Assessment Policy

AAUP is dedicated to the following principles and standards in academic assessment:

1. Scope:

   • This policy applies to all faculties and programs at AAUP and serves as the baseline for faculty- and/or program-specific assessment policies.

   • In the event of any contradiction between this policy and a faculty- or program-level policy, this policy takes precedence.

   • Faculties and academic programs have the autonomy to develop customized and localized assessment policies that align with their specific requirements while ensuring that this policy serves as the baseline for any further development.

      

2. Assessments Methods:

   • Summative Assessment: Graded and weighted assessments used to measure student achievement of learning outcomes during and at the end of a course or an instructional period. Examples include midterm and final exams, projects, presentations, quizzes, case studies, and portfolios. All summative assessments must undergo quality assurance reviews to ensure validity and reliability.

   • Formative Assessment: Graded but not weighted assessment used to monitor student learning, provide ongoing feedback, and guide instructional adjustments. Examples include in-class exercises, quizzes, reflective journals, oral questioning, and discussion forums.

      

3. Quality Assurance of Assessments:

   • Pre-Assessment Review:

   • Instructors or course coordinators develop exams in accordance with university standards and exam validity criteria.

   • Exams must be reviewed and approved by the department chair or an appointed expert before administration.

   • Post-Assessment Review:

   • Summative exams that are conducted electronically through the Moodle platform undergo statistical analysis to measure exam reliability.

   • Course instructors discuss assessment results with students (except final exams) and document feedback for continuous improvement.

   • Department chairs review post-assessment reports and submit findings to the faculty council for approval.

      

4. Assessment of Theory-Based Courses: 

   • Summative Assessments may include Exams, projects, and presentations form the core of summative assessments.

   • Faculty members are also encouraged to conduct formative assessments which may include, but not limited to, quizzes, oral questioning, and practice exercises provide timely feedback.

5. Assessment of Practical and Clinical Courses:

   • Summative Assessments: Evaluations based on practical exams, skill demonstrations, and case studies aligned with course learning outcomes.

   • Formative Assessments: Continuous feedback from instructors or clinical coordinators using observations, checklists, and logs.

      

6. Use of Rubrics:

   • Rubric Creation: Clearly defined performance levels aligned with learning outcomes.

   • Rubric Application: Distributed to students before assessments to ensure transparency and fairness.

   • Rubric Feedback: Used to provide structured feedback, encouraging student self-assessment and improvement.

      

7. General Assessment Principles:

   • Assessments must evaluate cognitive, psychomotor, and affective domains as outlined in course objectives.

   • A combination of formative and summative assessments should be used to provide a comprehensive view of student performance.

   • Assessment details, grading rubrics, and deadlines must be communicated clearly at the start of the course.

   • Assessment methods should reflect real-world applications where possible.

   • Feedback must be timely, constructive, and contribute to curriculum development and quality enhancement.

To ensure the successful implementation of this policy, AAUP will adhere to the following guidelines and procedures:

1. Designation of Responsibility: The Assessment and Evaluation Committee (or equivalent) oversees the implementation, communication, and monitoring of this policy.
    

2. Monitoring and Review: The Quality Promotion Department conducts periodic audits to assess compliance with reliability, validity, and overall quality standards.
    

3. Reporting and Transparency: Department Heads and Course Instructors submit reports on assessment methods, student performance, and necessary adjustments.
    

4. Continuous Improvement: This policy undergoes periodic reviews to align with new regulations, technological advancements, and best practices in assessment.
    

5. Training and Development: Instructors receive ongoing guidance and training to ensure effective implementation of assessment policies and best practices.

The following measures (indicators) assess the effectiveness and utilization of this policy:

1. Variety of Assessment Methods: Frequency and diversity of formative and summative assessments used per course.
    

2. University Alignment with Learning Outcomes: Percentage of courses where assessments directly map to intended learning outcomes.
    

3. Feedback Quality and Timeliness: Average turnaround time for returning feedback and student satisfaction surveys regarding feedback clarity and usefulness.
    

4. Reliability and Validity Testing: Frequency of item analyses, reliability coefficients (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha), and documented face/content validity checks.
    

5. Academic Integrity: Number of reported cases of academic misconduct and effectiveness of corrective measures.