Quality Improvement Program and Strategic Plan

D​allas College Construction Sciences Division has a comprehensive assessment and quality improvement plan that outlines direct and indirect measures by which the division can systematically evaluate student achievement of program outcomes and goals.

Any results that indicate a deficiency or decline of a Program Outcome are analyzed and reviewed by the faculty.

Outcomes and course content are then modified as needed to ensure that the division focuses on skill sets that are valued by construction employers and that the Division is doing an effective job of preparing students in those areas.

Quality Improvement Plan

The construction technology division follows an internal quality plan focusing on curriculum and student learning. The plan consists of four broad action areas and its implementation is continuous. The four action areas are:

  1. Identify and update program outcomes – Our industry advisory board maintains and annually reviews a list of program outcomes.
  2. Ensure that program structure and course content address program outcomes – Course syllabi are reviewed regularly to ensure that course content aligns with our outcomes and that all the outcomes are addressed within required classes.
  3. Verify that courses effectively teach to program objectives – Each course and its instructor are evaluated regularly by our students. The division also conducts a survey of graduates. Details can be found below.
  4. Curriculum and program procedures are modified based on objective criteria:
    • Student Evaluations of Courses and Instructors
    • Instructor monitoring of student progress,
    • Tracked Direct Assessments, and
    • Graduate Surveys

Student Evaluations of Courses and Instructors

Students evaluate course content, faculty performance, and facility review each semester utilizing a web-based Course Exiting Survey. Instructors review the data annually and modify course content to reflect changes in student needs and suggestions.

Instructor Monitoring of Student Progress

During each course, instructors monitor student progress. Test, exam, and project performance are reviewed on an ongoing basis by the instructor administering the assessment (test, exam, or project).

Graduate Survey and Direct Assessments

In addition to student course evaluations, the AAS Construction Management Degree adheres to the 13 ACCE SLOs for its graduates.

The Direct Assessment will be measured each semester as part of CM core courses. The Graduate Survey is administered on a three-year cycle concurrent with the 3-year SLO cycle as outlined in the Assessment Implementation Plan. Results will be used and will be integrated into the CM Program’s Quality Improvement Plan.

Direct Assessments

Each semester, the Construction Management Division initiates a Direct Assessment embedded within core courses for each ACCE Student Learning Outcome.

These Direct Assessments will be performed on a ‘baseline’ format. The baseline of previous assessments will be compared against the current assessment performance. Primarily, the division will be monitoring for trends of improvement or decline. When a group of graduates scores below the target success percentage for that course/SLO, the item will be identified for ongoing scrutiny and attention from the Construction Management Faculty.

Indirect Assessment – Surveys

Program Graduates will be asked to report on the level of knowledge and preparedness they received from the program. A special emphasis will be placed on the success of the outcomes in the graduate’s current construction management-based employment. The CM Program Chair’s analysis of the Graduate Survey will be used for program analysis by the instructional staff.

Upon graduating, students from the program will be asked two questions regarding each of the following skills:

  1. How important is the skill in your job?
  2. Did the CM program prepare you at the level necessary to meet job requirements?

The data garnered from these assessment methods will be evaluated to determine the level of graduate preparedness and knowledge. Every two years the Program Chair will analyze the data. Any result that indicates a decrease in the level of student understanding or preparation will be identified by the Chair.

For the Graduate Survey, any outcome where the level of preparedness is below that required to meet employment expectations will be reviewed, investigated, and brought to the attention of all instructors whose course contents apply to that outcome.

The curriculum of that responsible instructor, or instructors, will be reviewed by that instructor in conjunction with the program chair, and sponsoring full-time instructor in the case of adjunct instructors, and revised for completeness or added emphasis.

Full-time faculty and adjuncts have the responsibility for full input and implementation of agreed or mandated changes of curriculum. The Program Chair and Full-time Faculty work one-on-one with the Adjunct Faculty to implement revisions to course content, pedagogy, and structure.


5-Year Strategic Plan

Program Priorities

  • 1st Priority - ACCE Reaccreditation 2021FA
  • 2nd Priority - Enrollment
  • 3rd Priority - Articulation