UAAC Meeting Notes
August 20, 2015
Lee Thornton from NWCCU introduced himself to the group:
He is working with NWCCU as a consultant on a project to develop best practices around demonstrating
mission fulfillment. What does mission fulfillment mean to the institution and how is it best expressed
to external and internal audiences? Participants include: UM, U Oregon, U Puget Sound, Columbia Basin
College.
Regional accreditors were formed by the institutions themselves to foster continuous improvement.
After WWII the government got involved as a result of GI Bills, etc. A lot of institutions were taking
students’ money without any assurance of quality education and the government wanted to make sure
students’ money was well spent. They went to the accreditors to ask them to take on the role of quality
assurance and gatekeeper. Without accreditation you can’t receive Title IV funds. So accreditation is
critical for institutions.
NWCCU deals with all 7 states in the Northwest. They provide support to 165 institutions. Institutions
are on a 7-year cycle and in each report there are standards that must be responded to. In Year 7 there
was a requirement to show mission fulfilment. Institutions were really struggling with how to show this.
NWCCU chose a few institutions that we knew were doing well (including UM) and asked them to
participate in this demonstration project. We are a year into the 3 year cycle of this project, which will
culminate in a report that will be publically available.
Lee is traveling to institutions to talk with them.
There are 4 questions we need to focus on:
•
•
•
•
What essential learning dimensions represent mission fulfillment?
How are we defining quality?
What is the rationale for selected indicators and methodology for data collection—especially
direct measures of student learning?
How does our feedback system inform continuous improvement?
Discussion of priorities, measures, and goals
Nathan shared that these questions have spurred a lot of summer activity regarding data collection in
this committee. The Academic Officers talked about these metrics at their recent retreat. Are these
2020 goals aspirational or benchmark? Are they realistic? Are they based on data? How were they
chosen?
For example, 83% retention rate came from the top quartile of public institutions like ours.
Reed pointed out we want to be clear about the rationale for the 2020 goals in the report.
1
The AOs also looked at the biennium strategic priorities. The Planning Committee has outlined strategies
for each of the five strategic issues. The AOs discussed where we should focus our energy. We need to
prioritize the priorities. How do we accomplish all these goals with limited resources?
Some goals have already been met! We’ve accomplished them or we are well on their way.
Who is in charge of analyzing these priorities? Should it be the planning committee? As we think about
integrating the planning assessment continuum, should we provide some type of analysis?
Nathan said the Provost said this is not the planning committee’s role. His response was that they were
doing all of the priorities—they’re already happening.
Dawn agrees the planning committee adjusts the priorities every biennium. Dawn thinks you can take
what the planning committee has been doing and link it back up to what we’re doing in terms of
assessment metrics. The framework is there. We have these priorities identified. We need to formally go
back to them and evaluate them.
The planning committee will make recommendations and then the Cabinet as the implementation
committee would sign off.
Related to Question 1: What distinguishes a UM education?
•
•
•
•
•
•
John pointed out students have many experiential opportunities. They have the opportunity to
do many performances, labs, etc. We have small class sizes and students have a lot of access to
the faculty.
Nathan wants us to articulate what outcomes result from this close contact with faculty.
Gil thinks that should come back to the Gen Ed component--the faculty and curriculum that
make up Gen Ed.
Lee pointed out the problem we all have is distinguishing the intended outcomes of Gen Ed vs.
all the other kinds of outcomes. The accreditation report doesn’t need to cover every single
thing that the institution is doing. NWCCU is trying to encourage focus now….what does the
University do best? How can you scale it to the best outcomes? This is a big challenge.
o Every institution has Gen Ed, so it’s a reasonable approach to use this as an assessment
of the essential learning outcomes.
Nathan asked Cody and Betsy as students….what distinguishes us in terms of outcomes.
o Cody says a lot of classes are sustainability-focused and a lot of students are focused on
that. Extra-curricular activities also involve sustainability and it sets us apart.
o Betsy says the extra-curricular aspects stand out the most. Alums don’t talk about
faculty or courses. They talk about internships and study-abroad and other experiences
outside the classroom
 This could be described as commitment to community and an engaged citizenry.
