Office of Institutional Effectiveness
2021–22 through 2024–25 · Functional Units Meta-Assessment
Overview · By the Numbers
Phase 1 · Outcomes & Evidence
Phase 2 · Results & Analysis
Phase 3 · Actions
167
Assessment and
Action Plans
Action Plans
853
Outcomes
Assessed
Assessed
719
Evidence
Reviewed
Reviewed
497
Actions
Identified
Identified
80.5%
Outcomes
Met
Met
Primary and Supporting Evidence Reviewed
Primary Evidence
| Counts | 212 |
| Other | 141 |
| Project | 68 |
| Average Time | 35 |
| Total Time | 18 |
| Number of Applications | 13 |
| Assignment | 1 |
| Performance | 2 |
| Field Assessment | 1 |
| Presentation | 1 |
| Money Raised | 1 |
Supporting Evidence
| Other | 175 |
| Survey | 31 |
| Completion Rates | 7 |
| Interview | 7 |
| Course Evaluation | 5 |
| Overall Course Grade | 1 |
Primary Evidence directly shows the impact of the outcome, such as utilization figures, process completion timelines, counts of services rendered, project outputs, staff performance assessments, etc. Supporting Evidence consists of additional data that aids the unit in data-driven decision making, such as survey results, interviews, focus groups, etc.
Actions Identified: The Roadmap for Change
203
Unit-Specific Action
Specialized actions such as cross-unit collaboration, new program launches, technology expansion, community partnerships, and staff training.
171
Maintain Assessment Strategy
Used when results meet or exceed targets — the current plan is effective and will continue.
60
Gather Additional Data
Collecting additional information to get a clearer picture of a specific challenge before acting.
40
Modify Policies / Procedures
Updating administrative rules, policies, implementing staff success plans, improving outreach strategies, and streamlining administrative processes.
21
Revise Measurement / Assessment
Improving the tools used to collect data, such as updating survey questions or assessment methods for better clarity.
2
Revise Curriculum
Making changes to program content, sequencing, or requirements to better support learning outcomes.
79.3%
2021–22
Outcomes Met
Outcomes Met
73.1%
2022–23
Outcomes Met
Outcomes Met
86.0%
2023–24
Outcomes Met
Outcomes Met
82.6%
2024–25
Outcomes Met
Outcomes Met
Primary and Supporting Evidence by Year
Outcomes Met and Not Met & % Met/Not Met Trend by Year
Actions Identified by Year — Breakdown by Type
Strengths and Areas of Improvement by Year
LOOutcomes Assessed
Outcome Status
Met
687
Partially Met
6
Not Met
92
Not Assessed
68
Outcome Status and Trend by Year
Phase 1Evidences Assessed
Primary Evidence — Method Types
Supporting Evidence — Method Types
Phase 2Analysis Themes — Coded from 779 Analysis Texts
Strengths and Areas for Improvement
Strengths
687 (88.2%)
Areas of Improvement
92 (11.8%)
Top Analysis Sub-Themes
Student Performance
310
Program Quality
190
Technology Infrastructure
84
Enrollment Growth
59
Participation Rate
56
Student Support
46
Faculty Development
30
Goal Met
19
Curriculum Development
8
Research Output
8
Sub-Theme Detail — Strengths and Areas for Improvement
✓ Strengths by Sub-Theme
Student Performance
273
Program Quality
165
Technology Infrastructure
70
Enrollment Growth
55
Participation Rate
45
Student Support
35
Faculty Development
25
Goal Met
15
Curriculum Development
6
Research Output
6
↗ Areas of Improvement by Sub-Theme
Student Performance
38
Program Quality
25
Technology Infrastructure
13
Participation Rate
11
Student Support
11
Faculty Development
5
Enrollment Growth
5
Goal Met
5
Curriculum Development
2
Research Output
2
Sub-Theme Definitions
Curriculum Development: Program content updates, sequencing changes, new offerings, and requirement revisions.
Enrollment Growth: Participation trends, headcount changes, recruitment outcomes, and registration data.
Faculty Development: Staff professional development, workshops, mentoring, and practice improvements.
Goal Met: Outcomes that met or exceeded the stated target or benchmark.
Participation Rate: Attendance, submission rates, completion rates, and engagement levels.
Program Quality: Accreditation standards, benchmarks, best practices, and overall program effectiveness.
Research Output: Publications, grant funding, and scholarly or creative works.
Student Performance: Utilization figures, process completion metrics, and demonstrated service outcomes.
Student Support: Advising, counseling, mentoring, and student success interventions.
Technology Infrastructure: Digital tools, platforms, software systems, and online/virtual infrastructure.
Phase 3Actions — The Roadmap for Change
203
Unit-Specific Action
Specialized actions such as cross-unit collaboration, new program launches, technology expansion, community partnerships, and staff training.
171
Maintain Assessment Strategy
Used when results meet or exceed targets — the current plan is effective and will continue.
60
Gather Additional Data
Collecting additional information to get a clearer picture of a specific challenge before acting.
40
Modify Policies / Procedures
Updating administrative rules, policies, implementing staff success plans, improving outreach strategies, and streamlining administrative processes.
21
Revise Measurement / Assessment
Improving the tools used to collect data, such as updating survey questions or assessment methods for better clarity.
2
Revise Curriculum
Making changes to program content, sequencing, or requirements to better support learning outcomes.
Action Status by Year
Actions Identified by Year — Breakdown by Type
Syracuse University · Office of Institutional Effectiveness · Functional Units · 2021–22 through 2024–25