Course Evaluation System

Courses listed in the Guide are service school courses conducted on a formal basis, i.e., approved by a central authority within each service and listed by the service in its catalog. These courses are conducted for a specified period of time with a prescribed course of instruction, in a structured learning situation, and with qualified instructors.

Most courses are given on a full-time basis. After 1981, ACE began evaluating courses that are at least 45 academic hours in length. Prior to that time, evaluated courses were at least two weeks in duration, or, if less than two weeks in length, the course had to include a minimum of 60 contact hours of instruction. Before 1973, the minimum length requirement was three weeks or 90 contact hours.

In the fall of 1973, the Commission on Accreditation of Service Experiences (renamed the Commission on Educational Credit and Credentials in 1979) approved the following procedures and guidelines for the evaluation of military formal courses.

The Evaluation Process

Courses are evaluated by teams of at least three subject matter specialists (college and university professors, deans, and other academicians). Through discussion and the application of evaluation procedures and guidelines, team members reach a consensus on the amount and category of credit to be recommended.

Evaluation materials include the course syllabus, training materials, tests, textbooks, technical manuals, and examinations. Additional information may be obtained from discussions with instructors and program administrators, classroom observations, and examination of instructional equipment and laboratory facilities.

Evaluators have two major tasks for each course: the formulation of a credit recommendation and the preparation of the course's description. The credit recommendation consists of the category of credit, the number of semester hours recommended, and the appropriate subject area. Evaluators phrase the course description (which appears in the Guide exhibits under the headings Learning Outcomes or Objectives and Instruction) in terms meaningful to civilian educators. The course description supplements the credit recommendations by summarizing the nature of a given course.

Selection of Evaluators

Evaluators are drawn from postsecondary institutions, professional and disciplinary societies, education associations, and regional accrediting associations. Evaluation teams are selected by the Program Evaluations Content Review Committee.

The Content Review Committee meets weekly to determine the appropriate content/academic areas from which the slate of potential evaluators for each review team should be drawn. Members of the Committee reflect a diversity of backgrounds in academe as well as professional experience.

Committee members include: James H. Selbe, Director of Program Evaluations; Cynthia Bruce, Associate Director of Military Evaluations; Deborah Ross Warin, Assistant Director of Program Evaluations; Diana Gross, Assistant Director, Military Registries & Editor of the Guide; and Bryan Reynolds, Program Manager. Ad hoc committee members are Susan Porter Robinson, Vice President, Center for Lifelong Learning; Mary Beth Lakin, Associate Director, Special Projects, Center for Lifelong Learning; Susan Huggins, Assistant Director, Program Evaluations, Center for Lifelong Learning; as well as others who may be consulted with regard to a specialized content area.

Committee responsibilities and procedures include:

• Members of the committee review the submitted course materials to first determine the academic content areas reflected in the course descriptions and learning outcomes.
• Committee members then discuss the areas of academic expertise or training, as well as the program areas and institutions from which potential evaluators should be drawn. A consensus is reached on which academic fields should be represented in the evaluation team.
• After careful staff research, the committee is presented with a list of review team candidates for each academic field appropriate to the course being reviewed. From this list, the committee selects a team of at least three subject matter specialists whose competence is most appropriate for the review. The committee also strives for institutional and geographic diversity in forming the subject matter review teams.

After the evaluation team has been formed, the Associate Director of Military Evaluations confers with them, reviewing the procedures and responsibilities with which they are charged in conducting the review.