Annual Peer Review

Overview

Since 2016, UWG has completed an Annual Peer Review of Academic Assessment Reports. Each Spring, faculty members from across campus review all assessment reports on program-level Student Learning Outcomes. These reports are scored against the UWG Assessment Quality Rubric. The purpose of this process is to advance the assessment of student learning and to encourage the use of assessment data for continuous improvement.

Peer Review Process

Each spring semester, two faculty representatives from each College/School come together and form a team of 12 reviewers. These 12 reviewers are divided into four teams of three. Teams are responsible for reviewing and scoring around 21 assessment reports, 7 per person, using the UWG Assessment Quality Rubric.

Programs that score below a 3.0 during the initial review, will be given the opportunity to revise and resubmit their program assessment report for a second review. This revision process is intended for minor edits such as including additional information requested by the reviewers. Programs are notified of the opportunity by the Director of Assessment, and are asked to revise and resubmit within one week of being notified.

The revised report is then reviewed and re-scored by the same team of reviewers from the initial review.

Once second reviews are complete, all programs receive the final score report via email. Each College/School Dean receives an aggregate Final Score Report for their programs and the Provost receives an Institutional Final Score Report.

2020

Due to budgetary restrictions and COVID-19, the usual structure of 12 faculty members forming the Peer Review Committee was unable to occur. Instead, IEA reviewed and scored all assessment plans submitted in November 2019. IEA used the Assessment Review Rubric in their reviews. The rubric’s scale ranges from 0-Unknown to 1-Beginning, 2-Emerging, 3-Developed, and 4-Highly Developed. Scores in .5 increments were allowed. Final score reports went out to all programs, were aggregated for each College/School, and average scores were presented for the division of Academic Affairs. In addition, reports were created following the organizational change with multiple colleges to show scores under the former and new college structures.

Find the aggregate results for the 2020 Annual Peer Review here - New College Structure

Find the aggregate results for the 2020 Annual Peer Review here - Old College Structure

Spring 2017

Two faculty representatives from each College/School came together and formed a team of 12 reviewers. These 12 reviewers were divided into four teams of three. Each team was responsible for reviewing and scoring 21 assessment reports, 7 per person. Each team came together, and collectively reviewed all 21 reports and submitted final scores. Final score reports went out to all programs, were aggregated for each College/School, and an average score was presented for the division of Academic Affairs.

Find the rubric used in the 2017 Annual Peer Review here.

Find the aggregate results for the 2017 Annual Peer Review here.

Spring 2018

Based on feedback, the Office of Institutional Effectiveness & Assessment requested one faculty member from each College/School, who had previously participated as a reviewer, to take part in an ad-hoc Rubric Review Team. These six faculties, along with the Interim Director of Assessment, reviewed the rubric and overall process for the Annual Peer Review. Revisions were made to the rubric for clarity, and updated processes were implemented.

Find the revised rubric for the 2018 Annual Peer Review here.

Find the aggregate results for the 2018 Annual Peer Review here.

  • Two faculty members from each College/School (12 total)
  • Four teams of 3 reviewers
  • Teams will collectively review and score 21 assessment reports, 7 per person.
Copied

2018 Updated Processes

  • ***NEW Revise and Resubmit process for programs that initially score lower than 3.0***
    • After the initial review and scoring, programs who score below a 3.0, will be given the option to revise and resubmit the assessment report for a second review.
    • Programs will be notified of the opportunity by the Interim Director of Assessment
    • Programs who choose to revise and resubmit must resubmit within one week of being notified.
    • The revised report will be reviewed and re-scored by the same team of reviewers.
    • All programs and Colleges/School will receive the final score report at the same time via email.
Copied

2018 Rubric Updates

  • Reviewers will be allowed to give scores in increments of 0.5.
  • Removed scoring elements for SLO's (SLO's are focused and appropriate to measure student learning). Only comments will be allowed.
  • Final text box area changed from "Overall Summary Comments" to "Additional Comments."
  • "Summary of Program Progress" check boxes were removed.

Spring 2019

As before, two faculty representatives from each College/School came together and formed a team of 12 reviewers. These 12 reviewers were divided into four teams of three. Each team was responsible for reviewing and scoring approximately 21 assessment reports, collectively. Each team came together and reviewed all reports and submitted their first scores. After the initial review and scoring, programs who score below a 3.0, were given the option to revise and resubmit the assessment report for a second review. Programs were notified of the opportunity by the Director of Assessment. Programs who chose to revise and resubmit must have done so within one week of being notified. The revised report was reviewed and re-scored by the same team of reviewers. Final score reports went out to all programs, were aggregated for each College/School, and an average score was presented for the division of Academic Affairs.

Find the aggregate results for the 2019 Annual Peer Review here.

If you have any questions about the Peer Review, please contact Amanda Thomas, Director of Assessment at amandat@westga.edu.