cirruculum

Teaching and Learning in Nursing 13 (2018) 3–8

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Teaching and Learning in Nursing

j ourna l homepage: www. j t ln .o rg

Systematic Plan of Evaluation Part I: Assessment of End-of-Program

Student Learning Outcomes

Sharon F. Beasley, Suzette Farmer, Nell Ard ⁎, Keri Nunn-Ellison Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing, Atlanta, GA 33246, United States

a b s t r a c ta r t i c l e i n f o

Presentation Information: No previous presentation. ⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 404 975 5004; fax: +

E-mail address: [email protected] (N. Ard).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2017.09.003 1557-3087/© 2017 Organization for Associate Degree Nur

Keywords:

ACEN Accreditation Assessment Outcomes Systematic evaluation

As an accrediting agency recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, the Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing has established the Accreditation Standards and Criteria for the evaluation of nursing programs, including the evaluation of outcomes. This article outlines the essential elements and structure of a systematic plan of evaluation for a nursing program, and it describes assessment and evaluation processes for end-of-program student learning outcomes.

© 2017 Organization for Associate Degree Nursing. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Introduction

To paraphrase Mitchell (2016), former U.S. Department of Educa- tion Under Secretary of Education, the achievement of accreditation indicates that a program provides worthwhile education to its stu- dents and prepares graduates for employment. Therefore, the Ac- creditation Commission for Education in Nursing (ACEN) process emphasizes student outcomes as a primary measure of a meaningful education and the preparation for employment. In July 2016, the ACEN adopted the revised Standards and Criteria, which were devel- oped to clarify requirements for accreditation and to emphasize pro- grammatic evaluation processes, end-of-program student learning outcomes, and program outcomes. For ACEN-accredited programs and programs seeking ACEN candidacy, mandatory implementation of the 2017 Standards and Criteria begins on January 1, 2018.

The most frequent inquiries to the ACEN professional staff relate to the ACEN Standard 6 Outcomes. Standard 6 Outcomes and the supporting Criteria were significantly revised when the Board of Commissioners approved the 2017 Accreditation Standards in 2016. Standard 6 Outcomes states, “Program evaluation demonstrates that students have achieved each end-of-program student learning outcomeand each programoutcome” (ACENAccreditation Standards and Criteria, Standard 6 Outcomes, 2016a). Because the focus of Stan- dard 6 Outcomes includes assessment of end-of-program student learning outcomes and program outcomes, as well as the develop- ment of a systematic plan of evaluation, the purpose of this article is

1 404 975 5020.

sing. Published by Elsevier Inc. Al

to distinguish the end-of-program student learning outcomes from program outcomes, outline central components of the systematic plan of evaluation, and describe assessment of end-of-program stu- dent learning outcomes. This is the first article in a two-part series that describes the required components of a systematic plan of eval- uation. This article emphasizes the assessment of end-of-program student learning outcomes. The second article, Systematic Plan of Evaluation Part II: Assessment of Program Outcomes, will address the assessment of program outcomes.

ACEN Outcomes Definitions and Requirements

A premise central to this discussion is the adage “faculty own the curriculum” and, therefore, the assessment of its outcomes.While the ACEN Accreditation Standards include a standard specific to curricu- lum (Standard 4 Curriculum), faculty must understand that curricu- lum development and implementation are interwoven with the assessment and evaluation of the end-of-program student learning outcomes. Curriculum development should not occur without con- sideration of how the end-of-program outcomes are assessed and ul- timately evaluated through the implementation of the systematic plan of evaluation.

End-of-program student learning outcomes are defined in the ACEN Accreditation Manual Glossary (2016b) as follows: “State- ments of learner-oriented expectations written in measurable terms that express the knowledge, skills, or behaviors that the students should be able to demonstrate upon completion of the nursing pro- gram regardless of the nursing program option. End-of-program stu- dent learning outcomes must be consistent with standards of

l rights reserved.

