General Education Assessm ent Com m ittee
April 4, 2014
Rohrbach Library, Room 22
Present: Krista Prock (at-large non-teaching faculty), Janice Gasker (at-large teaching faculty), Gil Clary
(Office of Assessment), William Donner (SPRC), Mary Eicholtz (at-large teaching faculty), Valerie Trollinger
(CVPA).
Absent: Varsha Pandya (CLAS), Stephen Oross (at-large teaching faculty), William Dempsey (Academic
Dean), Dina Hayduk (COB), Nancy Cardenuto (COE), Randy Schaeffer (Gen Ed Committee), Brent Penny
(Admin. & Finance), and Austen Mest (Student Representative).
Gasker called the meeting to order at 2:00 pm.
M inutes:
Announcem ents: Gasker opened the meeting and announced that Oross was unable to attend today’s
meeting, but had sent her a proposed agenda.
Following the agenda and referencing the statement for criteria of courses selected for assessment of Goal 1 –
the courses were not necessarily placed on the curriculum map by the department chair, and it is felt we should
not make that statement. Additionally, we will assess courses offered during the fall 2014. The reason for this is
so that this committee is not required to work through the summer on the analysis of the data presented.
Discussion followed. It was decided to remove #2 of the criteria listing.
It was suggested that we assess two courses, levels 0 to 199; two courses, levels 200-299; and two courses 300
and above. Discussion followed regarding options available if we added 200 level courses. Based on the listing
of courses from the curriculum map being offered during the fall 2014 semester, few additional courses would
be assessed. The criteria followed are not policy – this is the way we are selecting courses for assessment now.
The committee wants to be fair. The goal is to assess six courses per semester per domain – three at a lower level
and three at a higher level as available. A factor to be considered is the number of students taking the courses.
These criteria can and will be changed after the committee has had a chance to evaluate the methods for this
semester. It is felt that we should be transparent in our thinking and methods for the course selection.
No. 3 – at least two courses numbered 0 to 199, two courses 200 to 299, and two courses 300 and above for
each of ten domains yielding a total of 60 courses.
No. 5 – delete for now.
No. 6 – senior semester/capstone/clinical experience at this time will not be sampled. We will add the words
“at this time”. Discussion followed. It is noted clinical experience requires that we follow the state-regulated
template for assessment.
No. 7 – eliminate as this is a guideline for the chair’s information.
Chairnet: A GEAC representative will attend the Chairnet meeting on April 15th. At that time, it will be
announced that assessment training will take place in the fall – dates TBA. Rather than changing the
curriculum map now, we can send an email indicating an opportunity to update their curriculum map at a
later time.
Eicholtz will go back to the reference material and look for 200 level courses to add to the list of courses to be
assessed if available.
Database: Prock reported that IT will not support the database because they did not create the database. IT
believes that MyKU is the place for this database. Greg Schaper suggested that we should try to get a new
computer science student to work on the database as the student who created this database graduates in May.
Discussion followed. Clary will meet with Dr. Wells to see what we can work out for the database and talk to
the GEC. Until this is all straightened out, we can save the database on Prock’s computer.
Flyers: Clary will contact CONNECTIONS to give them flyers to be placed with their materials this
CONNECTIONS’ season. It was agreed that the posters should be placed in each academic classroom. Clary will
ask for permission to post the flyers in the classrooms. Kent Dahlquist/Chris Price will have to be contacted for
the residence hall, and Prock will get permission for the library. She will also contact Trish Scarcia-King for the
MSU.
Final two m eetings – April 18 and M ay 2: Goals for the final meetings of the semester include
•
•
•
•
Finalize Year 2 report and submit to the Provost. The committee should review the report prior to our
next meeting on April 18;
Training sessions for the fall. A training schedule should be identified for September. Chairs will be
notified of the training dates once they are identified.
Check status of faculty volunteers participating in Goal 3 assessment this semester.
Identify a new chair for this committee.
Com m ittee com position: Donner indicated that Jim Delle may be back on this committee representing the
SPRC, and then he would withdraw from GEAC. A decision needs to be made about a chair for this committee
because of the release time factor. A new chair will be chosen on May 2nd. An election for Oross’ position on the
committee is taking place now, and five people are running for that position. Discussion followed. Cardenuto is
retiring and will be withdrawing from the committee; and Hayduk has withdrawn from the committee. We will
need new college reps for the College of Education and College of Business.
To do: Gasker will contact Oross ask for the Year 2 report and list of volunteers, and will ask the deans for
COE and COB representatives to the committee.
Next meeting is Friday, April 18, 2014 at 2 pm in RL 22.
Meeting adjourned at 3:10 pm.
/km
4/11/14