V. Outcomes Assessment Processes and Structures

Chapter V of this Periodic Review Report focuses on the assessment processes and structures that the College uses campuswide and within its major divisions. Chapter VI presents examples of the use of assessment results within the College's integrated system of planning, assessment, and budgeting.

Beginning with the Mission Statement and the Comprehensive College Plan, assessment results are integral to planning, analysis, and decision-making at the College. The College conducts campuswide assessment activities in support of the Comprehensive College Plan as well as appropriate assessment activities within the Divisions of Academic Affairs, Student Development, Finance and Administration, and College Advancement, based on their areas of responsibility. Though the College received no formal recommendations for improvement from its 2003 Middle States re-accreditation, the College has strengthened its planning, assessment, and budgeting processes in recent years.

Four key documents guide and focus the College's efforts in assessment, planning, and resource allocation, and three have been updated recently: the Institutional Assessment Plan or IAP (revised fall 2006), Academic Departmental Annual Report format (revised spring 2007), Guidelines for Review of Academic Programs, and Divisional Annual Report format (revised spring 2007). Though each process has a specific focus, each is interrelated. The IAP (See Appendix 6??) provides a unifying framework for campus assessment and planning with a separate, more detailed framework for each campus division. The processes and the assessment results of each division culminate in the Divisional Annual Report (See Appendix 5??) due each July.

In addition, the IAP includes, as a part of the plan in the academic area, results from the review of specific academic programs and the Academic Departmental Annual Reports (See Appendix 14??). In turn, these become part of the Divisional Annual Report for Academic Affairs, which reports the accomplishments from a previous year's major new initiatives and also presents actions and initiatives for the next year and beyond. For all major divisions of the College, the IAP is conceived as a continuing feedback loop, as are the other key assessment documents and divisional processes that provide input into the four major systems.

The fall 2006 revision of the IAP incorporates a number of improvements, including a greater focus on assessing institutional effectiveness; the inclusion of all major divisions of the College; greater specificity regarding the assessment process for each division; and greater specificity of measures for assessing progress toward goals and objectives. Moreover, there are links to the revised Academic Departmental Annual Report format, the results of programmatic assessment, the specific planning and assessment process of each division, and clearer links to Divisional Annual Reports. These annual reports summarize in greater detail plans, assessment of those plans including progress toward goals and objectives, changes in plans resulting from assessment, and the steps and actions required in the upcoming year.

A. Campuswide Assessment Processes

Assessment and planning have become an integral part of the College's culture. The College's guidelines and documents reflect a practical, usable, and realistic approach to assessment that is highly integrated and reflects an appropriate investment of institutional resources. These processes engage all members of the campus community.

The College uses a number of campuswide assessment instruments to measure its effectiveness in pursuing the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive College Plan. The responsibility for administration of the instruments is generally assigned to the division most responsible for the goal. The results and analyses are considered, along with other available data, at the level of the President's Cabinet, which holds primary responsibility for major integrated College-wide planning and resource allocation.

For example, to assist in assessing the College's progress in the area of academic quality, the Division of Academic Affairs assesses the General Education requirement and the academic programs using processes established by SUNY System Administration. The Division of Student Development administers the Student Opinion Survey, Withdrawal/Non-returning Student Survey, Alumni Survey, Beginning College Survey of Engagement, National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), and Freshman Six-Week Survey to assist in assessing the College's progress in the areas of enrollment management and student engagement. The Office of Equity and Inclusion coordinates the survey of the campus climate for diversity, which informs the College's efforts in the area of diversity and inclusion and community as well as the strategic plan for diversity and inclusion. The Division of Finance and Administration administers the Student Technology Initiative Survey and student satisfaction surveys regarding dining services and facilities in support of the College-wide effort to enhance the quality of campus life. The Division of College Advancement uses an alumni survey and donor satisfaction survey to inform the area of external support and image. These and many other smaller-scale assessment processes, as well as division and office-specific assessment processes, provide data integral to the College's planning and evaluation of the goals of the Comprehensive College Plan.

