Institutional Effectiveness
To improve. To assess. At Touro University California, we work constantly to understand the the things we are doing right, and the things on which we could improve.
What is Institutional Effectiveness
Institutional Effectiveness is a continuous cycle of planning, assessing, analyzing and improving processes, programs, and services that support TUC's mission and vision - including a well-formed understanding of social justice, leadership and equality.
Assessment builds our capacity to inform and evaluate change through data-driven decision making. The process of Institutional Effectiveness at the TUC bolsters our commitment to continuous and focused improvement that keeps us on the leading edge of educational development.
Continual educational improvement means we:
- Collect, analyze, and distribute high quality institutional research.
- Consult with departments, programs, and schools on research projects to insure legitimacy and rigor of data.
- Coordinate a comprehensive system of Program Reviews that contribute to TUC's mission and strategic goals.
- Provide guidance and data support for student learning outcomes assessment.
- Guide and facilitate the accreditation process.
- Ensure that policy decisions are made with information and research gained from assessment.
- Support strategic planning and implementation.
Student Learning Outcome Assessment
Touro University California (in conjunction with Touro University Nevada) has developed four Institutional Student Learning Outcomes (ISLOs). Each year, we focus on one ISLO.
TUC's ISLOs
To exemplify Judaic values of social justice, intellectual pursuit and service to humanity, Touro University students will demonstrate the ability to:
- Use knowledge, skills and effective communication to benefit diverse communities
- Collaborate across disciplines toward a common goal
- Think critically to make evidence-informed decisions and evaluate conclusions in a real world context
- Act in a professional and ethical manner
The first round of assessing the four ISLOs was completed in 2018-2019.
TUC formed the Institutional Assessment Committee (IAC) in 2011 to ensure the assessment of SLOs are sustainable, meaningful, and become part of the institutional culture.
The committee provides leadership and assistance in developing and implementing university-wide assessment policies, procedures and activities.
Institutional Assessment Committee Membership
Dr. Kimberly Wolf, Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine, College of Osteopathic Medicine
Dr. Evan Hermel, MSMHS, College of Osteopathic Medicine
Dr. Tara Jenkins, Doctor of Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy
Dr. Kevin Ita, Doctor of Pharmacy, MSMHS
Dr. Louise Santiago, Graduate School of Education, College of Education & Health Sciences
Ms. Sharon Chesney, Public Health Program, College of Education & Health Sciences
Ms. Julie Charles, MSPAS/MPH Program, College of Education & Health Sciences
Dr. Jacqueline Clavo, Nursing, College of Education & Health Sciences
Dr. Steven Jacobson, Student Services
Dr. James Binkerd, Student Services
Dr. Meiling Tang (Chair), Office of Institutional Effectiveness
IAC Bylaws
Article 1. Name
Section 1.1 Name.
The name of the organization will be the Touro University California Institutional Assessment Committee (“IAC”). It shall be a university committee and report directly to the University Provost/COO.
Article 2. Purpose and Responsibilities
Section 2.1 Purpose.
To ensure the assessment of Student Learning Outcomes is sustainable, meaningful, and becomes part of the culture of TUC; to provide leadership and assistance in developing and implementing university-wide assessment policies, procedures and activities.
Section 2.2 Responsibilities.
- To develop and recommend university-wide assessment policies;
- To review the progress of the university in implementing assessment activities
- To review all assessment reports and recommend improvements
- To recommend a process to encourage assessment and assessment-based change to take place in response to student learning outcomes assessment
- To document current practices of assessment and program improvement; including frequent assessment of the IAC and its processes.
- To facilitate a process for disseminating data, information, and results to appropriate university and external constituencies.
- To report to University Strategic Planning Committee the status of implementation of the plan and the results for outcomes assessment.
Article 3. Membership
The IAC is composed of:
- At least one representative from each academic program nominated by respective deans
- Two representatives from Student Services division
- Director of Institutional Research & Assessment
The Director of Institutional Research & Assessment serves as the Chair of the committee
Article 4. Meetings
- The Institutional Assessment Committee shall meet on a regular basis, at least quarterly, at such dates and times as decided by the Chair after determining the availability of committee members. Special meetings may be held at the discretion of the Chair of the IAC.
- The Chair of the IAC shall set the agenda for the meetings of the IAC.
- The IAC shall keep minutes of all meetings that serve as permanent records. A record of all actions taken shall also be included. The Chair shall maintain the minutes of the IAC.
Article 5. Amendment of Bylaws
These Bylaws may be amended, repealed, or altered, in whole or part, and new Bylaws may be adopted with the approval of the University Strategic Planning Committee.
Academic Program Review
All academic programs at TUC are subject to systematic program review. The program review process is designed to evaluate and enhance the quality of academic programs through a focus on student learning outcomes, evidence-based decisions, and integration with institutional planning.
This reflection on assessment results allows programs to make evidence-based conclusions regarding their performance and evidence-based decisions in proposing major programmatic changes or in requesting resources.
These evidence-based decisions and requests are then shared with the Provost and integrated with the planning and budgeting processes.
TUC Academic Program Review Committee (APRC) leads the institutional systematic program review process.
