From Findings to Decisions
Start with a finding that matters to a decision. Interpret the evidence, propose a feasible action, identify who will use it, and decide what follow-up evidence will show whether the action helped.
Recommendation
A proposed action that is specific, evidence-informed, feasible, and aligned to an identified gap or opportunity.
Closing the Loop
The act of using assessment findings to change strategies, curriculum, pedagogy, support services, assessment methods, or resource decisions.
Communication
The translation of assessment findings into a clear, meaningful story for faculty, students, administrators, accreditors, employers, and community partners.
What You Should Be Able to Do
| Performance Goal | Learner-Friendly Meaning | How It Shows Up in Your Work |
|---|---|---|
| Demonstrate the ability to implement changes based on assessment findings and effectively conclude the cycle of program evaluation for ongoing enhancement. | Use evidence to propose action; do not treat assessment as a static compliance exercise. | Explain the proposed change, the evidence that supports it, and how the institution could verify improvement. |
| Develop effective communication strategies tailored to diverse audiences. | Translate assessment results differently depending on who needs the information and what decision they must make. | Your recommendations should account for faculty, administrators, students, community partners, alumni, employers, or accreditors as appropriate. |
Core Ideas for Recommendation-Making
1. Evidence Before Advice
A recommendation should arise from a visible pattern: missed targets, weak evidence, unclear reporting, limited stakeholder engagement, inconsistent assessment methods, weak external validation, or findings that are not tied to action.
2. Recommendations Must Be Actionable
“Improve assessment” is not actionable. “Create a yearly program-level rubric calibration process for faculty scorers before capstone artifacts are scored” is actionable because it names the process, audience, timing, and purpose.
3. Closing the Loop Requires Documentation
The Closing the Loop resource emphasizes that results, decisions, implemented changes, and follow-up evidence must be documented; otherwise, outsiders and reviewers cannot see the improvement cycle.
4. Communicate for Use
JMU’s reporting guidance stresses meaningful storytelling, clear and concise presentation, audience awareness, useful context, and reasonable critique. The goal is not just to display data; the goal is to encourage action.
Closing-the-Loop Decision Guide
| Finding | Likely Interpretation | Possible Recommendation |
|---|---|---|
| Results are difficult to interpret. | The measure may be weak, unclear, or misaligned. | Revise the assessment instrument, refine rubric criteria, add scorer calibration, or clarify the learning outcome. |
| Results can be interpreted but lack detail. | The institution needs more useful evidence. | Add targeted survey items, focus groups, disaggregation, direct evidence, or stakeholder feedback. |
| Target was not achieved. | Students may need stronger instruction, support, resources, or clearer expectations. | Add action steps such as professional development, curriculum revision, tutoring, or changed assessment timing. |
| Target was achieved. | The program appears effective on that measure. | Sustain the practice, consider raising the target, or expand the successful strategy. |
| Target is achieved consistently. | The outcome may be stable enough to rotate out. | Replace with a more challenging outcome or new inquiry while maintaining periodic monitoring. |
Assessment Resources
Closing the Loop
This resource makes the practical case that assessment is pointless if findings are not used for improvement. It organizes action around sharing findings, discussing them, planning strategies, acting, and documenting changes. It also gives examples of curricular, pedagogical, student support, faculty support, process, and customer-service changes.
Developing a Comprehensive Assessment Plan
Piatt and Woodruff describe assessment as an ongoing cycle: determining outcomes, determining strategies and targets, implementing data collection, interpreting/analyzing data, and implementing proposed changes/reporting results. Their chapter is especially useful because it warns against collecting data that will not be used and emphasizes alignment, institutional context, mixed methods, stakeholder involvement, and tailored reporting.
Reporting & Use of Assessment Results - JMU
JMU explains that reporting results should encourage action. Results are more usable when they tell a meaningful story, are clear and compelling, address reasonable critiques, and are paired with a plan to re-assess after intervention. The resource also distinguishes effective, conditionally effective, and ineffective programs, which helps you avoid simplistic conclusions.
Develop and Review a Recommendation
Identify the decision
Choose a published assessment finding. Describe the gap, name the audience that will use the result, and identify the level at which a decision can be made.
Specify the action
Propose a change supported by the evidence. Identify the owner, resources, timing, and a measure the team can use to check the result.
Invite stakeholder review
Ask a colleague to check the interpretation, flag missing perspectives, and suggest a more feasible action or follow-up measure.
Build an Assessment Recommendation
1. University and Data Source
2. Pattern-to-Recommendation Matrix
| Assessment Finding or Pattern | Interpretation | Actionable Recommendation | Audience / Owner | Follow-Up Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Programs report results, but action steps are inconsistent. | The institution may collect evidence without consistently using it. | Create a required “findings → action → reassessment” field in annual assessment reports. | Assessment office, program chairs | Percentage of reports documenting implemented changes and follow-up results. |
| Assessment relies heavily on indirect surveys. | Evidence may reflect perceptions more than demonstrated learning. | Add direct measures such as capstone rubrics, portfolios, performance tasks, or sampled student work. | Faculty committees | Rubric score trends and calibration notes across cycles. |
| Stakeholder engagement is unclear. | Findings may not reflect employer, alumni, student, or community perspectives. | Form an advisory feedback cycle that reviews selected outcomes annually. | Program leadership, external advisory board | Meeting notes, survey themes, documented curriculum changes. |
| Results are not communicated in accessible formats. | Data may not influence decisions because stakeholders cannot easily interpret it. | Develop one-page visual summaries tailored to faculty, students, and administrators. | Assessment lead, institutional research | Stakeholder feedback and evidence of decisions made from reports. |
3. Recommendation Quality Test
Specific
Does the recommendation name the action, audience, process, and evidence?
Evidence-Informed
Does it respond directly to a documented finding rather than a personal preference?
Feasible
Could the institution reasonably implement it with existing or justifiable resources?
Re-Assessable
Does the recommendation include a way to check whether the change improved learning or effectiveness?
4. Broader Implications
Check Your Understanding
Check 1: Vague or actionable?
Vague: “The university should improve stakeholder communication.”
Actionable: “The assessment office should publish a one-page annual findings brief for faculty, students, employers, and advisory board members, then hold a 30-minute program meeting each fall to identify one improvement action from the prior year’s data.”
Check 2: What does it mean to close the loop?
Closing the loop means the institution uses evidence to change something and then documents whether the change helped. It is not enough to collect data, summarize it, and move on.
Check 3: What if the data are positive?
Positive findings still require action. The institution might sustain the successful practice, share it as a model, expand it, apply for resources, raise the performance target, or re-assess later to ensure the improvement remains stable.
Check 4: What if the data are negative?
Negative findings should not automatically produce blame. JMU’s guidance encourages investigating causes such as implementation fidelity, weak program theory, insufficient program length or strength, or poor alignment before choosing an intervention.
Reflection Prompts
References and Practice Resources
These sources provide context for assessment planning, reporting, and follow-up.
- James Madison University. (n.d.). Reporting and use of assessment results.
- Piatt, K. A., & Woodruff, T. R. (2016). Developing a comprehensive assessment plan. New Directions for Student Leadership.
- Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center El Paso. (n.d.). Closing the loop.