4 S.F. Beasley et al. / Teaching and Learning in Nursing 13 (2018) 3–8

contemporary nursing practice” (p. 11). Particularly, nursing faculty develop end-of-program student learning outcomes based on con- temporary nursing practice, established professional practice guide- lines, educational philosophy, the mission, and the goals of the nursing program. Documentation of the assessment and evaluation of end-of-program student learning outcomes is required within the program's systematic plan of evaluation.

The assessment and evaluation of program outcomes are also re- quired in the program's systematic plan of evaluation. Program out- comes are defined as follows: “Measurable indicators that reflect the extent to which the purposes of the nursing program are achieved and by which nursing program effectiveness is documented” (ACEN Accreditation Manual, Glossary, 2016b, p. 10). The ACEN requires nursing faculty to document the assessment of licensure examination pass rates, program completion rates, and job placement rates; facul- ty may elect to assess additional program outcomes as desired or re- quired by other agencies. In addition to documenting achievement of required program outcomes for ACEN accreditation, licensure pass rates, program completion rates, and job placement ratesmust be ac- cessible to the public. According to the ACEN Policy #29 Advertising, Publication, Promotional Literature, the program must publish the re- quired program outcome data based on the ACEN definitions of each outcome, and at a minimum, the programmust publish annual- ized, aggregated student achievement outcome data from the assess- ment cycle of the most recent cohort(s). A program's compliance with the 2017 ACEN Standard 6 Outcomes is an essential measure of the program's quality. The publication of program outcomes pro- vides comparative data, which the public can use to evaluate a program's performance on outcome metrics that are consistent across nursing education programs.

Plan for Systematic Evaluation of Outcomes

Stephen Covey (1989) suggests that, in order to be successful, we must start with the end inmind. To follow Dr. Covey's advice for suc- cess, the development of a written systematic plan of evaluation is an essential faculty process that allows the nursing program to identify, develop, and organize its end-of-program student learning outcomes and program outcomes. In other words, when the nursing faculty es- tablish the end-of-program student learning and program outcomes, the goals of the nursing program are explicit to the students and the public. Once the end-of-program student learning outcomes and pro- gram outcomes are identified, a written plan, which establishes ex- pected levels of achievement, appropriate assessment methods, and intervals for assessment must be developed.

The ongoing, systematic, structured, anddocumented analysis, as- sessment, and evaluation of the program's end-of-program student learning outcomes and program outcomes provide the nursing facul- tywith data,which should be used for themaintenance and improve- ment of the program. The analysis of assessment data provides faculty with objective information about the items assessed, while the evaluation of the assessment data allows the faculty tomake a de- termination about the quality of the data obtained. For purposes of this article, the term assessment is inclusive of analysis, and the term evaluation is used to describe the process of determining that the assessment data are useful and valid. The authors view assess- ment and evaluation as separate and distinct processes necessary to ensure that the program's systematic plan of evaluation is effective and to verify that program graduates achieve the end-of-program student learning outcomes. The assessment and evaluation process should be used by the faculty to inform decision making for program improvement. Finally, documentation of outcomes assessment and evaluation processes provides verification, or evidence, that the pro- gram is using data to improve the quality of the nursing program.

The systematic plan of evaluation is an operational document cre- ated, owned, and driven by the faculty. Although a requirement for ACEN accreditation, some state agencies stipulate use of an evalua- tion plan outlining compulsory elements,whichmay also be included in the systematic plan of evaluation.While this discussion focuses on the ACEN's expectations for the systematic plan of evaluation, faculty should refer to their state agency(ies), governing organization, and institutional accrediting agency for any additional requirements for program evaluation. As required in the 2017 ACEN Accreditation Standards, the systematic plan of evaluation consists of deliberate and planned assessment and evaluation of six elements, including as- sessment methods, expected levels of achievement, assessment fre- quencies, sufficient data, analysis of the assessment data, and documentation of decision making on the basis of the use of the as- sessment data. Recognizing that the systematic plan of evaluation must include these six elements, the format of the systematic plan of evaluation may differ from program to program. Nursing faculty have autonomy in developing the format for documenting the program's systematic plan of evaluation. However, the ACEN has an optional template on the Web site that could be utilized.

