Bowling Green State University aspires to be the premier learning community in Ohio, and one of the best in the nation. Through the interdependence of teaching, learning, scholarship, and service we are creating an educational institution grounded in intellectual discovery and guided by rational discourse and civility.

The “premier learning community” goal was set a decade ago through the faculty and staff collaborative process known as the Building Community Project, and it was endorsed by President Sidney A. Ribeau and the Board of Trustees. It became our number one strategic direction. Several initiatives, including the development of residential learning communities, enhanced first-year programs, a redesign of our general education program, and a signature student-learning experience focused on critical thinking about values (the BGeX program) are being carried out as a result of this commitment. 

Our focused efforts in assessment began at about the same time. Consequently, assessment has become well established at the University, and has reached beyond academic programs to include the libraries, student affairs, and continuing education programs.  Our focus on student learning outcomes is now university wide.

We adopted a strategy of focusing on undergraduate majors at the outset of our implementation of program assessment.  This strategy turned out to give us a strong base for identifying common expectations. Content analyses of the specific learning outcomes of undergraduate majors, first in the College of Arts and Sciences, and then across the entire undergraduate curriculum, resulted in the identification of seven University learning outcomes: inquiry [online readers can access additional information by clicking the blue underlined hyperlinks embedded in this document], creative problem solving, examining values in decision making (the intellectual skills), writing, presenting (communication skills), participating, and leading (active engagement skills). Learning outcomes are prominently displayed in University catalogs and program descriptions. The University and program learning outcomes are public information, available on the Student Achievement Assessment Committee (SAAC) Web site, at http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/assessment/page31434.html.   

SAAC has published rubrics for evaluating achievement of each of the University learning outcomes.  Each rubric maps the sequence of proficiency through which students develop, from beginning to advanced stages.  Distributed together with assignments, rubrics help students understand the standards that will be used when their work is evaluated. Their use leads to greater consistency of expectation about faculty goals for their learning within majors and across the curriculum.

DETERMINE AND CLEARLY COMMUNICATE EVIDENCE

Each academic unit in the University was charged to create its own assessment plan, comprising the student learning outcomes which it seeks to achieve, the measures to be taken, and the continuous improvement process to be followed.  Given the breadth of the university’s mission and the diversity of the colleges, departments, and other units, this approach allowed faculty and others who have the closest proximity to student learning to specify the kinds of evidence that would be most meaningful in their individual circumstances.  Thus, BGSU has a wide variety of capstone courses and experiences such as juries, senior recitals, team presentations, and research projects on offer to students in its 170 areas of study.  Moreover, many new cross-cutting ventures have emerged over the last decade, partly in response to assessment evidence supporting the need for initiative, for example, in establishing residential learning communities, refocusing the general education program, creating the critical thinking about values (BGeX) program, creating an office of undergraduate research opportunities, and implementing the electronic portfolio project.  For example, we now have over 13,000 ePortfolios, many of which show public examples of student work (students retain the authority to decide whether to make their work public).

REGULARLY COLLECT AND INTERPRET EVIDENCE

The Student Achievement Assessment Committee (SAAC) was created and chartered in 1996 to promote teaching and learning at BGSU by fostering a variety of effective learning environments, through assisting programs to define and assess student learning in programs and courses, assessing student learning at the university level, and assessing the assessment process itself.  

Each academic unit in the University reports annually on assessment of student learning outcomes in its programs.  Annual reports include four kinds of information: they (1) begin by listing the program’s learning outcomes, and note which have received particular attention in the time period covered by the report, (2) describe the assessments that have been made, noting especially the measures that were administered and the setting(s) where data were collected, (3) present the results and conclusions drawn from analysis of the assessments, and (4) document actions that have been taken based on the assessment findings—this last step is particularly important.  At the beginning of our implementation of program assessment, SAAC published general guidance, e.g., “Pitfalls in Assessment Reports,” and an assessment newsletter ( The Student Learner in Focus ) to help faculty define learning outcomes and implement the complete assessment cycle.  The annual reports are reviewed by SAAC, with feedback presented to the originating units.  In addition, since 1998 annual reports have been posted on the SAAC web site.  At first we posted a selection of the ten reports that best exemplified the complete assessment cycle (identification of student learning outcomes, specification of assessments to be made, collection of data and interpretation of findings, and implementation of actions based on the findings).  Since 2001, all annual reports are posted on the web site.  The report gateway is http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/assessment/page31436.html. 

