Assessment Steering Committee

Minutes

 

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

11:00-12:00

AMC-MS room

Type of meeting

University Assessment

Facilitator

Jim Sherohman, Assessment Director

Note taker

Jennifer Pearson

Attendees

HCOB:  Brad Sleeper

COE:    Elaine Ackerman

COFAH: Wendy Bjorklund

COSE:  Sandra Johnson

COSS: Joe Melcher

LRTS:  Chris Inkster

Gen Ed:  Judy Litterst

Cont. Studies:  Patty Aceves

Academic Affairs: Mitch Rubinstein

Undergraduate Studies:  Mark Nook

Graduate Studies:  Melanie Guentzel

Student L&D: Jim Knutson-Kolodzne

Institutional Research:  Lisa Foss

Student:  Michelle Lindahl

Topics

 

Approval of Minutes of february 14, 2007

 

motion

 

Motion-Mitch Rubinstein

2nd-Chris Inkster

Motion passes unanimously

 

chair’s report

 

 

discuss

The Collaboration for the Advancement of College Teaching & Learning

Jim S. announced that The Collaboration is hosting a Summer Institute on Engaged Learning and suggested that it may be of interest to those involved with General Education. 

motion

N/A

 

COMMITTEE BUSINESS

discuss

Assessment Plans

Based upon previous discussions in the committee, Jim S. drafted a proposed definition of an academic program assessment plan and a procedure for implementation:

 

A program assessment plan shall consist of the following four components:

Ø       Mission statement

Ø       Student learning outcomes

Ø       Program matrix (curriculum map)

Ø       Timeline

 

1)     Every program must have an assessment plan. Please submit assessment plans for all major programs to your college assessment director no later than May 17, 2007. Please submit assessment plans for all minor programs no later than December 24, 2007.

2)     The four components of the assessment plan are not new to SCSU. All major programs should currently have mission statements and student learning outcomes, and many already have the other two components as well.

3)     The program matrix or curriculum map shows which courses or outside-of-course activities (alumni surveys, standardized tests, and so forth) will be used to assess each student learning outcome.

4)     The timeline identifies when these assessments will take place. Every student learning outcome should be assessed at least once during each program review cycle (every six years).

5)     The assessment plan need not specify how each student learning outcome will be assessed. That information will be required in the annual assessment report, but only for the current year and the following year.

6)     Assessment plans will be posted on the Assessment website as a resource for program faculty and students, curriculum committees, and the broader academic community.

7)     As soon as possible after they are received, the Assessment website will post examples of assessment plans. This will serve as a resource for programs that still are working on their plans.

 

Rationale: This is an opportune time to revise our policies on assessment plans and annual assessment reports. The assessment plans for many programs were developed a number of years ago, and assessment reporting by programs has been sporadic in recent years. For SCSU to successfully complete its student learning projects for the HLC Assessment Academy, we need more systematic information about the assessment activities that are taking place across campus. The proposed revision of the policies on assessment plans and assessment reporting will clarify expectations for programs and will help ensure that programs have the information they need to improve student learning. Also, because assessment plans play an important role in our curriculum process, we need to clearly define what they are, and we need to make them public.

motion

Motion to approve-Wendy Bjorklund
2nd-Brad Sleeper
Motion passes unanimously

discuss

Assessment Templates

The committee discussed whether separate templates should be created for academic programs, general education and upper division writing and decided that there were enough differences to warrant individual forms.  Mitch Rubinstein suggested that undergraduate and graduate certificates and doctorate be levels on the forms.  The levels should be listed in a drop-down box.

 

 

motion

Motion to approve-Brad Sleeper
2nd-Judy Litterst
Motion passes unanimously

discuss

Guidelines for Academic Programs

The committee reviewed the guidelines drafted by Jim S. for how to complete assessment reports for academic programs.  Judy L. will solicit input on the Upper Division Writing and General Education templates and guidelines from these respective committees prior to next week’s meeting.

motion

Motion-Judy Litterst
2nd-Chris Inkster
Motion passes unanimously

discuss

General Education Assessment Template

Mark Nook questioned whether departments and colleges should be specified on the template, because this reinforces the “silo” view of education.  It was agreed to remove these.

motion

N/A

discuss

Assessment Academy Electronic Network

Jim reiterated that the Assessment Academy will be asking for SCSU’s information soon and requested that the subcommittees for each project work to finish.  He said he would work with Assessment Roundtable attendees to complete project two.

motion

N/A