Introduction
Self-Study 2012
- Executive Summary
- Introduction
- History and Overview of the University of Pittsburgh
- Summary of Major Accomplishments
- Challenges and Opportunities
- Why The University Chose the Topic of Assessment
- Assessment as a Strategic Tool to Advance the University
- Leadership in Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes
- Expected Outcomes of the Self Study
- Description of the Self-Study Process
- General Summary of Conclusions and Suggestions
- Using Assessment to Improve Institutional Effectiveness
- Introduction
- Using Assessment in University-level Planning and Budgeting, Annual Planning, and Benchmarking
- Using Assessment in Unit-level PLanning and Budgeting,Annual Planning, and Benchmarking, Selected Schools
- Using Assessment to Improve Institution-wide Infrastructure Investment
- Summary of Findings and Suggestions
- Using Assessment to Improve the Student Experience
- Introduction
- Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes
- Introduction
- Structure of Assessment of Student Learning Process at Pitt
- Building a Culture of Assessment
- Documentation of Assessment of Student Learning
- Examples of Developing a Culture of Assessment
- Examples of How Assessment of Student Learning Is Leading to Curricular Change
- General Education
- Examples of General Education Assessment
- How Assessment Is Used to Make Changes and Drive Progress
- Assessment of Student Retention, Satisfaction, and Graduation
- Assessment of Undergraduate Recruitment and Admissions
- Summary of Conclusions and Findings
- Appendices
The University has used assessment to improve institution-wide infrastructure investment. The areas explored in this section of the report are significantly different in their missions, their institutional history and location, and their relation to the academic mission and vision of the University of Pittsburgh. This very diversity makes them useful examples for understanding the general culture of assessment at Pitt.
In all cases, a committee at the Provost level or above sets fairly general goals and fiscal guidelines, while the particular means of realizing these goals devolve upon specified interested parties and stakeholders. The relevant oversight committee then reviews on a regular basis what has been proposed or accomplished and approves or adjusts the next stage of the strategic plan in the appropriate area. Within this common framework of assessment, there is significant variation in the kind and frequency of review, the period covered by each articulation of a strategic plan, and the ongoing participation of different groups of interested stakeholders in the planning and review process. Such variation seems appropriate due to the intrinsic differences of these areas as well as a general institutional commitment to assign immediate responsibility to the most knowledgeable and interested parties.