| _X_ Compliance | ___ Partial Compliance | ___ Non-Compliance |
| Narrative | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Introduction
Auburn University engages in rigorous planning and evaluation processes that are
Auburn University’s focus on institutional quality and effectiveness is evidenced by its
The following narrative will show that the result of Auburn University’s comprehensive planning and evaluation process has been continued fulfillment of Auburn University's mission and sustained improvement over the period since its 2013 reaffirmation. After an initial overview, the discussion will describe Auburn University's institutional effectiveness processes as they are expressed in strategic planning; in unit-level planning; in educational programs; and in physical and financial resources.
Overview of Auburn University's Institutional Effectiveness Process
The diagram in Figure 7.1-1, below, shows in simple form Auburn University’s comprehensive process for planning, evaluating, and implementing change. A more detailed illustration is provided for additional perspective. The following narrative describes this process in greater detail, and further illustration of these processes is offered in the responses to standards 7.3, 8.2.a, 8.2.b, and 8.2.c.
Figure 7.1-1: Auburn University’s Institutional Effectiveness Process
Auburn University’s strategic plan is the outcome of a robust process that involves ample engagement with faculty, students, staff, alumni, parents, administrators, industry partners, and other stakeholders. In 2013, the university implemented a five-year planning process that includes comprehensive benchmarking, data assessment, and environmental scanning to identify current and future challenges and institutional strengths, opportunities, themes, goals, and strategies. Following an annual review of key performance indicators, the university’s strategic plan draws on an extensive analysis of trends and best practices across higher education in addition to robust input and feedback from a wide range of stakeholders at all stages of development and implementation.
Auburn University’s Strategic Plan, 2019-2024
Plan Preparation After completing Auburn University’s 2013-2018 Strategic Plan, the university launched its subsequent planning cycle in the summer of 2018. Appointed by the then-president Steven Leath, a 12-member, faculty-led Strategic Planning Committee (SPC) was convened to engage university stakeholders in a nine-month process. The committee members represented a broad cross-section of the university, including faculty at all levels, administrators, the student government president, an extension coordinator, and an alumnus.
The critical question that served as the committee’s primary goal and articulated the ethos of the plan included: What should Auburn University’s priorities be over the next five years to create sustainable competitive advantage and best position the university to realize its 20-year vision?
Guiding Principles for the planning process established by the SPC included:
The SPC established a planning process consisting of four overlapping phases.
Phase 1: Situation Analysis (June – September 2018): The SPC analyzed Auburn University’s current situation to develop a “burning platform” for change to provide a well-researched, fact-driven foundation for Auburn University’s strategic plan. The team focused on six key areas that represent a comprehensive view of the university’s mission-related activities:
A research-driven and detailed perspective on Auburn University’s current situation was developed. The report included the following components:
Phase 2: Interviews and Listening Sessions (August – October 2018): Substantive input from Auburn University’s stakeholders was gathered, including more than 650 of Auburn University’s constituents who provided input through interviews and listening sessions. Over 70 interviews were conducted with trustees, deans, staff, administrators, students, alumni, donors, and extension coordinators, including:
Listening sessions were conducted around the country and on-campus—32 in total, involving 42 different focus groups and more than 650 constituents. Key sessions included:
Phase 3: Strategy Formulation (September - November 2018): Through workshops, the SPC developed goals, themes, a mission, and a vision. These workshops included some previous interviewees and listening session attendees. The SPC also engaged in scenario planning, where future scenarios for higher education were developed that were then used to develop alternative strategic options for consideration. These scenarios asked participants to look 20 years in the future. Multiple drafts of team deliverables were circulated to Auburn University’s senior leadership team (SLT) and the Board of Trustees (BOT) for review and feedback,. The SPC considered SLT and BOT input, making revisions where appropriate.
