University Assessment & Accreditation Committee
January 29, 2016
Accreditation Update:
Math assessment came in really strong. Five different classes were assessed for Gen Ed. The results
were mixed but showed areas of strengths and weaknesses. The results could help future proposals.
We also received the data from one Ethics class.
Project Innovation:
Unfortunately, none of the results were significantly different from the national group. Hopefully this
will change for the post-test! We were pleased with the participation of over 400 students. This indirect
data helps complement our assessment data. And we don’t have a lot of data about innovation, so this
is helpful. At least we are trying to measure it, which is a start.
Scott pointed out that the sample size is too small, so everyone is within the mean. You need more than
8 schools to get results.
Jeanne Loftus & Terri Herron have been using the AACU VALUE Rubrics to get data for the GLI courses.
The CLA will be going on until April 29.
Our main project is due next year, so we are trying to show a wide variety of measures (direct and
indirect).
On Monday, Nathan is going to Seattle for a dry run of the presentation of the UM pilot project report
that he and the President will be presenting in March.
They have been asked to make it interesting because several presentations on this topic could be dry.
Any suggestions to make it interesting?
•
•
•
•
•
It’s a bit text-heavy, possibly add some pictures. Also, not bullets AND numbers. One or the
other.
Scott pointed out that research and creative activity is missing. Shouldn’t it be included?
o Nathan says it’s hard to make this relevant to General Education.
o But it is how we are defining Mission Fulfillment. And Entrepreneurship and innovation
are pieces of this.
Are you going to discuss the planning-assessment continuum? It might seem external or else it’s
its own slide.
Slide 12, comparing 2015 data to 2020. In some of these it looks like we want to do worse
because the future goal is going to be lower than where we are at.
o If we’ve exceeded the goal, that should be noted.
o Some numbers have a % and some don’t. But this is the Report Card, which was made
by University Relations (we can’t change it).
o In the Writing Assessment data, maybe the X axis should be number of revisions rather
than score.
It won’t be official until March, so feel free to continue to send data.
Assessing the HR Position:
•
What are the next steps?
o What we are learning here is the original proposal was missing metrics on how to show
the position has been achieving the goals it was created. It’s difficult to assess because
the original proposal was missing information to determine if it was a good financial
investment.
o Right now there is only data on the number of trainings.
o It’s hard to make it concrete to say if it is meeting the return on investment.
o We’ve been trying to find a one-style-fits-all assessment form for these proposals but
maybe some need to be evaluated qualitatively or quantitatively or both?
o This should be decided on the front-end when they put in the proposal.
o For the HR position, Mike can have them respond to the questions.
 Mike will have Julie draft a template. He will send it to Nathan and the group.
 Then HR can fill it out and have it for review by the UAAC by the February
meeting (end of February).
o For reviews of what is going through the Planning Committee, what other questions
should we add to the form? Considering we want to make it quantitatively and
qualitatively relevant?
o They need to note benchmarks and explain what outcome is intended on the original
proposals. Their assessment measures need to be put in place before they even propose
it.
 Ex: “We need staff development.” Why? How do you know that?
 What evidence do they have that justifies the need?
• Even if it’s a great idea, there should be a demonstrated need.
What’s the status on the Planning Committee?
• There are two things being considered:
o Things submitted last year that are in limbo.
o And there are the requests for FY17, which have been forwarded to the Budget
Committee.
• Those funded will come to the Assessment Committee.
o These may have benchmarks but some won’t because they are still using the old
forms.
• The problem with some was that the justification was “it was a prior commitment”. This
will no longer be accepted!
• The next cycle will begin in the fall. We need to be sure we get our input in beforehand.
• Let’s get our hands on the Planning Committee’s form and then put it on the wall and
discuss how to revise it (next meeting).
Nathan reported that a major player in the assessment world (Trudy Banta) wants UM to write about
the Planning-Assessment Continuum.
NWCCU’s feedback on the Demonstration Project has been very positive.
Anything else this committee should be assessing?
•
•
•
Let’s assess the whole continuum!
The structure is worth reviewing. The membership, the function, etc.
Do these cycles work in a climate when new money is not available?
•
•
•
•
o And this is when a process really needs to work.
The communication between the groups is not always working.
Are people missing?
o There are a lot of the same people on each committee. That leads to a lack of honest
questions. There are a lot of Vice Presidents.
o And we always hear that nobody knows what’s going on. The communication back to
the campus could be improved as well.
The Chairs of all the committees should probably communicate more as well.
Is there anyone else we should add to this committee?
o Staff?
o Areas for accreditation are often academic—maybe faculty with expertise?
o Curriculum committee chairs?
o Outside expert? Like a consultant?
 Anyone have any recommendations?
We’ve Heard Your Voice:
In terms of using data, the Library made two pages of “we’ve heard your voice”.
Have the students made any progress on “we’ve heard your voice”?
•
Betsy stated that ASUM hasn’t done this yet, but they (Caleb Chestnut) might be interested.
We’ve Heard your Voice has been done by in:
•
Library, ASUM, Education, Business, Missoula College
To do in February:
•
•
Review HR Position
Look at Planning Committee Form together and edit it.
In March:
•
Begin to assess the continuum itself!!