Assessment of a program's end-of-program student learning out- comesmust be completed systematically, and itmay occur as often as necessary to collect sufficient data for comprehensive evaluation. In addition, the assessment and evaluation of the end-of-program stu- dent learning outcomes should be conducted at regular intervals. The ACEN does not require annual assessment and evaluation of each end-of-program student learning outcome. Depending upon the program type, the student population (demographics), the num- ber of end-of-program student learning outcomes, and the types of assessment methods selected, the faculty may analyze and evaluate annually, every 2 years, or even every 3 years; however, regular inter- vals of assessment and evaluation for each end-of-program student learning outcome are expected. As faculty develop a schedule for as- sessment and evaluation of the end-of-programstudent learning out- comes, sufficiency of data should be considered.

Whereas the systematic plan of evaluation describes the faculty's planning and implementation of its assessment and evaluation of end-of-program student learning outcomes and program outcomes, the remaining sections of this article will focus on the development, assessment, and evaluation of only the end-of-program student learning outcomes. A subsequent article, Systematic Plan of Evaluation Part II: Program Outcomes, will provide additional details regarding the evaluation of program outcomes for ACEN-accredited programs and programs seeking ACEN accreditation.

End-of-Program Student Learning Outcomes

Since 1991, the ACEN has included the assessment of student learning outcomes in its Accreditation Standards. Therefore, nursing faculty have been expected to assess, analyze, and evaluate end-of- program student learning outcomes for decades. Expanding upon the expectation for assessment and evaluation of student learning outcomes, the ACEN Criterion 6.1 (2017) now clearly conveys the ex- pectation of deliberate, thoughtful, and intentional assessment of each end-of-program student learning outcome. As a guide for as- sessment of learning, the National Institute for Learning Outcomes and Assessment (2016) offers five principles for effective assessment of student learning outcomes: development of specific, actionable learning outcomes statements, connection of learning goals with stu- dent assignments andwork, collaborationwith faculty, creation of as- sessment approaches that generate actionable evidence about student learning, and improvement and compliance. Although the National Institute for LearningOutcomes and Assessment's principles are insightful, they underscore three gaps in knowledge some nurs- ing faculty experience in the assessment and evaluation of end-of-

5S.F. Beasley et al. / Teaching and Learning in Nursing 13 (2018) 3–8

program student learning outcomes. The three identified knowledge gaps include the development of specific and measurable expected levels of achievement, the connection of end-of-program student learning outcomes with appropriate assessment methods, and the development and/or adoption of assessment tools designed to mea- sure the achievement of end-of-program student learning outcomes. Using the three gaps in knowledge as the framework for this discus- sion, the authorswill elaborate on each in the discussion that follows.

Evaluation of End-of-Program Student Learning Outcomes

Components of End-of-Program Student Learning Outcomes

To reiterate, the end-of-program student learning outcomes rep- resent the faculty's vision for entry-level nurses who graduate from their program. As indicated in the ACEN Criterion 6.1, facultymust in- clude all the end-of-program student learning outcomes, written ver- batim, in the program's systematic plan of evaluation. The end-of- program student learning outcomes include competencies and/or concepts that represent the foci of behaviors, skills, and knowledge that graduates should achieve. Further, faculty have the purview to develop program-specific end-of-program student learning out- comes on the basis of a comprehensive and integrated review of pro- fessional standards, guidelines, competencies, and feedback from communities of interest (ACEN Glossary, 2016b, p. 11).

