Main Navigation:

General workgroup process and guidelines

Assessment process main tasks

  • Evaluate existing mapping data for Area X and update as needed.
  • Review outcomes and refine as necessary to ensure continued value and appropriateness.
  • Review assessment data from previous semesters alongside completion rates.
  • Discuss and make recommendations for any potential improvements or next steps.
  • Facilitate college-wide discussion of the results and implementation of any recommendations.

Detailed process and timeline for ILO or GEO Area-X assessment

Semester before assessment

  • SLO Coordinators advertise workgroup and get folks to sign on and finalize workgroup 
  • SLO Coordinators update and prepare workgroup webpage and prepare for new assessment.

Semester 1

  • Month 1 (January or August): 
    • Workgroup meets with one SLO Coordinator and identifies chair and web page/minutes note taker.
    • Workgroup training on process, ARGOS, and CurricUNET. (CMS if necessary)
  • Month 2 (February or September):
    • SLO Coordinator runs mapping report within CurricUNET for GELOs or ILOs in Area X. *NOTE: GE Area assessments are combined with their corollary CSU/IGETC outcomes.*
    • Workgroup reviews existing mapping data for Area X and considers whether there are gaps and if so how to handle (might mean completing some mapping as a group).
    • Workgroup gathers data (numbers of students and % of students):
      • ARGOS 
        • Completion data for GE courses sliced for demographics
        • SLO data by GE course (not by GELO) sliced for demographics
        • Program data by Major (if relevant for GELOs that correspond to one of the Liberal Arts and Sciences degree)
      • CURRICUNET -- aggregated SLO data across multiple semesters (totals for mapped courses) -- gathered by SLO Coordinator.
    • Workgroup begins analysis of data
    • Workgroup begins discussion of outcomes and possible refinements.
  • Month 3 (March or October): 
    • Workgroup makes recommended refinements on the outcomes, if relevant, to ensure continued value and appropriateness.
    • Workgroup continues data analysis and discussion of possible recommendations if needed
    • Workgroup drafts report that includes summary of data (be sure to include numbers of students and % of students, within the GE Area and compared to college as whole), analysis, and preliminary recommendations
  • Month 4 (April or November):
    • SLO Coordinators send out college-wide survey to get feedback on any proposed changes to the outcomes
    • Workgroup brings proposed outcome changes and draft report to SLO Committee for review
    • Workgroup brings proposed outcome changes to Academic Senate for review (see notes below)
    • Workgroup finalizes outcomes (ultimately needs to send to Bipartite to make official)
    • Workgroup holds brown bag/forum with faculty from specific GE Areas (or college wide) and shows preliminary data and recommendations -- gather more
  • Month 5 (May or December):
    • Workgroup completes a final evaluation report on the results and the process

Semester after assessment

  • SLO Coordinators and workgroup chair facilitates college-wide discussion of the results and suggested next steps
    • Brings report through Academic Senate for action
    • Brings report through Planning Committee for action
  • SLO Coordinators continue to process revision to outcomes (if still hasn't been completed)
    • After bipartite and Academic Senate review, goes to Catalog and CurricUNET for updates.


Further details

  • Workgroup formation:
    • ILO workgroup is the SLO Committee.
    • Area X Workgroup formed in the semester PRIOR to the actual assessment semester. 
      • Workgroup members are volunteers from Area X faculty (volunteers solicited through emails sent by the SLO Coordinator to all Area X Course/Program Coordinators and Department Chairs with Area X courses/programs). 
      • Reasonable effort is made to include representatives from all departments. 
  • Web pages and minutes:
    • A workgroup/assessment web page is maintained and regularly updated with postings of all agendas and notes throughout the semester by a workgroup member identified with this responsibility at the start of the project.
  • Communication:
    • Results of workgroup efforts and meetings are shared with and discussed at the SLO Committee Meetings which are open to everyone.
    • When the workgroup has completed its best effort at refining the GEOs or ILOs, the proposed new outcomes are shared with the ENTIRE CCSF community through an online survey sent by email by the SLO Coordinator to the ENTIRE college. That survey is also linked from the front page of the SLO website.
    • In preparation for the Academic Senate Executive Council meeting, the proposed new GEOs or ILOs are submitted for review to the president of the Academic senate Executive Council for incorporation into the next meeting. A plan is described at that point for the final round of review and approval, which includes:
      • At the first EC meeting, the chair of the workgroup appears in front of the EC to answer any questions and solicit feedback both in the time allotted on the agenda as well as through email afterward (up to Sunday night immediately following the meeting).
      • The following week, the workgroup reconvenes to discuss the feedback received, make any final tweaks based on that feedback, and produces its final version of proposed new GEOs or ILOs.
      • The final proposal is sent to the President of the EC, again for distribution ahead of time to all members of the EC and for inclusion on the agenda for the next meeting.
      • At the next meeting, the chair of the workgroup again returns to submit the final proposal to a vote. Prior to a vote, the chair answers any questions that still linger and that the agenda has time to allow (but NO changes will be made to the proposal on the floor). After discussion ends, the proposal is put up for a yea/nay vote.
        • YEA = yes we prefer the current version to the existing one
        • NAY = no, we reject the revised version and prefer the existing one
      • If yea, wins, the proposal next goes on to the Bipartite meeting for a similar review and discussion and approval
      • If nay wins, the GEOs or ILOs remain as is, and will come back for review 4 years later.
    • Final report and recommendations sent to Academic Senate Executive Council and Planning Committee for discussion of how to take action on any of the recommendations. NOTE: This a final report -- the report doesn't change based on these meetings. It's the action that is the focus. Next steps.


Click here to see Pre-Spring 2015 process