Texas Tech University is in compliance with Comprehensive Standard 3.4.1.

Texas Tech University requires that every course and academic program pass through an approval process that involves faculty and administrative participation at all administrative levels (Texas Tech University Operating Policy and Procedure Manual, OP 36.01 and 36.04 http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/New.contents.links/36academic_programs.htm).

New undergraduate programs (OP 36.04, at http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/OP36.04.htm) generally originate at the department level. Ideas for new programs should be discussed with the appropriate academic dean(s), department chair(s) and a representative of the office of the provost before a formal proposal is submitted.  For graduate programs the process is similar, but would involve preliminary discussions with the academic dean(s) and the graduate dean before work begins on a formal proposal. 

New program proposals must be prepared following the guidelines set forth by the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board.  If all or part of the program is to be delivered via distance learning, the SACS Substantive Change Procedures must be followed. A degree program proposal must be reviewed and approved in the appropriate department(s), after which it is forwarded to the dean of the college. When approved at department and college levels, an undergraduate proposal will be forwarded directly to the vice provost for academic affairs for review by the academic council which is composed of the associate deans of all the colleges. A graduate program proposal will go to the graduate dean for review by the graduate council before it is sent to the academic council. The academic council passes on all programs, which are then forwarded to the provost for approval. Program proposals that successfully pass through the approval process are sent to the president, who will forward it to the board of regents for their approval.

A program proposal that has been approved at all university levels is then sent to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board for final review and approval. 

New courses (OP36.01, at http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/OP36.01.htm) generally originate with the faculty. There is a formal process whereby new course proposals (on the proper form http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/OP36.01.htm, Attachment A, a pdf file) are submitted to the faculty of the department for approval. From there the proposals are passed on to a college committee and to the graduate school if it is a graduate course. Approved courses are passed to the academic council and, finally, to the provost for final approval.

With respect to assessment of expected outcomes, the university strategic plan, implemented in 2001, requires program evaluation and establishment of learning outcomes at the academic unit level. Furthermore, workshops on these topics were conducted in 2003 and 2004 for area and unit administrators. Therefore, each academic program in the university should have established learning outcomes and should be evaluating the extent to which those outcomes have been met. Moreover, professional programs will have complied with this requirement as part of their discipline-specific accreditation processes. In a few cases, other academic programs may still be working toward compliance with the establishment of specific learning outcomes and assessment processes. However, those departments should be identified on their annual assessment reports and should soon come into compliance.

Assessment begins at the course level. All courses are evaluated by students at the end of the semester using a standardized university evaluation form (at http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/OP32.32.html, Attachment B , a pdf file). Individual colleges and departments may use additional evaluation forms of their own during this process. The standardized university forms are optically scanned and the results are returned to departments for distribution to the department chair and the faculty members. Peer evaluations of courses are conducted regularly for untenured faculty. Annual performance evaluation of faculty (O.P. 32.32 at http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/OP32.31.html  require evaluation of teaching, and comprehensive performance  evaluations, conducted at least once every 6 years and mandated by Texas statute, require peer evaluation of all faculty, including teaching (see O.P. 3.2.31 http://www.depts.ttu.edu/opmanual/OP32.32.html). Therefore, there is ample opportunity for assessment of both courses and teachers.

SACS Off-Site Committee Finding:

3.4.1     The institution demonstrates that each educational program for which academic credit is awarded (a) is approved by the faculty and the administration, and (b) establishes and evaluates program and learning outcomes.  

___       Compliance
_X_      Non-compliance
___       Did not review

Comments: 

The institution is compliant with the first part of this comprehensive standard (“each education program … is approved by the faculty and administration”), but it is not clear whether it is compliant with the second (“the institution … establishes and evaluates program and learning outcomes.”) The institution’s report says: “In a few cases, other academic programs may still be working toward compliance with the establishment of specific learning outcomes and assessment processes. However, those departments should be identified on their annual assessment reports and should soon come into compliance.”  Further, the Report’s discussion of assessment is problematic.  The institution conducts student course evaluations, peer teaching evaluations for untenured faculty, and annual performance evaluations of faculty, but these evaluations are not the same as an evaluation of program and learning outcomes.

TTU Response:  

Texas Tech University has made great strides in establishing an assessment-based system for course and program evaluation. At the graduate level, every program in the university undergoes a systematic evaluation on a six-year rotating cycle. These evaluations require the home unit of the program to prepare a self-study. The assessments are then evaluated by a committee of peers who are graduate faculty members in closely related fields to those being evaluated. A follow-up report is required. The entire process is described in detail at: http://www.depts.ttu.edu/gradschool/review_guidelines.htm. This process helps to insure that graduate programs are evaluated and improved on a constant basis. 

The process for undergraduate programs has become more formalized over the past three years. With the implementation of the current strategic planning and assessment process, there now is an annual assessment at the undergraduate level, as well as the graduate level. As noted above in our original response to this standard and in our responses to Core Requirement 2.5 and Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1, the university’s strategic planning and assessment process requires programs to establish specific educational outcomes. Emphasis on developing appropriate outcome assessments of student learning, as evident in part by the summer assessment workshops, will ensure that programs continue to focus on program assessment and to utilize the results of assessment to improve student learning. Our response to Comprehensive Standard 3.3.1 contains a list by college and department of outcomes, assessment procedures, and responses. This list is available at http://www.ba.ttu.edu/isqs/westfall/3.3.1-Supplement.doc. This document supports our contention that the university is in compliance with part (b) of Comprehensive Standard 3.4.1.