REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Monday, April 27 meeting of the Assessment Committee
Room FM 112, Eureka Campus: 7351 Tompkins Hill Road,
Present: Paul Chown, Clyde Johnson, Wendy Riggs, Lisa Sayles, David Bazard
Absent: Marla Gleave, Angelina Hill, Sheila Hall
Minutes
Meeting began at 2:45 p.m.
Discussion Items
1. 2014-2015 Initiatives/changes. Where they stand, what needs to be done in 2015-2016:
The Assessment Committee discussed how to follow through on initiatives and new policies that had
been approved during the 2014/2015 academic year. The new deadlines for submitting assessment
reports was discussed. Assessment Committee Chair David Bazard indicated that an announcement
could be made during Fall Convocation describing the new deadline of “one week past final grades”.
Committee member Paul Chown stated that this would not require any additional IT work because the
mid-term deadline is not a “hard” deadline when software is reset. That will occur in the summer,
possibly July 1. The committee agreed that the policy should be implemented and then the specifics of
the hard deadline can be worked out during the 2015/2016 academic year.
David Bazard explained what would be required to implement the new GE outcome assessment
proposal. He stated that the curriculum committee was already working on a new course outline to
provide the mapping between course outcomes and GE outcomes. However, this will only be an
incremental change. There will need to be mapping of existing course outcomes. This could be done
during a Convocation session and perhaps continued throughout the fall semester with assistance from
the Deans and Assessment Coordinator. Paul Chown described the software changes needed. Dave
suggested that Paul, Angelina (Assessment Committee CoChair), and he meet to define the necessary
software changes required to report assessment of the new outcomes. There was general agreement
that the new software could be in place to begin assessment of the new GE outcomes during the Spring
2016 semester.
The Assessment Committee also discussed changes for Distance Ed. Assessments. There was agreement
that recent changes to the reporting template are sufficient for now. These changes will allow
appropriate comparisons of DE and FTF courses
2. Initiatives and Plans for 2015-2016:
The Assessment Committee discussed the possibility of transitioning to a 4-year assessment cycle. This
would apply to both course and program assessments (which are tied to course assessments).
Committee CoChair David Bazard explained that it would be helpful to tie the assessment cycle to the
program review cycle. Committee member Wendy Riggs asked if that was necessary to begin a 4-year
PR cycle or if program review could be tied in later. Dave agreed that it would be possible to begin a 4year cycle and modify program review evaluation rubrics to take that cycle into account. The cycle of
program reviews could stay the same for now. This may allow more time to evaluate the length and
timing of the program review cycle. Dave also brought up the change of the cycle and the timing of the
next self-study. Committee member Lisa Sayles suggested it would be best to make a transition now so
it would be in place by the time of the writing of the self-study. Implementation in Fall 2015 would
allow one year before the data gathering and report writing scheduled for 2016/2017. After
considerable discussion the committee agreed that an effective means of transitioning to a 4-year cycle
would to consider the 2012/2013, 2013/2014, 2014/2015, 2015/2016 academic years as our first 4-year
cycle. If we announced this at fall 2015 convocation, then the faculty and student services could focus
on those courses and programs that had not completed a full cycle during that period. If courses and
programs had assessed all outcomes during that period, then they would be able to use that data for
planning but they would not have conduct additional assessments during the 2015/2016 academic year.
All course and programs would begin a new 4-year cycle during the 2016/2017 academic year. The
committee also agreed that there should be a policy of courses and programs completing at least 25% of
their outcomes each year during the 4-year cycle, until the cycle is completed. A course or program
could assess all outcomes in one year, but that would have to be the first year of the 4-year cycle. This
would prevent “putting off” assessment until the last year of the cycle, which could result in areas not
completed all assessments in the 4-year period. Dave agreed to discuss this proposal with CoChair
Angelina Hill and VPI Keith Snow-Flamer.
CoChair Bazard described the need to follow through on a process of “assessment by demographic
groups” (consistent with the – ACCJC rubric). The committee agreed that implementation of that
process need to be implemented during the 2015/2016 year. Committee member Lisa Sayles suggested
using Canvas for collecting that data.
CoChair Bazard suggested that the committee evaluate the reporting template next year and begin with
a set of goals that are essential to quality (meaningful) reports. An update would also address the
“loop” process that has become problematic with many unclosed loops. The committee agreed that this
update should be one of the goals for the 2015/2016 year.
Committee member Lisa Sayles expressed an interest in continuing the discussions regarding the use of
Canvas in the assessment process. The committee agreed and co-chair Bazard stated he would add that
to next year’s agenda.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:55pm