• OIE
  • Accreditation
    • Accreditation Overview
    • Accreditation Process
    • WASC Reports
    • WASC Resources
    • Program Specific
  • Program Reviews
    • Program Review Overview
    • Program Review Process
    • Program Review Schedule
    • Program Review Archive
  • Data Warehouse
    • Data Warehouse Overview
    • Common Data Set
    • Fact Book
    • Interactive Reports
    • Public Reports
    • National Surveys
    • Research Briefs
  • Learning Outcomes
    • IEOs
    • Program Learning Outcomes
    • Writing SLOs
    • SLOs in Course Syllabi
    • SLOs Evidence
    • Assessment Tools
    • Assessment Grant
  • Resources
    • Data/Research Request
    • Educational Effectiveness Workshop
    • Assessment Library
    • Peer & Aspirational Institutions
    • Institutional Effectiveness Links
  • About Us
    • OIE Team
    • Learning Council (ASLC)
    • EdInfo Analtyics Team

Advancement of Student Learning Council

Purpose

The Advancement of Student Learning Council (ASLC) was developed to meet two major needs of the University:
  1. To inculcate and sustain a culture of systematic student learning assessment in all quarters of the University through the following functions: (a)training faculty and co-curricular professionals in their respective schools or major areas in effective and meaningful assessment practices, (b) facilitating annual and 5-year program reviews in their respective schools or major areas and channeling aggregated data aligned to the University's Institutional Educational Objectives to the Office of Institutional Effectiveness.
  2. To serve as the body tasked with offering programs undergoing 5-year program reviews with feedback on the quality of their critical inquiry process and use of evidence to support their program improvement plan. (See Appendix A for the ASLC Internal Review Report template).
Other functions of the Council include:
  • When requested, offering advisement to the UAC on the quality of new program proposals and existing programs requesting substantial change
  • Preparing the University for WASC reaffirmation reviews.

Rationale

Good practices for program review entail the integration of outcomes-based assessment and evidence-based decision-making. This integration includes the following components:
  • Program self-study
  • External review of program
  • Internal review of program
  • Program Quality Improvement Plan
  • Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
  • Planning and Budgeting
  • Tracking Improvements (see Appendix B for more details of each component)
An evidence-based decision-making model allows for transparency among stakeholders (faculty, co-curricular professionals, and administration) as well as holds all stakeholders accountable for upholding their commitments. A process for outcomes-evidence integration within the University, and the ASLC’s role within this process, is visually depicted in Appendix C, Program Review Process.

The current state of student learning assessment and program review at Pepperdine is uneven in its application and does not meet the standard of practice for higher education. There are no channels to aggregate and store data for conducting program review and the review of the University’s Institutional Educational Objectives; the quality and/or availability of basic program assessment documents, e.g., student learning outcomes, curriculum matrices, assessment plans, and assessment rubrics, are unevenly employed; there are no formal internal mechanisms for ensuring an objective assessment of program quality; and there are weak lines of interaction between central administration and those responsible for assessing the curricular and co-curricular learning at the University. Although there is commitment from central administration and resources available for training and facilitating program review and the OIE has issued guidelines for conducting program reviews, a mechanism for evenly instilling a culture of assessment in all quarters of the University remains absent. The ASLC will serve as the body responsible for this diffusion. Moreover, the ASLC will offer programs undergoing self-study with recommendations for strengthening the quality of their program review efforts.

Membership

Founding Members

The founding members are constituted of faculty and co-curricular professionals who were appointed to the ASLC by the Office of the Provost in collaboration with the deans. The appointments were based on the formal role for the assessment of student learning and program review that each of these members holds in their respective schools or major department areas. These appointments met the immediate need for addressing the recommendations by the WASC Capacity and Preparatory Review (CPR) Steering Committee and the WASC site visiting team in preparation for the Educational Effectiveness Review (EER). The Assistant Provost of Institutional Effectiveness is an ex officio member of the Council without voting rights.

The following are the founding members:
  • Joy Asamen, GSEP (Chair)
  • Charla Griffy-Brown, Graziadio
  • Michael Shires, SPP
  • Constane M. Fulmer, Seaver
  • Herb Cihak, School of Law
  • Connie Horton, Students Affairs
  • Lisa Bortman, OIE

Future ASLC Representation

Faculty, co-curricular professionals, and student engagement in the assessment of student learning and program review is essential for successfully sustaining the process. The following standing representation is suggested.
  • Seaver College: 1 faculty representative
  • GSEP: 1 faculty representative
  • Graziadio: 1 faculty representative
  • School of Law: 1 faculty representative
  • SPP: 1 faculty representative
  • Student Affairs: 1 representative
  • Student Member: 1 representative
  • Assistant Provost of Institutional Effectiveness, ex officio member

ASLC Member Resources