An Assurance of Learning Process: A Post-Implementation Review

Many accounting departments have implemented assurance of learning (AoL) processes in the last few years because accreditation agencies have mandated it. In prior articles, we described an early assessment process (Stivers, Campbell, & Hermanson, 2000), a revised assessment process, and a suggested systems-oriented methodology for implementing an AoL process (Hill & Campbell, 2007). The purpose of this article is to provide the post-implementation review of our revised AoL process. We evaluate whether the AoL process is meeting the users’ goals effectively and efficiently. To do this, we provide the feedback we received from our Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) accreditation visit, the results of a faculty survey, and some output from our AoL system. Our review indicates that while the AACSB accreditation team viewed our AoL process as a “best practice,” the faculty members evaluated the process less positively. Faculty members were concerned about the number and clarity of the learning goals, the usefulness of the information generated, and the cost/benefit of the process with respect to the time involved. We conclude that different goals for the AoL process, accountability versus course improvement, drive the difference in opinion between the accreditation team and the faculty. Changes in senior management in the college along with faculty opinions have led to significant changes in the college’s AoL process including changing the name from AoL to TLC (Teaching and Learning Community). The results of this research emphasize the importance of treating the AoL program as a dynamic process that must be periodically evaluated to determine if it is meeting the organizations’ goals for the process. If the AoL program is not meeting goals or costing too much to meet them, then it should be revised and improved.