Reviews may be coordinated with, but are independent of, the periodic reviews of educational programs conducted by professional accrediting agencies.
In 2012, PRC approved the TUC Academic Program Review Guidelines.
Program Review Committee Membership
2022-2024
College of Osteopathic Medicine
Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine: Dr. Susan St. Pierre
MSMHS-COM: Dr. David Eliot
College of Pharmacy
Dr. Susan Heimer
College of Education & Health Sciences
Graduate School of Education /School of Nursing: Dr. Linda Haymes
Public Health Program /Joint Program: Dr. Carly Strouse (Vice-chair)
Library
Ms. Jennifer Abueg
Provost Appointees
Dr. Rolly Kali-Rai, Ms. Paisley Rosengren
Office of Institutional Effectiveness
Dr. Meiling Tang (Chair)
Academic Program Review Committee
A Faculty Senate/University Shared Committee
1. Purpose of Committee:
The Academic Program Review Committee (APRC) is a standing Faculty Senate/University shared committee. The purpose of the committee is to provide systematic program reviews designed to evaluate and enhance the quality of academic programs through a focus on student learning outcomes, evidence-based decisions, and integration with institutional planning. These reviews may be coordinated with, but are independent of, the periodic reviews of educational programs conducted by professional accrediting agencies. The committee reports directly to the provost and the chair of the Faculty Senate.
The roles and responsibilities of APRC shall be:
- To schedule program reviews and program review meetings
- To define what information will be required in program reviews
- To develop criteria by which to evaluate program effectiveness
- To review the development, the sustainability and the growth of the programs with regard to university infrastructure, facilities and services
- To review recommendations from accrediting agencies, program outcomes from selfstudies, and student learning outcomes (SLO) from annual updates
- To develop the Formal Findings and Recommendations report
- To review new academic degree program proposals (may review new program concentrations)
- To evaluate the scope and effectiveness of the program review process and make any necessary modifications
2. Membership:
The membership of the Academic Program Review Committee will consist of 11 members including:
- Seven (7) regular faculty members are elected through an all-faculty vote using an electronic ballot prepared by the Faculty Senate Committee on Committees.
- College of Osteopathic Medicine: two (2) members (one from Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine, one from MSMHS-COM)
- College of Pharmacy: one (1) member
- College of Education and Health Sciences: Two (2) members (one from Public Health or from Joint PA/MPH, one from GSOE or from School of Nursing)
- One (1) librarian
- One (1) non-regular faculty member
- One (1) staff member elected by the staff council
- The AVP of Institutional Effectiveness is a member of this FS/University shared committee by virtue of his/her position.
- Two (2) appointees by the provost.
- Terms are 3 years for each member with a maximum of 2 successive terms on a committee.
- Members may be re-elected to serve on the committee after a hiatus of 1 year.
- The Committee aspires to have a diverse and inclusive membership.
- All Committee members are voting members.
- All Committee members are voting members.
- A committee roster will be kept and indicates the term of office for each elected member. This will be maintained by the Committee on Committees in partnership with the Academic Program Review Committee Secretary.
- Members are expected to attend and participate in meetings and activities related to the charges of the Committee.
- If needed, the committee may add ad hoc members (faculty, staff or students) from the program(s) being reviewed.
3. Officers:
- The AVP of Institutional Effectiveness is assumed to chair the Committee, and they will provide that service unless there is a vote of the Committee to remove the current chair and then a second vote to elect a new chair from the members of the Committee who have served for at least one full year.
- The Committee will elect its own committee vice-chair and secretary from its own membership.
- Duties of the Chair:
- Conduct the committee meetings and set the agenda.
- Serve as the liaison between the provost, the APRC and the reviewed academic programs to conduct the reviews following TUC Academic Program Review Guidelines.
- Serve as the principal representative to the Administration and other bodies.
- Duties of the Vice-Chair
- Assist the chair and conduct the meeting in the absence of the chair.
- Assume all responsibilities described for the Chair in the event that the Chair is absent for meetings or otherwise unable to perform the Chair's duties.
- Duties of the Secretary
- Responsible for the written record of each committee meeting. Review, maintain, publish, and distribute minutes to the membership.
- In cooperation with the Chair, invite committee members to meetings, and invite additional participants if needed.
- The above committee officers are regular voting members of the committee.
- If an officer takes office during an academic year their term extends through the end of that academic year.
- The term for the vice-chair and secretary is 3 academic years (July through June). Officers may serve a maximum of two successive terms.
4. Conduct of Business:
- The Academic Program Review Committee shall meet on a regular basis, at such dates and times as decided by the Chair after determining the availability of committee members. Special meetings may be held at the discretion of the Chair of the APRC.
- This committee requires a quorum of 6 to conduct business. A vote of a majority of those present is required to pass a motion.
- Any further proposed changes to the Committee's bylaws will be sent to the FS Committee on Committees which will then forward it, with a recommendation, to the Faculty Governance Steering Committee for a decision.
In the academic year 2021-2022, the APRC reviewed Master of Science in Medical Health Sciences program, Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine program, and Master of Public Health program.