Identifying the Concepts and Competencies

Forming the foundation for assessment of end-of-program stu- dent learning outcomes consists of identifying the concepts/compe- tencies embedded within the end-of-program student learning outcomes. For example, if the end-of-program student learning out- come is to “demonstrate effective strategies for communication with clients, families, structured groups, and members of the healthcare team,” the curricular concept/competency is communica- tion. While the concept/competency may not be included in the ex- pected level of achievement, focusing on the concept/competency that will be assessed has the potential to connect the end-of- program student learning outcome to the curriculum, and it could fa- cilitate the development or selection of appropriate assessment methods and tools. The faculty should identify the concepts/compe- tencies embedded in the end-of-program student learning outcomes prior to specifying the assessment methods and expected levels of achievement.

Connecting End-of-Program Student Learning Outcomes to Appropriate Assessment Methods and Tools

The connection of the end-of-program student learning outcomes to an assessmentmethod is vital to ensure that assessmentmethod is appropriate for measurement of the concept/competencies within the end-of-program student learning outcomes. For example, if the end-of-program student learning outcome identifies that the student will be able to “perform” or “demonstrate” the identified outcome, then the assessment method should be something that requires the student to demonstrate the identified outcome. In the case where a student will be able to perform or demonstrate the identified out- come, a written paper would not be an appropriate method of evaluation.

After determining the appropriate assessment method (e.g., demonstration) for the identified end-of-program student learning outcome, the faculty would then need to identify or develop an assessment tool. An assessment tool is the instrument, such as a clinical evaluation tool or examination items, used to measure and verify that the student met the identified learning outcome. The

collaborative process through which faculty verify the relationship be- tween the end-of-program student learning outcomes and the assess- ment methods and tools is often referred to as mapping or, in some instances, cross-walking. The mapping process could help faculty link the identified curricular concepts/competencies to the end-of-program student learning outcomes and, in turn, link them to appropriate and ef- fective assessment methods and tools. Through a collaborative mapping process, the facultymay also identify curricularmisalignments and/or re- dundancies. This may be an opportune time for faculty to complete a comprehensive review of learning activities in addition to the assess- ment methods and tools used across the curriculum.

A fundamental question formapping the end-of-program student learning outcomes is “Which measurement tools include the concepts/competencies in the end-of-program student learning outcomes?” Ultimately, all concepts and competencies within end- of-program student learning outcomes must be included in the as- sessment; therefore, faculty should identify or develop assessment methods and tools that effectively assess all components of the iden- tified end-of-program student learning outcome. As written in the previous example of an end-of-program student learning outcome related to communication, the students will communicate with clients, families, structured groups, and members of the health care team. Therefore, it is essential to rely on the end-of-program student learning outcome for the context in which communication occurs. Faculty must identify the most appropriate assessment method(s) and tool(s) that measures student communication with the identified groups (i.e., clients, families, structured groups, and members of the health care team) specified in the end-of-program student learning outcome. As faculty become more proficient and better understand the end-of-program student learning outcomes and the identified assessment methods and tools, the faculty may develop and/or adopt new assessment methods and tools, revise current assessment methods and tools, and/or implement the use of more than one assessment method and tool for a single end-of- program student learning outcome in order to fully assess and evalu- ate an end-of-program student learning outcome.

Although faculty assess achievement of course-level student learning outcomes within nursing courses, course grades are not in- dicators of student achievement of each end-of-program student learning outcome. An end-of-course grade represents the level of subject mastery of the course by incorporating students' overall per- formance in a course, which are, in most cases, measured bymultiple assessments and reflective of multiple course-level student learning outcomes. Course grades cannot be mapped to a specific end-of- program student learning outcome. Since course grades do not assess end-of-program student learning outcomes, faculty should identify assessment methods mapped to the concepts/competencies that are placed at the end of the program and assessment methods, which capture concepts/competencies incorporated within the end- of-program student learning outcomes.