B. Divisional Assessment Activities in Academic Affairs

The Division of Academic Affairs is responsible for academic assessment activities required by SUNY, including the SUNY-wide General Education requirement and its strengthened campus based assessment and the SUNY assessment of academic programs. Other assessment activities address requirements from external accrediting agencies, such as the Middle States Association, the New York State Education Department, and professional organizations specific to particular areas, such as the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences, Commission on Accreditation for Dietetics Education, American Chemical Society, National Association of Schools of Music, and Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business--International. Internal assessment activities address the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive College Plan and the requirements of the various academic programs and academic-support areas within the division. These include the Milne Library, Registrar's Office, Academic Information Technology Services, Academic Support Services, the Center for Social Responsibility and Community, and the International Education Office. Faculty have used outcomes assessment in courses for many years and have used the results effectively for improvement. The Academic Departmental Annual Report format (Appendix 14??) provides the latest guidelines for outcomes assessment in courses, an updated process that has become more focused and demanding in recent years.

1. Student Learning Outcomes and General Education Assessment

The SUNY Assessment Initiative, which began in 2001, requires campuses to assess the 10 Knowledge and Skill areas and two Competencies making up the SUNY General Education Requirement (GER) every three years. In 2004, as part of its Strengthened Campus-Based Assessment (SCBA) initiative, SUNY established more stringent requirements for the assessment of three learning outcomes areas included in the GER--Writing, Mathematics, and Critical Thinking--and required state-operated campuses to administer the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) beginning in 2008. For assessment of the major, SUNY requires a comprehensive program review, including a self-study and evaluation by two external reviewers, of all undergraduate academic majors every five to seven years.

SUNY-Oneonta has been in complete compliance with the requirements of the SUNY Assessment Initiative and has, in fact, exceeded them. The College is one of the few SUNY institutions that has elected to assess all student learning outcomes making up the SUNY GER on an annual basis. The College also chose to administer the NSSE in 2003 and 2005 (See www.oneonta.edu/general/vsa/CollegePortrait.pdf) and will administer it again in 2008. The College will complete its initial cycle of assessments of academic majors in 2007-08 and will begin a new cycle in 2008-09.

The College's General Education Assessment plan, developed through guidelines from SUNY System Administration and its General Education Assessment Review (GEAR) group, has evolved since its initial implementation in 2000-01. Initially, faculty teaching Gen Ed 2000 courses were asked, beginning with the spring 2001 semester, to respond to the following four questions:
> How does your course address the SUNY Learning Outcome? (A syllabus is to be attached as supporting material.)
> How do you assess the extent to which students have attained this SUNY Learning Outcome?
> What were the assessment results?
> Based on your assessment of student learning, describe any changes you may have made or expect to make in your course design and/or teaching methods and indicate the reason(s).

Because the provost and divisional deans believe that maintaining the traditional academic leadership role of department chairs was important to the campus, chairs were asked to provide the initial review of course syllabi for department faculty teaching Gen Ed 2000 courses. In addition, each year a randomly generated list of 20% of all General Education sections taught for each subject category was used as an "assessment sampling" for a review by the deans. The College's first assessment of Gen Ed 2000 occurred at the end of the spring 2001 semester.

In 2002, at the request of the GEAR group, the College submitted a revised plan, the General Education 2 Assessment Plan, which combined some of the features of the College's original plan with far greater specificity of the assessment instruments to be used. The College's new plan was approved in May 2002, and the College has conducted assessments annually at the ends of the fall and spring semesters. Divisional deans reviewed the assessment results and worked with department faculty to implement changes in specific General Education courses. Every General Education course has a detailed syllabus with stated goals and objectives of expected student leaning (knowledge, skills, and competencies), as well as the methods of assessment to be used. Departments and programs and the courses offered use both direct and indirect measures of learning. The overall General Education program has not required changes as a result of the assessments.

