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.