In March 2005, SAAC hosted its first public reception and awards ceremony to honor the units submitting reports that show the best fulfillment of the complete program assessment cycle. Up to this point, Adolescent & Young Adult Integrated Language Arts, Bowen-Thompson Student Union,  College of Musical Arts, Early Childhood Studies, Economics, English, First Year Programs and Orientation, French, Marketing, MBA Programs, Music Education, Orientation and First Year Programs, Physical Education Teacher Education, Psychology, Respiratory Care, School of Art, and Spanish have won “SAAC Lunch Awards,”  which are Dining Services gift cards meant to provide lunch for the faculty and staff members who conducted and reported the assessments.  This form of public recognition continues.

Many units have additional reporting obligations, for instance, to the Ohio Department of Education and various national and specialty accreditation organizations.  To the extent possible, we align these external responsibilities and our internal program assessment and review processes.  Most especially we seek to “close the loop” by implementing curricular and program improvements based on student learning outcome evidence—several examples appear in the next section.

Whether students have met the requirements and demonstrated the learning outcomes of their majors and programs is determined in each case by the responsible faculty.  Here we offer one extended example, assessment in our General Studies Writing (GSW) program, to illustrate how student-centered assessment and program assessment go hand-in-hand.

One of BGSU’s missions is to ensure that all students have the ability to communicate effectively in writing. To help accomplish this, the University supports the General Studies Writing Program. All incoming first-year students are required to complete on-line writing exams in order to diagnose their appropriate placement in general studies writing courses. For 2006, about 15% of our 3700 incoming students tested into Developmental Writing (ENG 110), 70% into Introductory Writing (ENG 111), and 15% into Varieties of Writing (ENG 112). Virtually all students who attend BGSU take one or more of these courses.  Class sizes are small, and instructors provide much individual assistance.  A well established portfolio assessment process provides the primary pedagogy for the program—it incorporates extensive instructor development organized around structured writing assignments, student self-assessments of each assignment, and detailed rubrics for formative feedback. Summative assessment occurs at the end of each semester.

Because the first step in credible assessment is the articulation of clearly defined student learning outcomes, GSW regularly examines its learning outcomes and uses them to assess both its students’ performances and itself. Designed around a set of nationally approved learning outcomes, the GSW program is a comprehensive, competency-based writing program grounded in current theory and practice. GSW identifies these learning outcomes:  Rhetorical Knowledge, Critical Thinking, Writing Processes, Knowledge of Conventions, and Values Exploration (see the full definitions provided online).

Assessment of the GSW learning outcomes occurs in the portfolio assessment process.  At the end of the semester, each student’s writing portfolio is evaluated by one or more assessors in addition to the instructor. In this way, students receive feedback from multiple instructors, and the GSW program is able to maintain consistent standards across the many sections of each course.  With regard to grading, because writing is a process that takes some students longer than others to master, letter grades are not assigned until the successful completion of ENG 112 with a grade of C or higher—passing ENG 112 is a graduation requirement.  The GSW outcomes are also examined through indirect means such as a narrative self-reflection activity completed at the end of each course by students and in regular surveys of instructors throughout the semester.  The GSW program recently designed additional quality control measures, including pre- and post-surveys of students, and an enhanced portfolio review process using representative sampling. 

DOCUMENTING ACTUAL ACHIEVEMENT LEVELS

The means of assessment of student outcomes varies in ways appropriate to each discipline, as shown in these examples:

1. Introduction to Biology (BIOL 104) exemplifies course-embedded assessment of course-specific and general education learning outcomes in the natural sciences. This content-oriented science course for non-science majors implemented the use of concept mapping and experimental research assignments as a means to assess students’ achievement of inquiry and critical thinking skills associated with the scientific method. Concept maps and poster presentations of these two assignments are evaluated both as part of the final grade and to assess the degree to which intellectual skills are being acquired by students.
2. The Family (SOC 361) employs a multi-phase term paper as the assessment measure to ascertain the degree to which students can construct and present a sociological argument with supporting evidence and articulate bases for evidence and inquiry. Students construct hypotheses and then use relevant data from the annual General Social Survey (conducted by the National Opinion Research Center) to support their hypotheses and arguments. Despite little previous experience with hypothesis testing or data analysis, a majority of students are successful in constructing rational arguments and testing hypotheses.   Minority Groups (SOC 316) evaluates how well its students meet the student learning outcomes of “constructing and presenting an argument with supporting evidence” and “identify issues and problems in cultural diversity.” Students write a series of essays on various topics that they compiled into a “learning portfolio.” The instructor and graduate assistants then sample every 10th portfolio from the ~120 students enrolled in the course. Only 1/3 of the students were able to meet the outcome associated with constructing an argument while ~85% of the students could identify issues and problems associated with cultural diversity.
3. Introduction to Literary Genres (ENG 201) requires a series of short (3 and 5 paragraph) papers covering the different literary forms studied. Uniquely, class members are divided into three groups and only one group has a paper required on any given day in order to distribute the grading evenly across the semester and make feedback more immediate. Student learning outcome-based rubrics are used in assessing papers to evaluate competency in comprehending the literary genres as well as critical thinking and written communication skill.
4. Music Performance and Music Composition/History students are assessed not only prior to their entrance into a major in music through auditions and portfolio review processes, but formative and summative assessments of  their actual performances continue throughout their college careers.The ability of Music Education majors to teach is assessed in the course of the Student Teaching Practicum.  Theater students are assessed in their roles and set designs. Faculty in the School of Art serve as juries for the exhibited art work of their students.
5. Romance Languages faculty administer nationally normed college placement tests at the beginning of study in French and Spanish, and also again at completion, examining gains as a measure of increasing fluency.
6. BSBA Marketing specialists participate in a capstone course (MKT 460) in-basket case analysis. Shortly before meeting in teams, students receive a Harvard Business School case coupled with an assignment to propose a solution and devise an action. Team meetings are videotaped. Using a rubric, judges (faculty and practitioners) evaluate students’ abilities to develop data acquisition plans, to function as a team, to apply domain knowledge, and to solve problems creatively. Students receive the judges’ feedback, which also drives program assessment.
7. About 800 teacher education program graduates each year serve in student teaching internships as their capstone experience. The assessments associated with that experience have direct implications for graduation, eventual licensure, and future professional practice.  Further, the summary pass rate for Praxis II exams in 34 fields is 93%.

SUPPLEMENTARY EVIDENCE OF INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS

BGSU’s six-year graduation rate is 65%, 22 percentage points higher than the average of similar institutions.  It is also 12% to 15% higher than is predicted from the academic aptitude (ACT scores and high school grades) of incoming students.  U.S. News & World Report has recognized BGSU’s eminence in first year programs once and learning communities three times in the past few years.  BGSU participates in national studies, such as NSSE (described in a later section), FSSE, the Parsing the First Year of College Project, and the Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA).

During Fall 2005, approximately 250 first year BGSU students participated in the CLA, a collaborative national longitudinal on-line assessment involving over 50 universities. This assessment, comprising two parts—a  performance task and an analytic writing task, allows BGSU to compare our students’ achievement in critical and analytic thinking, problem solving, and writing with those across the nation as well as how these skills change over the undergraduate experience. A group of 100 graduating seniors was tested Spring 2006 term with either the performance or analytic writing task.  Whereas freshman CLA scores were right where they were predicted to be based on ACT scores, seniors scored 1.1 standard deviations higher on the CLA than predicted by the ACT, a finding we see as strong external confirmation of the impact of studying at BGSU.

BGSU graduates more teachers than any other Ohio institution.  At this year’s Teacher Job Fair, about 2,700 interviews were held with 600 graduating students.  Recruiters came from 155 school districts in 15 states.