As end-of-program student learning outcomes represent the knowledge, skills, and/or behaviors students demonstrate at the completion of the nursing program, they should be assessed at and/ or near the end of the program after students have completed the learning activities designed to help themacquire the requisite knowl- edge, skills, and/or behaviors necessary to achieve the end-of- program student learning outcomes. Faculty may assess progress toward the achievement of the end-of-program student learning out- comes at selected times throughout the program; however, faculty must still ensure that the final assessment of all skills, behaviors, and competencies included in the end-of-program student learning outcomes occurs at or near the end of the program. Measurement of student achievement should focus on the extent to which students achieve the end-of-program student learning outcomes and the tar- get for overall student success.

6 S.F. Beasley et al. / Teaching and Learning in Nursing 13 (2018) 3–8

Direct and Indirect Assessment Methods

In order to assess and evaluate the end-of-program student learn- ing outcomes, faculty should primarily select direct assessment methods, although indirect assessment methods may also be used. Direct assessment methods yield objective data. For instance, many programs utilize clinical evaluation tools administered in the final medical–surgical course and reflect knowledge, skills, and behaviors correlated to the end-of-program student learning outcomes. Direct assessmentmethodsmay include examinations, papers, clinical eval- uations, and portfolios. By comparison, indirect assessment methods are assessment tools that yield subjective data, such as perceptions, thoughts, and opinions. Examples of indirect assessmentmethods in- clude surveys, self-reports, focus groups, and interviews. Table 1 pro- vides an illustration of a direct assessment tool for an end-of-program student learning outcome.

Sufficient Measurements

Assessment and evaluation of end-of-program student learning outcomes hinges upon effective assessment; yet, effective assessment

Table 1 Sample End-of-Program Student Learning Outcome Assessment

and evaluation processes are dependent on sufficient data, which would be used to inform programdecision-making. Some assessments are global examinations that represent a spectrum of concepts/compe- tencies. Using the previous end-of-program student learning outcome example, an examination may include five questions related to com- munication; and of the five questions, two questions include commu- nication with clients, one question includes communication with families, and the remaining two questions include communication with the health care team. It is evident that the assessment tool does not measure communication with structured groups. Further, one or two questions would be insufficient for measuring achievement of the concept/competency. In this case, additional assessment methods and/or tools, such as a clinical evaluation tool, would be necessary to adequately measure student achievement of the identi- fied end-of-program student learning outcome.

Expected Levels of Achievement

Each end-of-program student learning outcomemust have a spe- cific and measurable expected level of achievement. In some in- stances, more than one expected level of achievement may be

7S.F. Beasley et al. / Teaching and Learning in Nursing 13 (2018) 3–8

necessary to ensure that sufficient data are collected for program decision-making. For every identified assessment method and tool, there should be an expected level of achievement. As the number of assessment methods and tools increases, so does the volume of data. The purpose of the systematic plan of evaluation is to document selected expected levels of achievement, which are based on the end- of-program student learning outcomes and assessment methods. If faculty elect to use two or three expected levels of achievement, the rationale should be related to ensuring that sufficient data are collect- ed and reflect all aspects of the end-of-program student learning outcome.

Although some faculty include a separate column in the systemat- ic plan of evaluation for assessment methods, when creating expect- ed levels of achievement, the faculty could consider including the assessment method within expected levels of achievement to ensure that the expected level of achievement is specific and measurable. In other words, expected levels of achievement and assessment methods and tools are interconnected and interdependent. In order to capture all components of an end-of-program student learning outcome, the assessment methods and tools should capture each concept/competency in the identified end-of-program student learn- ing outcome, and the concept/competency should be measured by the assessment tool. Mapping expected levels of achievement and as- sessmentmethods and tools to the concepts/competencies identified by faculty ensures that the assessment methods and tools are appro- priate for measuring the identified end-of-program student learning outcomes. Expected levels of achievement and assessment methods must be documented in the systematic plan of evaluation.