Phase 4: Strategic Plan Development (November 2018 – February 2019): Based on the goals, themes, values, mission, and vision, a strategic plan was written that was reviewed and discussed by the BOT during its February 14, 2019 Board Workshop. The resulting strategic plan was operationalized by the Senior Leadership Team, including the development of (1) an implementation plan that included action items, associated unit owners, and associated key performance indicators, and (2) unit plans that align with the university’s strategic and implementation plans. Major implementation plan elements and associated Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are periodically presented for review and discussion by the Board of Trustees.
Plan Implementation and Integrated Unit Planning Following the presentation of the approved 2019-2024 Strategic Plan to the campus community and institutional stakeholders, oversight of the plan’s implementation transitioned to the Provost’s Office to provide annual updates and identify action item owners. In addition, each academic college was asked to develop an individual plan and align its strategic planning efforts with the university’s broader objectives.
Academic college strategic plans are included here as documentation:
Action Items. Following approval of the University Strategic Plan, 131 unit-level action items were developed to measure the progress of the plan’s impact and assess the university-level KPIs. Where possible, these action items include specific metrics and reporting processes for programmatic updates and initiatives. Owned by various academic, administrative, and auxiliary units across campus, the action items support the broader objectives identified in the plan and provide ongoing assessments of the university’s strategic efforts and resources.
To fully support these processes, administrative and auxiliary units have also worked to create unit-level strategic plans that align to the Six Key Areas in the university strategic plan, typically grounded in the individual action items and KPIs owned by that unit. Examples of strategic plans from administrative and auxiliary units are provided here for documentation:
Key Performance Indicators. In addition to action items and metrics, a website was created to identify university-level KPIs for each of the six goals that includes historical data from the prior plan (where applicable) as well as targets for each of the five years. These indicators are all quantitative and are measured annually, either (1) at the end of the academic year (July) or (2) at the end of each fiscal year (October).
Institutional Assessments. Auburn University’s strategic plan integrates with several existing data collection processes and metrics which align with goals and action items. Three of the four examples below are metrics used nationwide, further strengthening the university’s ability to establish research-informed priorities based on peer, aspirational, and national trends. Examples of these assessments include:
Plan Updates and Ongoing Reporting In addition to annual updates, the university provides a periodic update on the university’s KPIs at Board of Trustees meetings, including data and programmatic updates and projections relative to target metrics. Programmatic updates may include specific initiatives and special projects aligned with one or more goals.
As part of the annual updates, interviews are conducted with all action item owners during the summer to prepare a comprehensive annual update that is data-driven and presents qualitative summaries of metrics and institutional programming, including achievements and highlights. In addition, metric updates are provided, including final student enrollment data following the official census taken on the 15th class day. This report is shared with the university’s leadership and provided on the university’s strategic planning website. A mid-plan report was prepared in Fall 2021 that provided KPI updates, presented university programs developed as a result of the plan, and highlighted the university’s response to the global pandemic.
Evaluation of Auburn University’s priorities and reporting on strategic plan outcomes also happens on an ad hoc basis. One such case is when an office or unit completes an assessment of its progress toward key outcomes between institutional planning cycles, such as the Office of International Programs’ “Strategic Internationalization Report” from 2021. Another such case is when a university committee completes one or more stages of its charge and reports out to campus and university leadership. For example, in response to the murder of George Floyd and subsequent nationwide protests for social justice, Auburn University formed the Presidential Task Force for Opportunity and Equity,, which was created to examine racial inequality at Auburn University. The Task Force has since recommended strategies for addressing disparities and routinely reports to campus leadership and the campus at large to share their findings and recommendations,.