In 2005-06 in response to a revised SUNY requirement for strengthened campus-based assessment, the College developed and submitted a revised general education assessment plan, which was approved with minor revisions by the SUNY-wide General Education Assessment Review Group in June 2006. The plan employs standardized rubrics and standards developed by panels of faculty from across SUNY to assess student learning outcomes in mathematics, composition, and critical thinking (See Appendix 15??). The initial assessment of mathematics was completed at the end of the 2006-07 academic year. Composition is scheduled for completion during 2007-08 and critical thinking during 2008-09.

In preparation for the mathematics assessment, the College sent faculty to a rubrics training workshop in February 2007, who then became responsible for training other Oneonta faculty to administer and score the rubrics. The actual assessments were conducted in spring 2007 and yielded positive findings. For the basic skills components, 78% of students met or exceeded a priori standards, 11% approached standards, and 11% did not meet standards. For the data-analysis and quantitative-reasoning components, 70% of students met or exceeded standards, 17% approached standards, and 13% did not meet standards. Mathematics faculty are using the results from these assessments in a variety of ways to make program improvements. For example, they closely examined the correlation between student performance on the assessments and student grades, and they decided to de-emphasize outcomes areas in which students performed very well in order to focus on areas in which students did not perform as well.

2. Assessment of Academic Majors

The College established and implemented a plan for assessment of academic majors over a seven-year period with an initial cycle of 2001-02 to 2007-08, as described in the Institutional Assessment Plan. Based on the assessments, modifications to individual courses and programs were made as appropriate.

Academic programs at the College are designed to reflect the Mission Statement and to meet the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive College Plan. In each of the four key assessment and planning documents, the Mission Statement and the goals and objectives of the CCP are addressed. The College's academic programs are a reflection of its history, its goals and objectives for individual programs, and its goals for the institution including General Education. Changes to curricular programs or additions and deletions of programs result from planning involving faculty, department chairs, deans, the provost, and appropriate committees of the College Senate.

The assessment and planning process for academic programs brings into use the programmatic assessment process, the Academic Departmental Annual Report, and the annual on-going planning process for Academic Affairs that focuses on two major areas: faculty needs and staffing requirements, and equipment and instrumentation to keep academic programs current.

The revised Academic Departmental Annual Report provides the guidelines and requirements for valid, reliable, and effective means to measure student learning and affective development. The report format addresses how each program or department contributes to the College and its students, the expected outcomes in student knowledge and skills, and links to both department and College goals. In addition, the report details planning related to programmatic expectations, outcomes, and achievements of faculty and students; specific accomplishments; plans for assessment of the program and student learning, both in the program and for General Education; recommendations with regard to course and program planning; and anticipated changes to improve student learning.

The following representative examples from the Division of Academic Affairs demonstrate the use of results from the assessment of academic majors to guide changes in courses and programs:

• During the 2004-05 academic year, the College's undergraduate major in Anthropology underwent programmatic assessment. As a result, the external reviewers recommended that the campus invest in additional faculty for the department in support of the curriculum, which historically has posted either the highest or one of the three highest student/faculty ratios on campus. As a part of the staffing planning process in the Division of Science and Social Science during spring 2005 and as a part of the staffing planning process in the Division of Academic Affairs during summer 2005, deliberations led to the decision to authorize a tenure-track faculty search in Anthropology with the new hire joining the faculty at the beginning of the 2006-07 academic year.

• Based on its assessment in 2004-05, the Psychology Department began strategic planning to address the issue of aligning course offerings to contemporary and likely future trends in psychology; and examined the feasibility of developing a two-course research-methods sequence that integrates teaching of research methods and statistics. Based on exit questionnaire responses of graduating seniors, the department developed increased emphasis on conveying career information and is considering requiring an appropriate course. It also planned activities in accordance with APA benchmarks and outside examiners' recommendations, including the research methods sequence, capstone experience, improved structure for independent study projects, and re-examination of overall set of required courses for major.

• Following an assessment of the Communication Arts Department in 2005-06, the Theatre Department was created as a separate free-standing department from the Communication Arts Department, which formerly housed the major. The Theatre major and minor programs were revised to include a new introductory theatre course; to refine the six-credit practicum into introductory and advanced skill levels; to move the required play-analysis course earlier in the curriculum to better prepare students for later coursework; and to simplify and streamline the Theatre minor. In addition, the department began development of a new Dance minor in cooperation with the Physical Education Department and began revising the Theatre program leading to a Bachelor of Science degree.