After the assessment methods are confirmed, the faculty should identify a target for each method of assessment. A target coupled with each assessment method is a critical component within the ex- pected level of achievement. The target specified in the expected level of achievement should correlate to student success on the as- sessment tool and the extent to which the expected level of achieve- ment occurs. Typically, an expected level of achievement has two targets. One target articulates the faculty's overall goal for student success on the assessment tool, and the other describes the extent to which students achieve the end-of-program student learning out- comes. For example, if the end-of-program student learning outcome is to “develop and implement effective health/nursing teaching plan for patients”. The faculty may set an expected level of achievement that “95% of students in NUR 2500 Community Health will score 90% or higher on the teaching project each fall academic term”. In this example, the extent of achievement of the end-of-program stu- dent learning outcome is 95%, whereas the target for success on the assessment tool is 90%. Faculty collaboration will be necessary to re- fine targets as the data collection process progresses. In most

Table 2 Documentation of Assessment of an End-of-Program Student Learning Outcome

Systematic plan of evaluation End-of-program student learning outcome: The student will be able to develop and implement effective health/nursing teaching Curricular concepts⁎, communication, patient teaching, patient-centered care

Expected level of achievement Assessment frequency

Data analysis

95% of students in NUR 2500 Community Health will score 90% or higher on the final teaching project.⁎⁎

Odd years: Fall Semester, November

Fall 2017: Expected level of achi students in NUR 2500 scored 90 teaching project; 20% scored 80% project. Evaluation/Analysis: After review tool, student performance data, a students, the faculty determined deficit in the area of communica

⁎ As defined by the faculty and supported by professional nursing standards, guidelines, ⁎⁎ Notice in this example that the assessment method is incorporated in the expected lev

instances, all students included in the assessment and evaluation of the outcome are expected to achieve the end-of-program student learning outcome; however, there are many factors that the faculty will need to consider when setting an expected level of achievement. When setting an expected level of achievement, faculty should con- sider setting it high enough to encourage continuous improvement, but it should not be so high that it would be unachievable.

Time Frame and Documentation

Finally, expected levels of achievement should be measurable as reflected by the time frame for assessment and the course in which assessment occurs. A focal premise of the ACEN requirement for as- sessment and evaluation of end-of-program student learning out- comes is assessment that occurs at and/or near the end of the program,which is thepoint in timewhen the student is ready to tran- sition to the role of a program graduate and, eventually, an entry- level nurse. The faculty should keep this principle in mind as they navigate the assessment and evaluation process. As echoed through- out this discussion, time frames for assessment and evaluation should be determined by the faculty after collaboration and identification of assessment methods and tools.

After specifying the concepts/competencies in the end-of- program student learning outcomes, identifying the most effective assessmentmethods and tools, delineating targets, specifying courses or selected times throughout the program in which assessment and evaluation occurs, and establishing the time frame for assessment, the final step in creating expected levels of achievement is compiling all required components. Using the example in this discussion, an ex- pected level of achievement could be “Annually in April, 90% of stu- dents in NURS 2500 will score 85% or higher on the community assessment project.” This expected level of achievement specifies the time frame of assessment, the course inwhich assessment occurs, the target for student success on the assessment tool, the target indi- cating the extent of achievement, and the assessment tool; all of these components are fundamental elements in the assessment of end-of-program student learning outcomes.

Because assessment tools generate data, it is imperative that fac- ulty analyze the data generated from the assessment tools, evaluate the data to inform decision-making, and maintain documentation of the decisions made. For example, the analysis reveals that students are not achieving the end-of-program student learning outcome as evidenced by the expected level of achievement and/or target not being met, but the evaluation of the assessment data reveals that the assessment is an adequate measure of the established end-of- program student learning outcome, the faculty may decide to implement a new strategy to try to help students achieve the end-

plans for patients.

Actions to improve the program

evement unmet: 80% of % or higher on the –89% on the teaching

of the assessment nd discussions with there is a knowledge tion styles.

Fall 2017: Based on the faculty analysis, the faculty added a communications module to the second and third semesters of the nursing program. Faculty will reassess Fall 2019 student achievement.

and competencies. el of achievement statement.

