November 1, 2006

8:00 a.m.
Livingston Lord Library 120D

Present: Jean Sando, chair; Tim Decker, Ellen Brisch, Ellen Hill, Mike McCord, Brian Smith, Stacy Voeller

Absent: Rajiv Kalra, Margaret Sankey

Announcements: Sando reported that she has been reviewing archival assessment documents and noted it appears the Dragon Core Assessment Committee is not departing from the campus philosophy of the past, particularly that faculty participation is a key. The documents also support evidence that having students volunteer to participate in assessment provides insufficient data.

Minutes: Moved by Hill, seconded by McCord to approve October 25, 2006 minutes. The motion was approved unanimously.

IPESL Grants: Voeller, co-chair of the IPESL Review Committee, reported that 51 requests were received. The proposals have been initially reviewed and now Jean Hollaar, University Budget Officer, is computing salary costs for EDDs. It is expected the final review and recommendation to Vice President Midgarden will happen in the next few weeks.

Dragon Core Assessment Plan: Discussion ensued on whether sections of the plan when ready (Foundation Four, Inner Cluster, Middle Cluster, Outer Cluster, plus DC 11-Information Literacy and Writing-Intensive) should be presented to the campus for comment or whether the entire plan should be presented when complete. It was agreed to request feedback as sections are completed. Sando reported on discussions with SuEllen Shaw, University Writing Committee chair, regarding assessment of Writing-Intensive courses. Shaw agreed to bring the topic to the University Writing Committee for discussion. Whether to use pre/post testing in DC 1B, to use writing-intensive portfolios, and sampling in the Middle Cluster were discussed. It was noted that not all majors will have a writing-intensive course listed in its rubric as some majors will identify a course from another rubric.

It was suggested members review the Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) portfolio assessment website for examples of how it is using the NSSE data across the Indiana system. The site is a representation of a well designed assessment website.

It was reported that using ETS (Educational Testing Service) major field tests, particularly the GRE (Graduate Record Exam) are not appropriate since they are senior level tests. Discussion ensued on the possibility of MSUM creating its own field tests, both pre and post. Building a test based using the student learning outcomes of each competency area was discussed. Whether faculty would use the tests and the logistics of testing were discussed. Quantitative versus qualitative measures were discussed as well as consistency issues. It was added that seeing that all students as a group are meeting all the competency areas and not that each individual student is meeting all the competency areas is our goal. 

It was announced that a cross walk of the student learning outcomes from DC 3-7 and approved courses is underway. The spreadsheet will provide information on whether any student learning outcomes are not being addressed.

Portfolio Issues: It was noted that most students and many faculty do not know how to use portfolios. Communication issues including the feedback loop were discussed. It was added that portfolios are work both in the terms input and output. The types of artifacts to collect for a portfolio and issues with quality control were discussed. It was agreed if portfolios are used in the assessment process training will need to take place.

Next Meeting: Wednesday, November 8, 2006 at 8:00 a.m. in LI 120D.

The meeting adjourned at 8:55 a.m.

A member of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities System
Contact @mnstate.edu | Updated 8/8/06
MSU Moorhead | 1104 7th Ave South | Moorhead, MN 56563 | 1.800.593.7246
home | msum | academic affairs | about dragon core | requirements | faculty | students | minnesota transfer