Examples of Institutional Improvement Resulting from the Strategic Plan Within the action items, opportunities exist to demonstrate the institution’s response to and investment in achieving the plan’s goals and objectives. Examples of efforts derived from the plan are provided below:
Planning and Evaluation in Academic Programs
Auburn University's institutional effectiveness process operates both at the institutional level and at the program or unit level. Its purpose is to create an organizational climate focused on improvement in achieving and advancing the university's mission. Nowhere is the interplay between general and particular forms of effectiveness more apparent than in Auburn University's attention to promoting effective student learning by its 31,000 students. As shown above, a prominent initiative in the strategic plan is devoted to enhancing undergraduate education, and the plan embodies an "aim … to inspire and teach our students to be lifelong learners and to embrace life’s challenges." Further, the periodic processes of academic program review and specialized accreditation emphasize student learning within the broader context of the unit's mission activities. Thus, effectiveness in the university's educational programs is a major component of the institution's strategic plan.
Program Review and External Accreditation As one ongoing means of assuring the effectiveness of its academic programs, Auburn University uses the complementary processes of specialized accreditation and academic program review. Broader than student learning outcomes assessment, but including it, these processes promote effectiveness by examining the whole scope of a unit’s mission activities and the resources necessary to effectively conduct them.
Many of Auburn University's academic programs and units have achieved specialized accreditation. Currently, over 70 different Auburn University programs have such accreditation. Reviews for initial accreditation or its reaffirmation typically examine how the unit aligns with the mission and strategic plan of the institution. Increasingly, specialized accreditors are also requiring clear evidence of program effectiveness in using outcomes data to improve in the achievement of stated learning goals for students. The existence and renewal of these specialized accreditations provides further evidence of Auburn University's commitment to institutional effectiveness.
Academic programs without access to external accreditation undergo academic program review (APR) on a six-year cycle. Auburn University's standards for these reviews require identification of each unit's mission, goals and expected outcomes and continual examination of their alignment with institution-wide statements of Auburn University's mission and goals. Standard I for Academic Program Review states,
The mission, goals, and expected outcomes of an academic unit should be congruent with those of Auburn University, reflect the academic unit’s standards and guidelines, and consider the needs and expectations of a distinct discipline of interest. Faculty, administrators and students are all involved in ongoing efforts to improve quality of an academic unit.
This process requires a self-study by the unit; an intensive campus visit and interviews by a peer evaluation team external to the unit; a written report with recommendations for improvement by the peer evaluation team; and a formal action and follow-up plan developed by the dean and department under review and approved by the Provost. In addition to one complete set of APR documentation from 2021 (schedule, self-study, peer report, and Dean’s action plan), the following are provided as documentation to illustrate the rigor and ongoing nature of this process:
Student Learning Outcomes Assessment
Assessment in the Disciplines. Each summer term, all academic programs are required to submit an assessment report to the Office of Academic Insight (OAI). The academic assessment cycle, illustrated in Figure 7.1-2 below, requires programs to identify a set of student learning outcomes, consider alignment of the student learning outcomes to the academic degree program’s curriculum, visually represent this alignment through the use of a curriculum map, and identify a set of measures by which they can systematically assess the extent to which student learning outcomes are being achieved, making use of direct measures and sound reasoning. After using these measures, faculty then report assessment results for their program and discuss their process for communicating those results to the department. The rubric used to evaluate the quality of assessment reports from academic programs is included as additional documentation.
Figure 7.1-2, Academic Assessment Cycle
The final component of Auburn University’s annual assessment cycle is for programs to interpret their results in relation to the student learning outcomes, to provide evidence that their assessment results have been discussed and to act upon those results in a purposeful and thoughtful manner to improve student learning. Evidence of this process is contained in annual assessment reports and other documents, which are described in detail in the response to standard 8.2.a, Student Outcomes: Educational Programs.
General Education Outcomes Assessment. Each of the general education student learning outcomes is measured by one Student Core Outcomes & Readiness Evaluation (SCORE),. Four (4) measures are purchased from Educational Testing Services (ETS), one (1) measure is purchased from Threshold Achievement, and four (4) measures were developed by faculty experts at Auburn University, detailed below.
