IP IEPs and Reports

Main Content

Annual IP Assessment Plan

Annual instructional program (IP) assessment plans consist of the following:

Program/degree overview


  • A summary that states the degree program mission, including the primary purpose of the academic degree program, primary functions/activities, and stakeholders
  • A brief statement that describes how program outcomes relate to the program's mission and role in the institution
  • A description of the role of distance learning in the degree program, and whether the program delivers instruction at different instructional sites or through different instructional paths (e.g. tracks, online and campus-based offerings, traditional and advanced standing/progression options)
  • A synopsis of the program's approach to assessment
  • Overview of how assessment procedures are apportioned amongst program faculty
  • An account of the number of students in the program and the distribution of students across each degree program year

Program information

  • Indicates the faculty member who represents the program and provides the program's annual assessment plan/report.
  • Documents program and outcome alignment with institutional goals
  • Describes dates and venues for team-based discussions on assessment plans and analysis/use of data
  • Documents outcome alignment with school objectives and/or professional accreditations
  • Provides a summary of actions taken in response to current assessment findings and a summary of observed improvements resulting from actions taken in a previous assessment cycle (included at end of cycle)
  • Records supervisor approval

Three to five student learning/achievement outcome statements

  • Statements that define what students should think, know, or be able to do upon graduating from UMMC
  • Outcomes for IP units focus on knowledge, skills, attitudes, behaviors and perceptions
  • Programs engaged in distance learning or multi-site/multi-path instruction will provide data on comparability. This means that programs utilizing different modes of instruction (online and campus-based constructs), or delivering content to groups of learners at different locations/through different on-line platforms, separate data in order to examine skill or knowledge attainment across learner subgroups. At least one student learning outcome annually addresses outcome comparability (where applicable). Programs offering multi-site and multi-path instruction assess outcome comparability for each instructional paradigm (i.e. at least one student learning outcome compares the effectiveness of training at different instructional sites, and at least one student learning outcome compares the effectiveness of training when different instructional modalities are employed or when different on-line options are available)
  • As of 2016-17, programs include an operational outcome to assess quality in terms administrative goal attainment and progress toward strategic gains

Each outcome statement is accompanied by:

  • Two means of assessment
    • Description of data collection methods
    • Multiple measures are used to triangulate conclusions
    • Direct measures, or a combination of direct and indirect measures are used
    • Supporting assessment instruments (rubrics etc.) are included
  • Rationale for means of assessment
    • Linking a previous outcome assessment to the current cycle
    • Offering motivation for a particular outcome or (re)-assessment
    • Expressing how the means of assessment address program goal attainment
    • Justification is provided for the selection of assessment instruments
  • Criteria for success
    • Targeted numerical value representing a point of achievement
    • Final grades and pass/fail grades are not considered an acceptable form of assessment. Subcategory information is provided to examine areas of student proficiency and cognitive/behavioral development