• Following its assessment in 2006-07, the Sociology Department implemented a Multiple Major Assessment Strategy document that outlines program goals, a senior survey, and course-specific assessment measures; aligned core requirements between Gerontology Studies and Sociology; and altered the research-methods sequence to meet better the differing needs of the multiple majors.

• In preparation for its assessment in 2007-08, the Art Department developed programmatic goals for both the art studio and computer art programs and created a Student Learning Outcomes chart outlining several levels that students should acquire and experience. It also developed a list of "points of assessment"; developed a "bubble sheet" to assess drawing skills, aesthetic judgment, and critical thinking skills; and developed both mid-term and final portfolio reviews.

3. External Accreditations of Academic Programs

A number of the College's academic departments and programs hold or are pursuing professional accreditations from national agencies, including three of the College's largest majors: Education, Music, and Economics and Business. Such accreditation requires ongoing planning and assessment. The College's program in Chemistry is approved by the American Chemical Society, and the Human Ecology Department holds professional accreditation from the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences. The Dietetics program in the Human Ecology Department was re-accredited in 2004 by the Commission for Accreditation of Dietetics Education of the American Dietetic Association. The College was re-accredited in 2005 by the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. The Music Department earned national accreditation for its programs from the National Association of Schools of Music in 2007. The Division of Economics and Business was accepted into the AACSB-International pre-accreditation process in February 2006. The strategic planning review for AACSB-International took place during 2006-07 in preparation for a peer-review team visit during 2008-09.

The following examples demonstrate changes to programs that resulted from the self-study and assessment processes involved in external accreditations:

• The Music Department received NASM accreditation as an associate member and is now working to isolate each of the NASM musicianship and performance competencies by course. The department also developed a new Music Performance Handbook, providing for enhanced assessment of musical performance proficiency by an entrance placement evaluation of students to determine proficiency levels, and an Applied Music Progress Assessment Form to monitor progress at the end of each applied music course or ensemble. The department also established end-of-semester juries, student performance, and ensemble performance adjudicated by teams of at least two faculty, as well as a Proficiency Requirement Adjudication Form to determine when a student has met minimum requirements defined for each instrument and voice.
• Based on the NCATE re-accreditation process in 2005, the Division of Education is working to better prepare students in areas of assessment, classroom management, and the Content Specialty Test in Social Studies. The division reviewed its current disposition assessment and is now examining how ethical behavior is defined and promoted.
• The Economics and Business Division continued preparation for AACSB International accreditation; improved faculty credentials; revised the recommended course sequence for accounting; and refined methods of assessment.
• The Human Ecology Department in its Apparel and Textiles program received a new faculty line, coordinated faculty efforts across sections of same course to provide a common experience for students, and is considering revising its curriculum to reflect a more distinct division between Fashion Merchandising and Fashion Design sequences. Its Child and Family Studies program revised the curriculum to reflect a stronger child-and-family emphasis, coordinated across courses for course sequencing and content to eliminate duplication and create a more cohesive program, and developed two new courses. Its Dietetics program strengthened efforts to improve students' technical reading, writing, and research skills, improved students' preparation prior to taking Advanced Nutrition, provided an earlier and more thorough introduction to professional practice and portfolio development, and implemented better sequencing of courses. Its Food Service and Restaurant Administration program implemented several changes in curriculum and added a second faculty position. Its General Human Ecology program worked on finding better-quality internship placements and continued networking within the community.

4. Development of the Academic Departmental Annual Report Format

Over the past two years, the academic deans, chairs, and the Academic Programs Assessment Committee (APAC) have collaborated on revising the annual reporting process for departments and modifying selected instructional-related paperwork to consolidate the reporting and data-gathering processes and thereby facilitate the assessment processes for courses and programs. The Academic Departmental Annual Report format (See Appendix 14??), a model that provides consistency of format, was implemented in Spring 2007 for departmental annual reports covering the 2006-07 academic year. Following its initial use, discussion with the deans, and feedback from academic departments and programs, APAC is reviewing the effectiveness of the format and considering adjustments to it.

