| Course | NU 635 Curriculum Development and Evaluation |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 6 |
| Paper type | Program evaluation metrics specification |
| Length | About 820 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Herzing University |
| Program | MSN Nurse Educator |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NU 635 Unit 6
Program Metrics Specification for an Online RN-to-BSN Program: Six Measures, Each With Its Counted Group, Timing, Source, and Reader
Student Name
Department of Nursing, Herzing University
NU 635: Curriculum Development and Evaluation
Instructor Name
February 27, 2026
Program Metrics Specification for an Online RN-to-BSN Program: Six Measures, Each With Its Counted Group, Timing, Source, and Reader
Purpose
This specification defines what the composite RN-to-BSN program will report about itself each year, one measure at a time, so that whoever pulls the data produces the same number every year and so that the curriculum committee knows what each number means. Measures were chosen to cover the program's commitments: that students finish, that they achieve the program outcomes, and that graduates change their practice. Accreditation standards require programs to report completion and employment rates and evidence of outcome achievement, and to use the results for improvement (Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education [CCNE], 2018). The measures also follow a widely used model for evaluating education, which distinguishes learners' reactions, their learning, their behavior in practice, and results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006).
Measure 1: Completion Rate
What it counts: students who complete the program within 150% of the expected time for their route, that is, 18 months for the full-time route and 27 months for the part-time route. Counted group: all students who began NUR 300 in a given calendar year. Excluded, as the accreditation standard allows when documented: students who leave for military deployment, serious illness, or death, and students who transfer to another nursing program. Not excluded: students who stop out for work or family reasons and do not return within the time limit. When counted: 27 months after the end of the entry year, so all students have had the full time. Source: the student information system, entry and graduation dates, and the advising record for exclusions. Reader: curriculum committee and program director. Target: 70% or higher, the accreditation threshold, with a program goal of 80%.
Measure 2: First-Course Retention
What it counts: students who complete NUR 300 and enroll in the next course within one session. Counted group: all students who begin NUR 300 in a session. When counted: at the start of the following session. Source: registration records. Reader: course faculty and advising. Target: 90%. Purpose: an early warning, since students who leave after the first course do so for reasons, such as workload shock or writing difficulty, that advising can address, and waiting for the completion rate would reveal the problem two years late.
Measure 3: Program Outcome Achievement
What it counts: for each of the seven program outcomes, the percentage of students rated proficient or higher on the program rubric in the designated assessing course. Counted group: all students who submit the assessing assignment in a calendar year; students who withdraw before submitting are not counted here, since the completion rate captures them. When counted: at the end of each calendar year. Source: rubric scores exported from the learning management system. Reader: curriculum committee. Target: 85% proficient or higher on each outcome. Aggregation: reported by outcome, never as a single average, because a high average can hide one outcome that most students fail to reach.
Measure 4: Graduate Practice Behaviors at One Year
What it counts: the percentage of graduates reporting, one year after graduation, that they have led or co-led a quality improvement project, used evidence to change a practice or policy, or coordinated a complex care transition. Counted group: all graduates of a calendar year with a working email address. When counted: 12 months after graduation. Source: the program's graduate survey. Reader: curriculum committee and advisory board. Target: 60% reporting at least one of the three. Reporting rule: the response rate is always reported beside the result, since a 60% figure from a 25% response rate means something very different from the same figure from a 70% response rate.
Measure 5: Employer Assessment
What it counts: employers' ratings of graduates on the same three practice behaviors, on a four-point scale. Counted group: supervisors named by graduates who consent to their contact. When counted: 12 months after graduation. Source: employer survey. Reader: advisory board and curriculum committee. Target: mean of 3.0 or higher. Caution: graduates choose which supervisors are contacted, so the results may be favorable; the report will state this.
Measure 6: Time to Completion
What it counts: median months from starting NUR 300 to graduation, by route. Counted group: all graduates in a calendar year. Source: the student information system. Reader: program director and advising. Purpose: to show whether students on the part-time route finish in about 18 to 20 months as the sequencing plan expects, and where delays cluster.
Reporting Calendar and Ownership
The program's evaluation coordinator pulls all six measures each February for the previous calendar year and presents them to the curriculum committee in March, with three years of trend data beside each. When a measure misses its target for two consecutive years, the committee must record an action plan. The specification itself is revisited on the same three-year cycle as the outcomes, so that the measures continue to match what the program says it values (Keating & DeBoor, 2018).
References
Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education. (2018). Standards for accreditation of baccalaureate and graduate nursing programs (Amended 2018). Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education.
Keating, S. B., & DeBoor, S. S. (2018). Curriculum development and evaluation in nursing education (4th ed.). Springer Publishing.
Kirkpatrick, D. L., & Kirkpatrick, J. D. (2006). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler.