The SCORE requires each graduating senior to take one randomly assigned one-hour test that is aligned to a single general education outcome (i.e., students do not take nine assessments). SCORE infrastructure was created through collaborations with the Office of Information Technology, the Office of Instructional Technology, the Registrar’s Office, the Testing Center, and Student Affairs. Likewise, Auburn Online supported filming students for our oral communication assessment efforts. Each decision of the pilot was presented and vetted for feedback via Provost’s Council, Academic Affairs, the Student Government Association, and the University Senate.
Beginning in Spring 2020, Auburn began collecting general education outcome data for just one outcome each calendar year so that the SCORE data could be reviewed at the college, department, and degree-level. See Table 7.1-1 for the full data collection timeline.
Table 7.1-1, SCORE General Education Assessment Schedule
Seeking Improvement Based on Analysis of Results While the SCORE was initially derived as a way to measure learning relative to our general education outcomes, it presents an amazing opportunity for the university to understand and improve the student experience, both academically and through co-curricular experiences. OAI strongly believes assessment is conducted to facilitate improvement in learning. As opposed to hoping to improve upon each outcome incrementally, Auburn University’s strategy is to focus on disaggregating the data related to each outcome and identifying learning discrepancies. In this way, the university can focus on closing equity gaps in learning. In addition, OAI has acquired data from multiple partners across campuses to allow for an investigation of learning research questions. A more in-depth discussion of how results from general education assessments are used to inform programmatic improvements can be found in Standard 8.2.b.
Comprehensive and Ongoing: Faculty Roles in Academic Assessment Processes Additional evidence of how the evaluation process in Auburn University’s academic programs is both comprehensive and ongoing is the Meta-Assessment Institute, which achieves four key purposes:
Just as faculty members regularly use their disciplinary expertise to consider evidence of student achievement when they seek to improve the university’s educational programs, so does the university promote opportunities for faculty to build expertise in academic assessment methods. This gives faculty the ability to carefully and regularly evaluate how well the university’s assessment procedures themselves are working to examine and enhance student learning. The section of this narrative will describe how, under the leadership of OAI, Auburn University has established a meta-assessment process to further integrate academic planning and evaluation into the university culture.
To help improve the quality of assessment on campus and foster a stronger culture of assessment, the first goal of OAI was to develop a consistent understanding of what assessment entails and what high quality assessment looks like. Toward this end, in 2015, 13 faculty members from across campus met weekly to develop Auburn University’s initial Quality of Assessment Rubric. This rubric was designed, first, to articulate sound assessment practice for all academic degree programs and, second, to be used as a framework for assessing the quality of programs’ assessment processes through a peer review system that allows for formative feedback to be delivered to each program. This secondary purpose, to build a mechanism for peer revaluation of assessment practices within academic programs, relies less on a faculty member’s disciplinary expertise and more on their increasing expertise in best practices for academic assessment, as initiated and supported by OAI.
The Quality of Assessment Rubric was frozen after development to allow faculty and OAI leadership to focus on developing stronger assessment processes across campus. In 2021, the rubric was unfrozen and a team of 12 faculty met with the Director of OAI again to determine if any changes or clarifications were needed. A few minor changes were made to enhance the user experience and allow for greater consistency across raters. More importantly, to support use of results and learning improvement, two separate elements were created to focus individually on purposeful reflection and action planning. In addition to the revision of the Quality of Assessment Rubric, the faculty team created supplementary guidance as an appendix to it.
The integrated academic assessment and meta-assessment processes illustrate how the evaluation of student learning outcomes is an ongoing evolution wherein faculty develop new expertise in assessment best practices and even the central mechanism for academic assessment is itself routinely evaluated and improved through faculty participation.
Auburn University’s Comprehensive Campus Master Plan, 2013-2023
Auburn University’s macro-level strategic plans are used to inform resource allocation in two key ways, the first of which is through the Comprehensive Master Plan.
