Back See this section in context: Criterion 3 Core Component 3C
3C.7: Educational Services Included in Continuous Improvement System
Sauk is firmly committed to continuous improvement of its educational services. Its system of evaluation and review ties appropriate forms of data to varying forms of service. Every five years, each office and academic area complete a comprehensive program review, at which time an array of data and measures receives scrutiny. However, the primary mechanism for quality improvement review is annual operational planning. This process requires that every action plan be identified by its source, such as assessment, program review, department discussion, or some other source. A sampling follows (3D.4):
- The Adult Education Department gathers data on ten measures as required by the National Reporting Standards. In addition, enrollment and completion statistics for the program are gathered through a data system called DAISI, which is used as a means to measure the effectiveness of Adult Education class sites on a variety of factors, including post-test rates. For example, based on FY09 data, four ineffective adult education class sites were eliminated. For FY10 the department will also be using unemployment data in its planning to identify communities with the highest need for GED and ESL classes.
- Student Support Services (SSS) use a Likert Scale Assessment in combination with open-ended questions to assess the effectiveness of each of their program activities (workshops and college visits). The activities are evaluated immediately after they take place. SSS also evaluates the effectiveness of its program by having program participants complete an end-of-the-year comprehensive evaluation, which it confirms by examining data on retention, graduation, transfer, and GPA of student participants. In FY09, for example, individual programs and events received an overall average of 4.6 (out of 5 possible). An end-of-the-year comprehensive evaluation by program participants gave an average rating of 4.7. Data showed that for FY08 over 93% of program participants remained in good academic standing.