8 S.F. Beasley et al. / Teaching and Learning in Nursing 13 (2018) 3–8

of-program student learning outcome or, perhaps, the analysis of the assessment data may reveal that students are achieving the end-of- program student learning outcome as evidenced by the expected level of achievement and target being met; however, if the evaluation of the assessment data reveals that the assessment is not adequatelymea- suring the established end-of-program student learning outcome, the faculty may decide to revise the method of assessment.

Documentation of decision-making is most often maintained in the faculty, the curriculum, the program, or a combination ofmeeting minutes. The focus and purpose of the systematic assessment and evaluation of end-of-program student learning outcomes is program improvement. If the expected levels of achievement are unmet, the faculty should use the data obtained through the assessment and evaluation process to guide their decision-making regardingprogram changes and student interventions. After completing a comprehen- sive review of the literature and program data, the faculty may also need to revise the systematic plan of evaluation. Thus, the systematic plan of evaluation, if constructed in a methodical manner, is a road map illustrating the faculty members' commitment to foster stu- dents' success, to facilitate graduates' readiness for entry-level prac- tice, and to improve the quality of the nursing program through the assessment of end-of-program student learning outcomes. Please re- view Table 2 for an example of the documentation.

Conclusion

Because of the nursing faculty's knowledge of the curriculum, they are in the best position to identify the concepts/competencies in each end-of-program student learning outcome, develop and adopt appro- priate assessment methods, select assessment tools that align with the concepts/competencies, and develop expected levels of achieve- ment. The systematic plan of evaluation is a faculty-created, faculty- owned, and faculty-driven document that conveys the deliberate as- sessment and evaluation of all the end-of-program student learning outcomes and program outcomes and, most importantly, the faculty's data-driven decisions to improve students' achievement of all the end-of-program student learning outcomes and program outcomes. As a fluid document, faculty have autonomy to revise any and all as- pects of the systematic plan of evaluation as needed.

Once engaged in a systematic outcomes assessment and evalua- tion process, the faculty will be able to report to its constituents, including institutional or programmatic accreditors, regulatory

agencies, institutional committees, community stakeholders, faculty, and students on the program's achievements and areas that need im- provement. Faculty ownership, collaboration, and active participa- tion are at the core of each step in the assessment and evaluation of outcomes to foster student achievement.

The ACEN professional staff are committed to assisting nursing programs to develop effective and useful systematic plans of evalua- tion. The professional staff are a resource to nursing programs with any questions about the accreditation process, including the system- atic plan of evaluation. The ACEN Web site also provides access to a variety of resources, such as the Guidelines for the Preparation of the Self-Study Report and the Report to Constituents, to assist in developing a systematic plan of evaluation. Please take advantage of the re- sources available to you.

This will be a recurring column in the journal, and the ACEN in- vites individuals and/or programs to continue to submit questions that they may have regarding accreditation. Systematic Plan of Evalu- ation Part II: Assessment of Program Outcomeswill be published in the next issue, and it will provide guidance in the assessment and evalu- ation of programoutcomes. In future columns, a responsewill be pro- vided to these questions to assist everyone in better understanding nursing accreditation. Questions can be sent to Nell Ard at nard@ acenursing.org. For information about the ACEN resources available, please visit the Web site: http://www.acenursing.org/acen-resources or call the office at 1-404-975-5000.

Acknowledgments

None.

References

Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing (2016a). ACEN 2017 standards and criteria-associate. http://www.acenursing.net/manuals/sc2017_A.pdf.

Accreditation Commission for Education in Nursing (2016b). Accreditation manual/ glossary. http://www.acenursing.net/manuals/Glossary_August2016.pdf.

Covey, S. (1989). The 7 habits of highly effective people: Powerful lessons in personal change. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.

Mitchell, T. (2016). Strengthening accreditation's focus on outcomes. https://sites.ed. gov/ous/2016/02/strengthening-accreditations-focus-on-outcomes/.

National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (2016). Higher education quality: Why documenting learning matters. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois and Indiana University.