Student Learning Outcomes Committee Meeting March 4, 2008 Room 3521, 12-1pm Present: Norma Ambriz, Carolyn Arnold, Dr. Barberena, Chad Mark Glen, Ming-Lun Ho, Gloria Meads, Barbara Ogman, Rebecca Otto, Michelle Sherry, Steve Smalls, Wayne Philips, Bernadette Zermeño, Diane Zulani 1. The meeting opened with all faculty members introducing themselves to Dr. Barberena. 2. Summary of SLOAC Barbara Ogman gave a short summary of the accomplishments since Convocation 2008 and many obstacles the committee has tried to address with faculty members: -controversy about standardization and how Chabot will decide how to honor faculty freedom while still making the SLOAC meaningful for faculty -The gradual compliance of faculty, 61% of faculty involvement with turning in one SLO per discipline. -The introduction to eLumen 3. Committee Input Diane stated that when faculty members are reminded that SLOAC is a requirement, faculty becomes engaged. SLOs are just one aspect and the main goal is completing the whole cycle. The question of making SLOAC a part of Program Review was discussed. There was a discussion of the use of eLumen. How are other colleges gathering SLO documentation to comply with Accreditation requirements? Are there alternatives to using eLumen or any software that faculty might like better? 4. Elumen Workshop Carolyn expressed that the eLumen workshop has helped clear up many of the definition problems the committee has been dealing with at every meeting. Rebecca told the committee members that many faculty members like the SLO process, but it is not documented because of lack of time. 5. Structure of Time and Organization Diane told committee members that other campuses have more opportunity to address issues and concerns because of having nine Flex days compared to Chabot’s one and ½ days. As a whole Chabot college has many goals, but not enough time to determine the steps for success. The reason that the SLOA committee has taken such small steps is because they have less time in the committee and as the college as a whole. There needs to be more time and opportunity to meet. Dr. Barberena asked Norma how she manages her division meetings to provide opportunity for discussion with faculty members. Norma expressed that many issues come up during her limited division meetings. Structure is provided, but more extensive time is needed to discuss all the issues Chabot faces. Dr. Barberena wants to know what the committee needs to really complete the SLOAC at Chabot College. She wants the committee to move at a faster speed and to be well versed about the needed resources. She wants committee members to express: - What is fundamental? - What the student walks out with? - How it will be measured? - How will the committee get from A to B? More organization is needed for the committee to define the process and how it will be facilitated. Ming spoke about the issue of having faculty come together to just sit down and do what is required on elLmen. eLumen can be reductive, but also uniting. The committee needs to make sure it addresses the importance and the intention in what faculty need to do to complete the SLOAC. 6. SLOAC’s Obstacles Barbara said the two main related to eLumen: Does the faculty “front load” the information or does someone else load the information? Are there alternatives that we can “teach” faculty to use? Comments were made that the software is not necessarily a good fit for all faculty. It is not particularly user friendly. 7. Closing Dr. Barberena is very interested in the SLOAC work, but she wants to know what will be done and to have a proposal ready. She believes the committee needs administrative support and needs to set a direction with action plans attached to them. 8. Next meeting: March 18 at noon in room 3521.