| Student
Learning Outcomes Assessment Committee Minutes
September 11, 2006
10:00 a.m.
Bridges Hall 250B
Present: Tim
Borchers, chair; Ted Gracyk, Jody Mattern, Amy Phillips, Peggy Rittenhouse,
Stacy Voeller, Alison Wallace
Minutes: Moved by
Gracyk, seconded by Voeller to approve the August 28, 2006 minutes. The
motion was approved unanimously.
Update on SLOAC
Presentations: Borchers updated the committee on SLOAC information
presentations held for department chairs and assessment coordinators on
September 5 and 6, 2006. The “new and improved” assessment guidebook for
academic programs was distributed. Borchers added that he has been meeting
with departments when asked.
Chemistry Plan and
Report:
- The department is using multiple
assessment measures;
- Suggest added direct measures,
- Need to define the rating scale
with specific identifiers;
- Suggest reducing from a 1-5 scale
to a 1-3 scale;
- Feedback is missing on student
research progress report;
- Plan does not assess content
knowledge;
- Exit survey has some useful
information, but it is not necessarily related to student learning
outcome;
- Suggest the department delve deeper
to locate areas for improvement;
- Suggest the department review
national information/governing bodies for ways to addressing
communication within the discipline;
- Suggest the effectiveness outcomes
be dropped from the plan;
- Suggest that identifying names be
redacted from the report.
Counseling and Student
Affairs:
- Plan submitted is a new plan and is
favorable overall;
- The program has done a nice job of
collapsing all assessment into a succinct list of student learning
outcomes,
- Are the rubrics under each student
learning outcome more detailed? Need to submit the rubrics to SLOAC for
review;
- Lacking a minimum score for the
Counselor Preparation Comprehensive Exam;
- Need to submit copies of the exams;
- Research student learning outcome
lacks specified in class assessment measure and the level of expected
performance is unclear.
Special Education
Report:
- Report is straight forward
- All goals met --- are their
students that good or goals too low;
- Record of department consultation
missing;
- No indication of how the results
will be used to improve the program, just continuing to observe.
Borchers
agreed to provide the respective departments/programs with SLOAC feedback.
Accredited Programs:
Discussion ensued on what information should be submitted by accredited
programs. It was suggested that a link to each program’s institutional
report and final accreditation report/response from the state/national
agency would be sufficient.
Borchers
reported that he and Rittenhouse met during the summer with Charlie Howell,
Chair of the School of Teaching and Learning, and Teri Walseth, Associate
Dean of Education and Human Services, to discuss assessment of Teacher
Preparation programs. The meeting resulted in the need to separate NCATE and
Board of Teaching (BOT) assessment. It was noted that student teaching
evaluation would be linked to BOT standards in the future using a 3-point
scale. Follow up meetings with each program would be held in the future.
Instructional Improvement Grants: Discussion on whether grants are
limited to one per department or one per program opened. It was agreed the
intent is one grant application per report, so if a department has multiple
programs and provides multiple reports (one per program) it would be
acceptable to submit multiple grant applications. It was suggested that the
grant recipient and department/program secretary receive notice along with
the academic dean when grants awards are announced.
The meeting adjourned at
10:56 a.m.
Next Meeting: The
next scheduled meeting is October 23, 2006 and it is anticipated that review
of Philosophy and Biosciences plans will be on the agenda. Phillips agreed
to report on the Social Work grant at the November meeting. |