University Assessment Committee Meeting
Minutes
October 8, 2015 9:00-10:00 a.m.
Bloch Executive Hall, Room 331
-
-
Attending – Ruth Cain, Brenda Bethman, Caitlin Horsmon, David Cornell, Sabrina MadisonCannon, Ken Mitchell, Chris Van Ness, Jennifer Friend, Wanda Temm, Jennifer Quaintance,
Maqual Graham, Kristin Lee, Margaret Mullally-Quijas, Larry Bunce, Rhiannon Dickerson, Peggy
Ward-Smith, Devon Cancilla, Crystal Doss, and Dan Stroud.
Not Present – Da-Ming Zhu, LaVerne Berkel, Greg Vonnahme, Lynda Plamann, and Jennifer
Waddell.
1. Welcome – Ruth Cain, Director of Assessment began the meeting and welcomed new member
Marqual Graham (School of Pharmacy) to the committee.
2. Approval of Minutes
- Kristin Lee made the motion to accept the minutes as written. Jennifer Friend seconded the
motion. Vote was taken and the motion unanimously carried.
3. Updates
-
-
-
-
-
Ruth reminded the committee that the October 15, 2015 Weave deadline was quickly
approaching and that all academic programs and plans to include majors, stand-alone minors,
and certificate programs, would be reviewed by the committee.
Ruth made the committee aware that the Assessable Roo for the fall quarter would be dispersed
this week and that new articles for the winter and spring issues were welcome by any and all
departments.
Peggy Ward-Smith opened the floor to discuss the Spring FaCET symposium. Asked for
suggestions regarding local workshops and possible suggestions for a local keynote speaker that
might better fit the current budget. Local or system level speakers would be ideal.
The Spring FaCET symposium is scheduled for January 11, 2016.
Devon Cancilla expounded about the online criteria and expectations moving forward.
Essentially he said that meeting the HLC requirements for online learning would be equal to
meeting SARA (State Authorization Reciprocity Association) expectations. Devon said that the
expectation was for meetings in January with the Provost and Deans about moving the
certification process forward.
Ruth asked Devon if he would present SARA’s 9 Criteria to the committee at the November
meeting.
4. Reports: Discourse, Anchor and Focus Courses, ETS® Proficiency Profile (EPP)
-
Ruth discussed the current utilization of the EPP and the state mandate. She recommended the
test be administered at the 90 credit threshold for undergraduate students, rather than at the
current 61 credit threshold.
- Larry Bunce suggested looking at ways to make it more meaningful to students, which in turn,
might make the data retrieved more relevant.
- Ruth countered by pointing out a need to speak more about what the results of such measures
actually reveal, and then what action needs to be taken to improve these results in the future.
- Wanda Temm asked whether there was a minimum score requirement or expectation.
- Peggy Ward-Smith inquired about what if any possible consequences could be imposed to drive
higher achievement on such exams.
- Chris Van Ness questioned whether the data was being viewed from an institutional or an
individual standpoint.
- Countering this point, Larry Bunce suggested that the university was not using the EPP in the
way that ETS had intended it.
- Expanding the conversation to locally developed culminating exams, Sabrina Madison-Cannon
spoke about the conservatory’s struggle to determine what major information is or is not
important.
- Dave Cornell discussed why the Bloch School discontinued it’s use of the ETS® Major Field Tests
and began developing their own culminating exams. He discussed the fact that they looked at
their program and course outcomes within the twelve business courses taught and challenged
instructors to examine outcomes within their courses first, ultimately visualizing the work done
in all courses (currently eight of the courses participate) within the purview of the entire
program. This seems to make more sense than the use of the MFT.
- Ruth pointed out that there are no requirements laid out by state or federal authorities that
insist on participation in the ETS® MFT testing program.
- Kristin Lee stated that the nursing program has competency exams that are worth 10 percent of
course grades.
- Peggy Ward-Smith picked up on this and spoke to the nursing program’s use of peer assessment
in their assessment efforts.
- Picking up on dialogue earlier in the discussion, Ruth said “we need to be careful not to say
things like ‘you professor, and your students are not meeting the outcomes listed.” It should not
be directly linked to performance issues.
- Ken Mitchell discussed the differences in ABET and HLC standards and his departments
continuing challenges in this area.
5. Academic Program Assessment Reports/Reviews
-
Ruth addressed the process as the committee begins the review process after the Weave
deadline.
Dan will send Weave reports, the year’s narrative, and last year’s feedback for the programs to
each of the review teams. All review teams will also have access in Weave to their specific
programs.
-
-
-
Dave Cornell suggested semi-annual reviews of poor programs and those that have strong
histories could perhaps be reviewed every three years.
Chris Van Ness warned about infrequency of reviews and falling into same issues that put the
university in the cross hairs of the HLC to begin with.
Ruth clarified this thinking and explained that the assessment office would continue to ensure
that programs were turning in their information each year, even though they might not be
evaluated by the committee.
Ruth also suggested that as part of the review process, a follow up visit attended by UAC
reviewers, the Director of Assessment, and the program itself might be included as part of the
process.
Jennifer Friend pointed out that additional comments in the plan reviews were far more
effective than merely placing an X in the appropriate box, no matter the level.
6. Election of UAC Co-Chair
-
Ruth asked the committee to consider worthy candidates willing to serve for the next meeting.
7. Next Meeting: November 12, 2015. 9:00 – 10:00 AM in Bloch Executive Hall, Room 413.
Jazzman’s Coffee will be provided.