As part of the process of compiling the Academic Departmental Annual Report, faculty articulate program goals and identify their relationship to the College's goals. Faculty also delineate the knowledge, skills, and dispositions expected of graduates of their programs, thereby forming the basis of student learning goals. Faculty determine how courses contribute to the overall learning goals for the major and incorporate the learning goals into individual courses. For departmental annual reports, faculty also analyze their findings regarding the assessment of student learning and describe changes to programs that are made based on their analyses. The structure of the Academic Departmental Annual Report thereby encourages the linking of the results of assessment and planning, which are reflected in the Academic Affairs Divisional Annual Report.

Several revisions of curricular programs were implemented based on the planning and assessment involved in completing the Academic Departmental Annual Report. Selected examples, resulting from the 2006-07 reports, are as follows:

• The Theatre Department revised the practicum experience for Theatre majors to create two levels of participation: introductory (i.e., in which students learn to take direction and work together under a team leader) and advanced (i.e., in which students learn how to participate in the ongoing creative decision-making process and are given managerial responsibilities over crews of introductory students).
• The Child and Family Studies Program of the Human Ecology Department added a prerequisite (FAMS 363, focusing on teaching those skills necessary to work in the human service professions) which students must take before their internship experience.
• The Department of Management, Marketing, and Information Systems implemented an integrated approach to ethics throughout the curriculum through strategies such as adopting a customized text on Business Ethics that will be used in a number of required courses and that students will be required to keep and use throughout their junior and senior years. The department required that all upper-division courses emphasize ethics and added an ethics discussion and paper requirement to the Management Information Systems course.
• The English Department revised its new "gateway-to-the-major" LITR 150 course to place more early emphasis on poetry, based on student performance on a locally-developed pre-test.

5. New Academic Programs and Program Revisions

The College is developing a new online Master of Science program in Nutrition and Dietetics. Because the new program will be the College's first online degree program, the College submitted a request for substantive change to the Middle States Association. On February 21, 2007, the MSA Committee on Substantive Change decided to "include the on-line distance education Master of Science Degree program in Nutrition and Dietetics provisionally within the scope of the institution's accreditation pending the institution providing documentation of approval by the New York State Education Department and the SUNY System Administration." The College has since received approval from SUNY System Administration and the State Education Department. Relevant documents demonstrating the approvals are attached as Appendix 16??.

The Committee on Substantive Change requested that this Periodic Review Report address the process for assessment of student learning in the new program and provide an update on student enrollment and faculty staffing for the program. The new online graduate program, which will have a maximum initial capacity of 20 students, is currently accepting students and will be offered for the first time beginning in June 2008. Appropriate faculty resources have been assigned to the program. A discussion of the process to assess student learning in the online program is attached as Appendix 17??.

A letter of intent for a new master's program in Educational Technology was submitted to SUNY in July 2006 for SUNY-wide review. Approval was granted to commence the next phase of creation of a new program, and the required external reviewers visited the campus in late May 2007. Designed to use state-of-the-art technologies in the classroom to meet educational standards, this program will require initial teacher certification as an entrance requirement and is designed for both elementary and secondary teachers seeking professional certification. The tentative beginning date for this new graduate program is fall 2008.

A letter of intent was submitted to SUNY System Administration for a master's degree program in Lake Management. Currently, it is being reviewed by the SUNY campuses.

C. Divisional Assessment Activities in Student Development

The Division of Student Development serves students through offices and programs including Academic Advisement; Admissions; Athletics, Intramurals and Recreation; Career Development and Student Employment; the College Assistance Migrant Program; the Counseling Center; Financial Aid; First Year Experience and Orientation; the Health and Wellness Center; the Hunt College Union (which includes the Gender and Sexuality Resource Center, Greek Life, and Student Activities); Judicial Affairs; Multicultural Student Affairs; Residence Life and Housing; the Office of Special Programs/Educational Opportunity Program; Student Disability Services; and University Police. The division holds primary responsibility for enrollment management, student life, campus safety, and intercollegiate athletics.