BGSU’s learning outcomes appear in print and online (e.g., catalogs, syllabi), and are presented to students during Orientation and Registration.  They are embedded in Bowling Green Perspective (general education) and Bowling Green Experience (critical thinking about values) courses.  They have been described in presentations at national conferences and workshops (e.g., AAHE, AIR, Educause, LIfIA, NASULGC, NCA, NLII, POD, SACS), at higher education institutions (e.g., Allegheny College, Alverno College, Lawrence Tech, Loras College, Maryland Eastern Shore, Michigan, Montana, North Carolina A&T, Ohio, Otterbein College, Portland State, Regis, Roosevelt, Saginaw Valley, S. F. Austin, Truman State, and Winona State), and in numerous articles such as:
Knight, William E., Hakel, Milton D., and Gromko, Mark H. (2006). Research and Learning Intensive: Bowling Green State University Commits to Both.  About Campus, 10, 24-27.
Hakel, Milton D., Gromko, Mark H., and Blackburn, Jessica L. (2006). Implementing Electronic Portfolios at Bowling Green State University.  In Jafari, A. and Kaufman, C. (Eds.).  Handbook of Research on ePortfolios.  Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
Hakel, M. D. and Halpern, D. F. (2005).  How far can transfer go?  Making transfer happen across physical, temporal, and conceptual space.  In Mestre, J. (Ed.). Transfer of Learning from a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective.  Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Hakel, M. D. and Gromko, M. H. (2002). Delineating shared learning outcomes and standards for their assessment.  In Van Kollenberg, S. (Ed.), A Collection of Papers on Self-Study and Institutional Improvement, 2002 Edition.  Chicago: The Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools.
Gromko, M. H. and Hakel, M. D. (2002).  Evolution of learning outcomes.  In Doherty, A., Riordan, T., and Roth, J., Student Learning: A Central Focus for Institutions of Higher Learning.  Milwaukee: Alverno College Institute.
Hakel, M. D. and McCreery, E. A. W. (2000).  Springboard: student-centered assessment for development.  In Fallows, S. and Steven, C. (Eds.), Integrating key skills in higher education.  London: Kogan Page.

More information for students and the public about learning outcomes comes through BGSU’s publication of its results in national studies.  Writing under the headline “Colleges Praise New Source of Data, as Long as Their Scores Stay Secret” in the Nov. 23, 2001, edition of the Chronicle of Higher Education, Thomas Bartlett described the failure of institutions to disclose their National Survey of Student Engagement results.  He wrote, “They may praise the survey -- known as ‘Nessie’ after its acronym, NSSE -- but they only want average national data released. Like its mythical namesake, they believe it should be kept out of public view.”  He went on, however, to note some exceptions: “Not every college is shy about the survey. A few, like Bowling Green State University, in Ohio, are more forthcoming. Bowling Green posted the results of its 2000 survey on the university's Web site. Officials plan to post the 2001 results as well. This seems natural to William E. Knight, the university's director of planning and institutional research. ‘Our default position is that if there's any question, go ahead and make it public,’ he says.   For instance, on the positive side, 85 percent of undergraduates in the survey rated their overall educational experience as good or excellent. But the survey also found that 80 percent of students never or only occasionally discussed ideas from their readings with faculty members outside of class.”  See the full article at http://chronicle.com/weekly/v48/i13/13a03101.htm.  The 2000, 2001, 2003, and 2005 NSSE results are presented online at http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/ir/studies/nsse.htm.  In general the results show that BGSU undergraduate students are actively engaged with their academic activities at the University.

ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE OF MISSION FULFILLMENT

BGSU’s emphasis on learning outcomes and student success has helped to shape some statewide initiatives organized by the Ohio Board of Regents (OBR) to improve the quality of higher education and to inform the public about those improvements.  The first case in point concerns accountability.  It is the proposal, made by the Regents’ Planning Committee for Higher Learning Accountability and Productivity, that each institution in Ohio, independent and public alike, should publish online its own Student Success Plan.  Each institution’s Student Success Plan would define learning outcomes and assess student achievement of those outcomes both in general education and undergraduate majors; set higher expectations, as well as current standards, in content, competencies, abilities and successful completion of undergraduate education; and ensure the engagement of faculty and the entire instructional community in continuous improvement of student outcomes and achievement.

BGSU presented its Student Success Plan as a model for other Ohio institutions when OBR held its regular April 2006 meeting on campus.  That meeting was followed by a June statewide conference concerning accountability, and five regional workshops are being held this fall.  Calling the regional workshops “the next step in a process designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of Ohio’s higher education institutions,” the Regents’ Interim Chancellor E. Garrison Walters described them as “an opportunity to examine some institutional accountability plans and to discuss ways to leverage the differential missions and strengths of Ohio’s colleges and universities in expanding access to information about student learning expectations.”  He noted also, “An expected benefit from the regional workshops is the ability to share with the Ohio General Assembly—at the time of the budget hearings for the next biennial budget in Spring 2007—the results of these workshops in the form of Student Success Plans for each Ohio public institution.” More information about the Regents’ June conference and accountability in higher education, as well as student success plans, is available at http://regents.ohio.gov/accountability. To see BGSU’s current plan, go to http://www.bgsu.edu/studentsuccess. 