Campus Master Plan Background In June 2002, the Auburn University Board of Trustees (the Board) adopted its first campus master plan, a guide for university leaders that provides “long-range strategies for the growth and development of the Auburn University Campus” (BOT Policy D-2). The original plan, along with its subsequent updates in 2007 and 2013, has been informed and guided by the Auburn University Strategic Plan, as directed by the Board. The plan is required to be updated periodically to meet the changing strategic needs of the university. An update to the plan is currently underway, with efforts beginning in the Fall of 2021.
Auburn University Comprehensive Campus Master Plan Update, 2013 In November 2013, Auburn University adopted the second update to its campus master plan in order to respond to the university’s evolving physical needs and strategic priorities. This update translated the 2013-2018 Auburn University Strategic Plan into a framework to ensure stewardship of resources and data-driven decision making relative to the physical environment. Auburn University retained the services of Sasaki and Associates to assist with the planning process.
The 2013 update was organized into 12 Planning Elements, topics that received focused attention as part of the update to reflect emerging interests:
Within each of these elements is an analysis of existing conditions, findings that indicate issues and challenges, and future projects and strategies that allow for the fulfillment of the university strategic plan. The findings of the elements drive the implementation strategy, along with recommendations for the Capital Projects Plan, Landscape Master Plan, and any needed supporting policies and guidelines.
Auburn University Campus Master Plan, 2022 Update The Campus Master Plan is currently undergoing a revision to both its structure and contents. The 2022 Campus Master Plan will expand the decision-making framework for growth and development, allowing for greater flexibility while maintaining support of the university’s strategic mission. Due to reasons such as the potential impacts of national population trends and lessons learned from the recent COVID pandemic, the university realizes that flexibility in a campus plan will allow it to adapt to unanticipated changes in the way the physical campus is utilized. A more incremental approach to planning, starting with a flexible framework plan and detailed capacity analysis, allows the university to allocate resources more wisely. It will also provide guidance on the importance of preserving natural areas and open spaces that make the campus unique and attractive to future students. In addition, the plan will be influential to the capital projects planning process, enhancing facility operational efficiency and effectiveness. The Campus Master Plan Update of 2022 is being timed to reflect potential changes in university vision or priorities based on the fact that Auburn University will have a new President and Provost and the sincere desire to incorporate their strategic direction.
Responsibility for carrying the Campus Master Plan into implementation and for organizing its regular updating is assigned to Planning, Design, and Construction within the Division of Facilities Management. For assistance with the current update, Auburn University has retained the services of SmithGroup, a planning and design firm.
Improving the Auburn University Capital Planning Process
In the last several years, Auburn University has worked to improve its capital project planning process to make it more comprehensive and rigorous. The two major actions that have been taken to improve capital project planning at the university include the following:
Establishment of the Executive Facilities Committee Auburn University established the Executive Facilities Committee inNovember 2020 by university policy, with the stated purpose of the committee being: “Auburn University needs an executive level committee to make strategic and resource related decisions regarding the university's capital project program.” The Executive Facilities Committee provides executive level leadership to plan, prioritize, and fund the university’s physical growth and development. The committee consists of a cross section of the university’s executive leadership, building on the university’s strategic plan to increase collaboration. The leadership team is a diverse group that aids in the plan-making process with the highest-level understanding of the university’s current needs and growth opportunities. Co-chaired by the university Executive Vice President and the Associate Vice President for Facilities, the committee meets regularly, generally in alignment with Board of Trustee meetings. Auburn University needs an executive level committee to make strategic and resource related decisions regarding the university's capital project program.
The charge for Executive Facilities Committee is to:
The Establishment of an Annual Capital Project Planning Process The Capital Projects Plan, as directed by the Board, details the university’s “proposed future construction plans and the priorities of the capital projects in the plan” (BOT Policy D-256). Auburn University is developing a more formal, transparent, and comprehensive Annual Capital Project Planning Process.