A number of assessment instruments are used to measure the effectiveness of and student satisfaction with the services of the division, including the Residence Life Quality of Life Survey, Health Center Satisfaction Survey, National College Health Assessment, Counseling Center Quality of Service Survey, ACUI/EBI College Union/Student Center Assessment, Admissions Decliner Survey, and EOP Student Perception Survey. The division also oversees the administration and analysis of several campus-wide surveys, including the SUNY Student Opinion Survey, Withdrawal/Non-returning Student Survey, Alumni Survey, CORE, National College Health Assessment, Beginning College Survey of Engagement, National Survey of Student Engagement, and Freshman Six-Week Survey.

The division's planning and assessment process begins with each unit's developing plans and goals related to the Comprehensive College Plan and to continuous quality improvement, with consideration of the most recent outcomes assessment results. All unit managers then consider these plans and goals during a planning retreat each June. Additionally, division-wide issues that were identified the previous June are reviewed during the retreat, and a consensus-building process is used to identify issues for the next year. The results of the process are reflected in the Student Development Divisional Annual Report.

1. Examples of the Use of Assessment Results in Student Development

The following selected examples from the Division of Student Development demonstrate the use of assessment results to affect program and College goals and objectives:

• While student opinion on a wide variety of services and experiences has steadily improved in the last three administrations of the Student Opinion Survey, ratings of academic climate have remained flat. In an effort to better understand the dynamics of academic climate, the Student Development Division administered the National Survey of Student Engagement in 2003 and 2005. Results indicate that freshmen are significantly less engaged on a host of survey items than their counterparts at similar institutions. Seniors, on the other hand, are not significantly different. As a result, a recommendation was made, and the President and Provost initiated a Freshman Academic Experience Task Force to explore and make recommendations for enhancing the academic experience of freshmen.
• In the spring of 2007, the Student Development Division participated in a vulnerability assessment project (facilitated by the College's Internal Control Officer) to identify potential vulnerabilities in the areas of Physical Safety, Customer/Staff Access, Cash Security, Property Security, Information Security, Business Continuity, Policies and Procedures, Personnel Management Practices, Financial Management Practices, Planning Practices, and Other Vulnerabilities. As a result, each office identified potential vulnerabilities. Supervisors were asked to develop plans to correct vulnerabilities as part of their annual goals, and local "experts" were engaged to assist in reviewing and making recommendations about the vulnerabilities.
• Each department n the Student Development Division was asked to conduct a Diversity Assessment using a matrix. The matrix asked for ratings on five characteristics of program (the vertical axis) and six sub-groups representing diverse populations (the horizontal axis). After the assessment was complete, each office was asked to identify a diversity goal for that spring. Subsequently, each office was asked to revisit the diversity assessment matrix each year and establish annual goals to improve the office climate with respect to diversity.
• In response to external audit, the Office of Judicial Affairs has changed procedures of the Standing Disciplinary Board. In response to student survey data, the office has added methods of providing information to students prior to hearings.
• After evaluating patterns of usage of appointments, the Counseling Center changed its referral process and increased the use of group counseling. The center is evaluating data on psychiatric transports to project costs associated with using Bassett Hospital in Cooperstown instead of Fox Hospital in Oneonta. The center uses data regarding cancellations and no-shows for appointments in evaluating its clinical staff.

D. Divisional Assessment Activities in Finance and Administration

The Division of Finance and Administration holds primary responsibility for the administrative functions of the College, such as financial management, business affairs, administrative technology, telecommunications, facilities, employee services, and some student services. It serves the College through offices and programs including the Offices of Computer Services, Facilities & Physical Plant, Human Resources, Payroll, Employment Opportunities, Information Technology Security, Maintenance Operations, Purchasing, Student Accounts, and Telecommunications. The division is also administratively responsible for Oneonta Ancillary Services (including services such as student dining and the bookstore), the College's Research Foundation activities, and the SUNY Student Information & Campus Administrative Systems (SICAS) Center, which is housed at the College.