The second case in point concerns improved access to higher education, as influenced by Ohio’s Transfer Module.  Vice Provost Mark Gromko chaired a subcommittee of OBR’s Articulation and Transfer Council. The subcommittee – the Transfer Module Guidelines subcommittee – revised the guidelines that define the state transfer module, the body of common general education courses offered by all Ohio state colleges and universities. The revised guidelines define the purposes of a general education program in terms of two components, breadth of knowledge and foundational skills and abilities. The foundational skills and abilities are cast as five specific learning outcomes, thus shaping the state’s approach to general education in a way that makes it more open to assessment of student outcomes.  Concurrently, BGSU and Owens Community College are exploring how portfolio software might aid in addressing student transfer.  The Board of Regents is working with institutions to facilitate the Transfer Module mandated by the Ohio Legislature.  While transfer of courses must take place in conjunction with the Transfer Module, the transfer process can be enhanced and facilitated through the use of electronic portfolios.  Stakeholders having access to the student’s electronic portfolio will have the opportunity to view the student’s work in relation to developmental rubrics.  The receiving institution can then make more informed decisions regarding the best way to meet incoming students’ educational needs. 

Electronic portfolio technology enables students to document and reflect on their learning, and to prepare showcase portfolios.  Students create, edit, and upload examples of their best performances for regular review, anytime, anywhere.   Electronic portfolio technology also gives faculty a tool to learn much more quickly and directly about what is working well and what needs more attention.  Both baseline performance and the cumulative record of development are easily retrieved by students themselves, advisors, instructors, and other authorized university staff members.  To see the public side of our ePortfolios, visit http://e-demo.with.bgsu.edu/examples.aspx and click on any link, or visit http://mhakel.with.bgsu.edu/ or  http://saribeau.with.bgsu.edu/. The electronic portfolio project provides the clearest opportunity to provide a comprehensive assessment vehicle that spans multiple University programs.  At BGSU we see the Student Success Plan and ePortfolio initiatives as providing a practical alternative to “one-size-fits-all standardized testing of college students.”  Our progress toward becoming a premier learning community is leading the way in documenting educational accountability while maintaining a sharp and clear focus on what really counts, student success.

Since 1996, all proposals for undergraduate and graduate curricular and program change have included a section addressing the assessment of student learning outcomes. In addition, reporting on assessment of student learning outcomes is a major section of the documentation required in academic program review.   Moreover, assessment of student learning outcomes plays roles in budgeting and strategic planning.  For example, when faced with budget issues, the Division of Student Affairs senior leadership team reviews departmental and program assessment data to evaluate the impact on student success and recommends reductions when data do not provide evidence of making a difference, adding value, etc.   Assessment of outcomes is an integral component of the Continuing & Extended Education (CEE) unit strategic plans.  The data from CEE assessment activities is shared with all program directors, and individual program assessment is conducted by program administrators and shared with appropriate Assistant and Associate Deans.  Feedback on appropriateness and usefulness of assessment activities is tied directly to strategic plan updates and annual review of program accomplishments. 

SHARING INFORMATION

Numerous events and communication channels have been and are used to share assessment information across the university.  The SAAC website and BGSU’s practices in posting annual assessment reports, as well as the SAAC Lunch Awards, were mentioned earlier.  Great detail is available on the Web, where a collection of over 500 annual assessment reports is posted, and the evolution of program learning outcomes, assessment plans, measures, and program and curricular changes can be traced. Visit http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/assessment/page31436.html, and use the Assessment Search link to view reports from specific programs or majors.

Many major events have been held, for example:  

• Assessment Fair—a poster and demonstration session with 30 booths. 
• Visions of Learning Outcomes—a symposium involving a member of the Ohio House of Representatives, the manager of worldwide recruiting for Proctor & Gamble, the director of teaching enhancement at a peer institution, and BGSU’s President Ribeau.   
• Assessment Showcase—local workshops for assessment tools such as video and audio formative feedback, and juries.
• Assessment for Development—a consultant-led workshop on software-augmented peer coaching to enhance formative feedback. 
• Connections for Learning—a two-day joint consultation by external assessors from Alverno College, Kalamazoo College, and MIT, culminating in a recognition banquet.