The Annual Capital Project Planning Process is a proposed decision-making system designed to enable the Executive Facilities Committee in prioritizing university capital projects prior to presentation to the Board. The intent of the Annual Capital Project Planning Process is to ensure that Auburn University has an effective and comprehensive process for assessing capital projects and real estate purchase requests. The purpose of this review is to allocate University Bond and General funds to those projects that will most enhance the university’s ability to execute its mission of education, research, and outreach.
This year-long process evaluates, prioritizes, funds, and schedules projects while providing the university a transparent capital project planning and selection process.
The Board provides the committee with strategic guidance regarding capital project investment for the upcoming five-year period. Key elements of the Annual Capital Project Planning Process include:
Upon approval, the Capital Projects Plan will embody the spirit of the strategic plan through university-wide coordination, as well as develop the spaces needed to fulfill the university’s mission of education, research, and outreach.
Auburn University's Process for Budget Review and Resource Allocation
Another important way Auburn University’s macro-level strategic planning is used to inform resource allocation is through the budget process.
Since budgets express an institution's intentions in quantitative terms, Auburn University's processes of budget formation and resource allocation are integrated within the institution's overall planning and evaluation system. Full discussion of Auburn University's financial resources is reserved for narratives supporting compliance with standards 13.1 and 13.3. Emphasis here falls on the ways in which the university's resource allocation process is integrated with and affected by institutional mission, goals, and outcomes.
Budget Model In 2017, Auburn University transitioned its budget allocation process away from an historical model to an incentive-based model commonly called Responsibility Center Management. This new method employs an approach in which all revenues flow where the activities occur and institutional support costs, such as facility operations, academic support administration, and central administration, are allocated based on certain metrics. Auburn University’s annual budget process begins with Budget and Planning Services working closely with Governmental Affairs and the Vice President for Enrollment Management to estimate its revenue growth in its two largest sources of funding: state appropriations and tuition. In addition, the office provides cost estimates on salary and employee benefit increases as well as other mandatory costs, such as utilities, debt service, and software licensing agreements.
The following examples provide evidence that budget allocations are integrated with the institution's ongoing planning and evaluation processes and are oriented toward the accomplishment of Auburn University's mission:
Shared Governance in Budget Planning As a part of the allocation model change, Auburn University implemented a new shared governance structure, which makes the process more collaborative. The governance structure includes a revised Budget Advisory Committee that is made up of 16 members of the campus community. That committee has oversight of the other two committees: the Central Unit Allocation Committee and the Space Management/Repair & Renovation Committee. The Central Unit Allocation Committee exists to assess the appropriate size and scope of administrative budgets based on Auburn’s strategic objectives. The Space Management/Repair & Renovation Committee is designed to verify space allocations included in the model and advise on the appropriate level of funding for repair and renovation projects on campus. The latter two committees operate independently and present reports to the Budget Advisory Committee for consideration in the overall budget. All revenue and cost estimates are provided to the Budget Advisory Committee, who takes all of the information from those estimates as well as the other committee reports and advises the President and senior leadership on budget preparation guidance.
During budget development, the budget guidelines are presented to the Board for informational purposes. Upon completion, the proposed annual budget is presented by the President to and approved by the Board of Trustees. Budget planning and prioritization is a continuous process, with work beginning in November of every fiscal year and concluding with the Board of Trustees’ approval in September. On occasion, presentations are preceded by more detailed financial workshops, so that the institution's chief officers and the Board can discuss together the strategic financial environment. Examples of the information shared with senior leadership and the Board are included as evidence, but they include future projections based on trends and estimated assumptions of enrollment, capital spending plans, and other strategic initiatives,,.
Conclusion
Auburn University engages in rigorous planning and evaluation processes that are reflective of its commitment to continuous improvement. These ongoing, university-wide processes include the kind of long-term planning necessary to secure the university’s excellence in the future and opportunities to reflect, reevaluate, and respond to the ever-changing demands of higher education in the 21st century. Auburn University’s planning and evaluation processes ensure alignment between strategic priorities, university policies and procedures, and resource allocation in order to fulfill its mission of teaching, research, and service/outreach. |
