Purpose: The post-Spring Professional Development (PD) week is designated as the primary data analysis period for all college units. Faculty and staff conduct structured review of the prior academic year’s outcomes data to identify areas of strength and opportunities for improvement.

Activities:

• Faculty review student learning outcomes data for all courses and programs.
• Departments analyze DFW (Drop, Fail, Withdraw) rates by class and section.
• Units examine performance against prior year CoMPASS plan goals and targets.
• Administrative and educational support units review operational and service outcomes.

Facilitation: Data analysis sessions are faculty-led within each department or unit. The Dean of the relevant school and the Director of Assessment, Compliance, and Grants facilitate discussion to ensure data are interpreted accurately and that analysis is aligned with institutional priorities and HLC expectations.

Data Sources:

• Student learning outcomes data from Canvas and institutional assessment records
• DFW rates by course prefix, class, and section (grade distribution data)
• Program completion, retention, and placement data
• Survey results (ESS, GSS, CCSSE, Employee Survey) where applicable
• Prior year CoMPASS plan documentation

Decision Summary (Due May 15): No later than May 15, the Director of Assessment, Compliance, and Grants will produce and distribute a one-page decision summary for each department and program. This summary documents the key findings and improvement decisions that emerged from the May 4–7 data analysis sessions. The summary is distributed to the Dean of the relevant school and to the faculty of each department or program.

The decision summary serves as the formal bridge between Phase 1 and Phase 2, ensuring that analysis findings are preserved over the summer and that faculty return in August with a documented record of what was discussed and decided during the May PD week.

Purpose: Upon returning for the fall semester, faculty and departments translate data analysis findings into specific, actionable improvement decisions for the new academic year. The May 15 decision summary serves as the primary reference document for this phase, ensuring continuity between the spring data analysis and fall planning sessions.

Activities:

• Faculty and department members review the May 15 decision summary from Phase 1.
• Departments finalize improvement strategies, targets, and action steps.
• Units identify resource needs or curricular changes required to support planned improvements.
• CoMPASS plan documentation is drafted or updated in preparation for August 25 submission.

Facilitation: Improvement planning is conducted within departments and units during the pre-semester fall PD week. Deans and the Director of AC&G are available to support alignment with institutional priorities and to address questions about CoMPASS documentation requirements.

Submission Requirements: All units must submit completed CoMPASS plans to the Office of Assessment, Compliance, and Grants no later than August 25 of each year. Plans must be submitted via email as a Microsoft Word document (.docx format).

• Submit to: Office of Assessment, Compliance, and Grants
• Method: Email
• Format: Microsoft Word document (.docx)
• Deadline: August 25

Plan Content: Each CoMPASS plan must document the following elements:

• Unit mission and role in supporting the institutional mission
• Student learning outcomes or operational outcomes under review
• Assessment methods and data sources used
• Summary of prior year data analysis findings
• Improvement decisions, goals, and action steps for the current academic year
• Resource requests, if applicable
• Connection to relevant Master Plan goals and HLC criteria

Approval Process: Upon receipt, the Office of Assessment, Compliance, and Grants reviews each submitted plan for completeness, alignment with institutional priorities, and documentation quality.

Revision Process: If a submitted plan requires revision prior to approval, the Office of Assessment, Compliance, and Grants will communicate feedback informally to the submitting department or unit. The unit will revise and resubmit the plan. This process continues until the plan meets institutional standards and receives final approval. Units are expected to respond promptly to feedback to ensure approval is completed prior to the September 15 implementation date.

Purpose: A formal mid-cycle monitoring checkpoint occurs at the end of the Fall Semester to assess progress on CoMPASS plan goals and to identify any issues requiring attention before the Spring semester. This checkpoint provides an early evidence signal without waiting for the full annual review in May.

Data Preparation: The Director of E-Learning (Vikki Milton) is responsible for pulling and compiling the following data for each class and section:

• Student learning outcomes performance data (Milton)
• DFW (Drop, Fail, Withdraw) rates by class and section (Stone)

Distribution and Review: Compiled checkpoint data is distributed to Deans and Directors at the January Deans and Directors meeting. This meeting serves as the formal venue for reviewing mid-cycle performance, discussing emerging concerns, and determining whether any adjustments to implementation are warranted before the Spring semester concludes.

Relationship to the Annual Cycle: The Fall Semester checkpoint does not replace the full annual data analysis conducted during Phase 1 in May. Rather, it provides a timely interim review. The May PD Week serves the dual function of completing the Spring semester data review and launching Phase 1 of the subsequent planning cycle.