In addition, SAAC “seed grants” have supported consultations and visitations, as well as many other assessment projects.  For example, over 100 faculty and staff members have attended the “Day at Alverno College,” and President Ribeau and four members of our Board of Trustees have visited there as well, to learn from their transformative practices.

OUTCOME EVIDENCE USE IN QUALITY IMPROVEMENT

We have many examples of curriculum redesign and course re-sequencing as a result of assessment outcomes.  Returning to the General Studies Writing Program, we note that it assesses achievement of its learning outcomes as part of its commitment to providing continuous quality improvement. Information collected through portfolio assessment and also through surveys leads to curricular modifications.  For example, assessment of portfolios revealed that students could benefit from more explicit instruction in anticipating the needs and expectations of audiences when writing, so an audience awareness activity was designed and implemented as a mandatory class activity. In another example, feedback from student evaluations and instructor input led the program to enhance its training program for teachers of developmental writing.

Bowling Green eXperience  (BGeX) courses are general education or general service courses with section size limited to 25 students, offered in more than 25 disciplines. Each is designed to examine the role of values in making judgments about difficult and often controversial issues covered in the course; help students make connections with a faculty member, an upper class peer mentor, and other first-year students; understand the University’s expectations and culture; identify their values and how they influence decision making; and develop skills to think critically.  Originating in the Building Community Project and the desire to create a “signature” program for the University, BGeX grew from a small pilot of five BGeX courses and 125 students begun in August 2002 to 160 BGeX classes enrolling all 3,700 first-year students in 2005.  BGeX learning outcomes specify that students will be able to (1) recognize and describe values that arise in the methods or content of the subject area, (2) identify ways in which these sometimes unexamined values shape or relate to academic and/or public discussion of issues relevant to today’s citizens, and (3) understand, articulate, and evaluate reasons and justifications that can support their own and others’ value choices.  The learning outcomes are incorporated into the fabric of BGeX courses, and program assessment has been a continuing factor in the program’s growth.  For example, a quasi-experimental comparison of student performance on a “critical thinking about values assessment” in three BGeX sections and three comparison sections of introductory psychology showed that the BGeX students scored significantly higher on the learning outcomes, even though the groups did not differ in critical thinking skills or in scholastic ability (Gillespie, 2005).

Assessment findings from a learning community on campus which met monthly in AY 04-05 led the Interactive Distance Education for All Learners group to provide technology and pedagogy training for prospective and active distance educators.  They developed and launched an online training program for distance faculty, created a BGSU online monthly newsletter to provide technology and pedagogy updates, and redesigned their website to serve as a central resource for online teaching.

The Mathematics and Statistics introductory course in college algebra (MATH 120) was a 5-credit hour course.  Many students found this course to be challenging, in part because it was a 5-credit hour course, and the course did in fact produce a high percentage of grades of D and F. This was discouraging for students, particularly if they took the course in the first semester of their freshman year. Consequently, the Department revised the course and at the same time implemented a well-calibrated placement test. MATH 120 was split into a sequence of two 3-credit hour courses, MATH 112 and MATH 122. Students who arrived well-prepared in math could place directly into MATH 122. Following these changes, the D/F/WF rate has fallen substantially, from 33% for MATH 120 to 20% for MATH 112 and 26% for MATH 122.

The American Culture Studies (ACS) program offers interdisciplinary baccalaureate and graduate degrees that can include coursework from English, Ethnic Studies, Theatre/Film Studies, History, Political Science, Popular Culture, Sociology, or Women’s Studies.  The ACS faculty has reorganized the undergraduate major and minor, and also its master’s and doctoral  programs, on the basis of the findings in the early rounds of assessing student learning outcomes.  Formerly largely individually tailored programs, the revised programs have clearer and more coherent structures.  Undergraduate major requirements now incorporate upper-division courses and include a two-semester senior capstone sequence.

In conclusion, Bowling Green State University is making tangible institution-wide progress in developing and applying evidence of student learning outcomes as part of the ongoing evaluation and improvement of its programs of study.