built around guiding principles for assessment. 

The first of those guiding principles is that assessment initiatives be closely linked to integrated planning. Others include the establishment of assessment guidelines and standards, and assessment that promises the greatest impact in helping the university achieve its goals be given highest priority.

The framework also identifies three broad areas of assessment. The first is academic, encompassing the university teaching and learning, research and scholarship activities, and includes four priorities for review during the second integrated planning cycle: graduate programs, undergraduate curricula, the student experience and research accomplishments.

The second area of assessment—operational—addresses the university's organizational structures. The immediate priorities involve looking at progress toward institutional plans and goals, quality assurance and accountability within select academic and administrative units, and unit reviews for quality improvement and enhanced planning.

The framework identifies evaluation of the university's reputation as the third area of assessment. This includes activities that help position the U of S within the post-secondary sector nationally and internationally, and the requirement, according to the document, is to move from qualitative observation to quantifiable results.

Addressing implementation, Fairbairn said the intention is to create an assessment function, staffed by two or three people, within the Integrated Planning Office (IPO) to co-ordinate assessment initiatives and link them to planning and decision-making. When asked by a Council member why that responsibility will reside in the IPO, the provost said"administration will handle administration" while the actual assessment will be a responsibility undertaken across campus. The university's three governing bodies—the Board of Governors, Council and Senate—will share oversight of the entire process.