The Division of Finance and Administration is integrally involved in planning, assessment, and analysis, and the division undergoes periodic audits by SUNY, the State Office of Audit and Control, the SUNY Research Foundation, the State Civil Service Department, and other external agencies. These reviews focus on performance and program effectiveness as well as financial accountability and compliance. Furthermore, in order to sustain the fiscal integrity of the College, the division engages in regular routine analysis and evaluation of expenditures relative to revenue. Additional information is provided in the form of feedback and assessment by students, faculty, and other campus constituencies through surveys and focus groups.

On a campuswide basis, the division coordinates the College's internal control program, which is required of all state agencies by state law, to identify facility, program, and process weaknesses and to implement corrective action. The College is currently conducting a two-year process of vulnerability assessments within its major divisions in the areas of customer and staff physical safety, customer and staff access, cash security, property security, information security, business continuity, policies and procedures, personnel management, financial management, and planning. The anticipated outcome is the development of process and program quality-control points in each of the College's critical functions.

1. Examples of the Use of Assessment Results in Finance and Administration

The Division of Finance and Administration uses a number of assessment activities to measure the effectiveness of its programs and services related to divisional and College goals and to effect improvements in them. The following selected examples demonstrate the use of assessment results to implement program changes.

• Based on the results of the ID/Dining Card survey of students, Oneonta Ancillary Services extended the hours of the ID/Dining Card office and placed additional informational FAQs about it on the OAS homepage. Based on the results of the EZAdd survey of students, OAS created a link to EZAdd (through which funds can be added to ID/Dining cards) from the campus homepage, provided access to the EZAdd site for parents of students, and enhanced the EZAdd web site. Based on feedback from extensive two-year consultations with large student groups, OAS replaced the Italian eatery in the Hunt Union with a new dining concept, implemented a "web-food" system for students to order take-out food online, implemented a "LaundryView" system to enable students to monitor residence-hall laundry machines, and developed agreements with off-campus merchants to enable students to make purchases with their campus cards.
• Based on the annual Student Technology Initiative survey, the Computer Services, Networking, Security, and Telecommunications area has made a number of improvements to technology and telecommunications services for students. A Service Level Agreement has been established with the goal of responding to all help desk calls within one business day. An independent third-party now calls members of the campus community to verify that issues referred to the help desk have been resolved to the satisfaction of the users who reported the problems.
• Based on campus needs for timely reporting and recognition of gifts, the College Foundation Finance Office created the Gift Processing Advisory Committee to streamline the process and to inform all of those involved in gift-processing. The group created flowcharts to detail the process, and it meets bi-weekly to discuss concerns and seek additional efficiencies.

• Based on the 2006 alumni survey as well as feedback from alumni in groups events and individual meetings, the division engaged faculty in identifying and working with alumni who are prospective major donors, notably in cases where the donor may be a faculty member's former student. These deliberate actions to engage faculty now include having alumni as guest speakers in classes and with academic clubs, having faculty travel with College Advancement staff for relationship-building and solicitation meetings, and asking faculty to speak at events. Gifts from faculty and staff and gifts from alumni both reached all-time highs in the 2006-07 academic year.
• Based on national research on philanthropy in education, the division sought to increase student involvement in charitable giving as a means of increasing in the future the percentage of alumni who participate in giving to the College. Because the research suggested that current students must learn about and experience charitable giving to the College, the division implemented the Senior Class Gift Campaign, expanded the Campus Phonathon Program, and initiated a "Students for Students" giving program. The division also expanded its web presence and worked with the College at Oneonta Foundation Board of Directors to establish "student-director" positions. Three students have since been elected to the Foundation Board of Directors.
• Feedback from alumni and other constituents and College data on gifts indicated that scholarships were the favored vehicle for gifts to the College. Therefore, the division established gifts to scholarships as the primary thrust of its five-year campaign, "Changing Lives Since 1889." The Campaign exceeded its goal of $10 million by raising over $12 million for scholarships and other campus initiatives. Before the campaign, an average of eight new scholarships were established annually. In 2006-07, the final year of the campaign, 28 new scholarships were established.