Rebecca discussed the sense of place and how it ties into the sustainability aspect. The
interactions with faculty (especially as a student in NAS which is a small department)
o How can these experiences be described as outcomes?
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
John DeBoer mentioned the Gen Ed preamble. Lots about civic engagement. We can assess
these things that way.
Mike says assessing Mission Fulfillment is difficult. A lot of things that were mentioned Tuesday
are not that unique to UM. He’s heard it in other places.
Reed agrees with the distinctive exposure to learning about the environment and sustainability.
Mike agrees sustainability does seem more unique. We could use a couple other pieces in
addition to that.
Nathan says that many people espouse the same values, but these can be different from their
actual values. Every University espouses a commitment to diversity, sustainability, etc. But what
are the outcomes?
Our task is that our assessment measures need to focus on that. Dawn thinks of some measures
she would like to add, such as the areas of sustainability or civic engagement. We are really
good at the civic engagement. Our outcomes show this to be true. It goes hand-in-hand with
what makes us distinctive. We need to capture that better. Especially in the assessment report.
Rebecca mentioned the greater opportunity for students to be involved in undergraduate
research. Not just graduate students, not just honors college students. And this sets us apart.
o Cody added that UG are proctoring classes, which is a great opportunity.
Nathan mentioned that they talked about the assessment of Gen Ed earlier in the meeting with the
President and Provost. We are also going to do the CLA. Another potentially unique aspect of UM is
entrepreneurship. This is why we are taking part in the Project InnC student survey.
The GLI is distinctive. Other institutions may talk about leadership, but our form of leadership training is
distinct. We need to be assessing this.
John asked about our end goal. Is it accreditation or is it to sell ourselves?
Nathan says the exercise of providing the data (big picture) will lead to Gen Ed enhancement, a reexploration of our values and mission. So it will have a role in, “are we doing what we are supposed to”
and “how can we do it better”?
Lee thinks accreditation should be viewed as complementary to what the institutions are already doing
on their own. It always bugged him that academics weren’t mentioned more often in marketing at his
former institution.
Success may not always be predicated on distinctiveness. Ex: passing a standardized test like nursing.
Questions for Lee?
Lee is glad to hear that these kinds of discussions are happening. NWCCU switched from the ten year
cycle in order to make something more valuable and flexible. So you wouldn’t just write a report in year
8 or 9 and then put it on a shelf. Accreditation is under attack and has been. They are looking for lots of
indirect measures that don’t take into account all the variables and context. But we need to respond to
the quality issue. That’s why we are looking for data-driven outcomes.
3
NWCCU is trying to streamline things. They are looking for certain compliance issues, and are planning
to list those separately and then focus on outcomes.
Reed also mentioned that we should be developing leaders. Physical Therapy looks at how many of
their graduates move into leadership positions. They like to think this contributes to making their
graduates highly sought after. It is important to find ways to track our graduates’ leadership abilities. He
believes we do that, but we need to find a way to track it.
Lee agrees that it’s another question of when to measure this. Every year? Every 4 years? After
graduation?
Can we think of other leadership programs?
•
•
ASUM provides tons of experiential learning (early childhood students can work at ASUM
childcare, students can produce shows).
o There are over 90 student groups and all have leaders
Where is leadership development intentional and specific?
Where are the 2020 goals coming from? We need to discuss these, decide if they are appropriate, and if
they should be aspirational or benchmark?
Dawn mentioned that we need to have standard measures. It is unclear how some of the data was
collected. This fall it will all get straightened out.
What’s magical about declaring a major after 45 credits? This is a complicated measurement for OPBA.
Can we change it to 60 (after sophomore year) or is there a reason for 45?
It may have to do with the student’s ability to successfully graduate if they declare by 45.
4