Skip to main content

Accessibility menu

Skip to main content Skip to footer

University Program Assessment Committee (UPAC)

A page within Academic Affairs

The University Program Assessment Committee (UPAC) provides feedback to academic programs to support their efforts to assess student learning and make improvements based on the results.

The UPAC process is aligned with Academic Program Review (APR). Departments/programs submit an assessment report to the UPAC at two timepoints as they move towards the completion of their APR self-study:

  • 5 years out from APR review
  • 2 years out from APR review 

Review this spreadsheet for specific deadlines for programs in upcoming review cycles.

The UPAC has established a report template and an evaluation rubric to guide and support programs as they document their assessment activities. Completed reports are submitted to a dedicated Canvas course. 

UPAC Review Process

Each program that is not exempt from UPAC participation is expected to submit two assessment reports to UPAC during a single APR cycle.  Assessment reports are due on February 15th of the academic years that are five years and two years prior to that programs next APR review.

The UPAC review process is outlined below.

  • Annually every fall: UPAC chair sends an email to each program that communicates the assessment review process and timeline.
  • February 15: Deadline for programs to upload their assessment report to Canvas five-years and two-years prior to their next APR review. The program will notify both the UPAC chair and the University Assessment Coordinator of their submission. Programs may request extensions if this deadline is not feasible.
  • Upon submission: UPAC reviews a submission and sends their review back to the submitter. Any disagreements between the submitter and UPAC are discussed by those parties. The Writing Programs Coordinator will also receive a copy of reports submitted to UPAC and will then contact programs to provide feedback and support related to writing-in-the-major. 

The Assessment Report Template provides an outline of the content the UPAC expects in your report. This Word document includes annotations as guidelines to use as you prepare your report. The UPAC will review assessment reports using this Evaluation Rubric.

A review letter will be written to highlight strengths of the department and areas for growth in their assessment practice. This letter will then be forwarded to the submitter. If a program does not agree with any portion of this UPAC evaluation, UPAC will work with that program to resolve those issues. The UAPR and GAPR committees expect programs to attach 5-year and 2-year UPAC feedback to their self studies and may ask UPAC for documentation on a program's assessment report submissions.

Programs should submit their assessment reports via a Canvas web site.  Please notify via email both the University Assessment Coordinator, Patrick Barlow at pbarlow@uwlax.edu, as well as the chair of UPAC upon submission.

Writing in the Major Assessment

Effective Summer 2025, all undergraduate programs that are not exempt from UPAC review must include evidence of writing-in-the-major assessment as part of their 5-year and 2-year assessment reports.

Programs Exempt from the UPAC Process

Since UWL has a number of externally accredited programs and teacher education programs certified by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI), the UPAC does not review programs who instead get regular feedback on their assessment work from these accrediting bodies or the DPI.  If  you have questions on your department or programs relationship to the UPAC process, please contact the UPAC Chair (Bryan Kopp, bkopp@uwlax.edu) or the University Assessment Coordinator (Patrick Barlow, pbarlow@uwlax.edu).

Overview of Expectations

UPAC expectations for program assessment are detailed in the report template.

Below is an overview:

  • UPAC’s overall goal in interacting with programs is to keep the lines of communication open and accompany programs in their assessment process. As assessment is a journey, we recognize that there may be complete sections alongside newly proposed assessments where data has not yet been collected and/or analyzed.
  • UPAC is looking to verify that (1) each SLO is assessed in at least one course and that (2) each SLO is covered in at least one of the courses listed in the curriculum map.
  • A program should assess at least one outcome per year and plan to have all outcomes assessed during one academic program review cycle (a program review cycle is once every seven years unless review follows external accreditation cycle).
  • In each section, include a brief description of how your program/department members share responsibility in the assessment process, as applicable.
  • UPAC understands that rubrics will vary greatly depending on discipline. UPAC is looking to verify that the rubric specifies how a student is classified and that the classifications do not overlap. If your program doesn’t utilize a rubric, please provide a discussion of the assessment criteria.
  • UPAC understands that benchmark levels will vary greatly across disciplines. UPAC does not expect to make judgements about whether a particular benchmark is too high or too low. It is reasonable that programs will alter benchmarks over different iterations of their assessment plan. Not meeting a benchmark does not make the assessment or the program “bad”. In the absence of a predetermined benchmark, briefly indicate general expectation for student performance.
  • UPAC expects to see the results of the assessment. Any additional data that the program used in their analysis should also be included. UPAC expects that the analysis is directly aligned to the supplied data and the associated programmatic learning outcomes.
  • Please be clear on how the data supports the actions taken. If these actions are to be taken in the future, please add who will be involved in implementing proposed actions. Examples of possible actions include: curricular changes, modifying instructional practices, changing your assessment tasks, changing your benchmark, modifying learning outcomes, modifying assessment plans/timeline, etc.

2024-2025 Committee Membership

Name Department/College UPAC Role
Bryan Kopp, Chair English, CASSH Faculty Committee Appointment
Weixu Lu CST, CASSH Faculty Committee Appointment
Nilakshi Borah Finance, CBA Faculty Committee Appointment
Mehtap Eklund Accountancy, CBA Faculty Committee Appointment
Karen Hart English, CASSH Faculty Committee Appointment
Terry Lilley RGSS, CASSH Assessment Associate
Megan Litster Health Prof, CSH Assessment Associate
Sam Cocks Philosophy, CASSH Assessment Associate
Cordial Gillette ESS, CSH Assessment Associate
Patrick Barlow IRAP, Academic Affairs Assessment Associate