What the NU 635 Unit 6 instructions ask for
In Unit 6 you specify the metrics a nursing program will use to evaluate itself. Expect to define each measure precisely, including what it counts, the counted group, timing, data source and audience, and to set a reporting calendar with owners. Many versions ask you to align measures with accreditation requirements and an evaluation framework such as Kirkpatrick's levels. Check how many measures your section expects; five to eight is common. Precision matters, since a completion rate means little unless the counted group and time window are defined. Include measures beyond grades, such as graduate practice and employer views. Individual student grading belongs in course assessment, not program evaluation, so keep the two separate.
How the NU 635 Unit 6 example is put together
The specification opens with its purpose: consistent numbers regardless of who pulls them. Each measure then uses the same labeled fields, which makes the document easy to use and easy to check. Completion is defined with a time window for each route. First-course retention is included because early loss is a known problem in online programs. Outcome achievement uses the program rubric in designated courses. Graduate and employer measures reach beyond the program, which matches Kirkpatrick's higher levels. Time to completion is reported by route. The calendar section names who pulls each measure, when it is presented and to whom. The structure is repetitive by design, so nothing is left to interpretation.
NU 635 Unit 6 rubric: what full points look like
Herzing's rubric for a metrics specification generally covers the selection of measures, the precision of definitions, alignment with accreditation and frameworks, data sources, reporting and ownership and writing. Precision is where graders spend their time: each measure must name its numerator, denominator, time window and source so two people would compute the same figure. Selection points reward a mix of process and outcome measures, including graduate and employer data. Alignment criteria look for CCNE program effectiveness expectations and a named framework. Reporting points go to a calendar with owners and audiences. Feasibility of data collection may be scored within sources. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick and the CCNE standards appear in the APA 7 list.
NU 635 Unit 6 help: mistakes that cost points
Metrics specifications in Unit 6 usually lose points through measures defined loosely, such as graduation rate, with no counted group or time window. Another frequent problem is relying on grades and satisfaction surveys alone. Students often leave out data sources, so it is unclear whether the measure can be collected. Graduate and employer measures are missing. Reporting calendars lack owners. The specification mixes program evaluation with individual student grading. Targets are absent or arbitrary. Finally, use the same fields for every measure, because graders find a consistent structure easier to verify and inconsistent definitions are the most common source of lost points.
Get a NU 635 Unit 6 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 6 instructions and the rubric from your NU 635 classroom, and tell us which measures the program already reports. We write a custom example with each measure defined by counted group, timing and source, thresholds written as review triggers, and program measurement kept clear of individual grading. First custom sample free, returned in 24 to 48 hours.
More NU 635 papers and nurse educator samples
- NU 635 Unit 1: Curriculum philosophy statement
- NU 635 Unit 2: Program outcomes framework
- NU 635 Unit 3: Curriculum map
- NU 635 Unit 4: Course sequencing plan
- NU 635 Unit 5: Standards gap analysis
- NU 635 Unit 7: Curriculum revision proposal
- NU 635 Unit 8: Curriculum design and evaluation package
- NSG 520 Unit 6: Abnormal value interpretation table
- NSG 521 Unit 6: Vital signs interpretation set
- NU 600 Unit 6: Educational technology selection
- NU 617 Unit 6: Curriculum change proposal
NU 635 Unit 6 questions, answered
Can I use real figures from a program?
Only figures that are genuinely public, and it is usually unnecessary. This deliverable is judged on how the measures are defined rather than on what they currently read, so illustrative values clearly labeled as illustrative serve the argument without putting anything sensitive into a file. Never take internal reporting out of an employer's systems, and never attach a number to a named institution unless it was published there.
How many measures should the specification carry?
Enough to cover completion, credential results, employment or progression, and outcome attainment, which usually lands under a dozen. Long dashboards look thorough and get reviewed once. A short set, each defined tightly enough to be pulled the same way every year, does more for a program than thirty measures nobody has the time to interpret.
Where does individual grading belong then?
In the course, where it already does its work. Individual performance becomes program measurement only in aggregate, and only when the aggregation is defined: which assignment, scored against which outcome, across which group of learners. Keeping that boundary visible is one of the things this unit is checking, so state it rather than assuming a reader will infer it.
Where can I find a free NU 635 Unit 6 sample paper?
This page carries the complete NU 635 Unit 6 metrics specification at no cost, six measures with counted groups, timing and sources. A custom specification can be built for your own program's evaluation plan.
What measures should a nursing program use to evaluate itself?
A mix of completion and retention, outcome achievement, graduate practice and employer assessment, each defined precisely. This sample specifies six such measures for an RN-to-BSN program and assigns one coordinator to report them each February.