General Education Committee
March 01st, 2011 2:00 PM
McMahon Centennial Center
Approved Minutes
Members present:
(Chair) James Heflin – Communication
Mohammad Tabatabai – Mathematical Sciences
Abdulhamid Sukar – Business
John Geiger – Psychology
Abbas Johari – Multimedia Design
Ramona Hall – Education
Jason Smith – Library
Mary Penick – Computing and Technology
Nicole Bucher – Student Representative
Karla Oty – IRAA (non-voting)
Amanda Husak – VPAA representative
Agenda Items/Discussions
1.
The meeting was called to order at 2:00 PM.
2. Penick approved the minutes from 02/03/11. Tabatabai seconded.
3. Next item on agenda: Memo from Kirsten Underwood titled “Assessment of Concert Reports”.
This memo said that the Music Department will continue to assess their group assessment of
concert reports. The committee had no feedback for this memo.
4. Next agenda item: Selection of new student learning outcomes. After some discussion, Heflin
told the committee members to start thinking about outcomes 1B, 1C, 2B, 2C, and 3A. Geiger
pointed out that 2B has only one course measuring this outcome.
5. Next agenda item: Focus groups for learning outcomes 1A, 2A, and 3B. Heflin asked for
feedback from the possible questions for the focus groups, but no feedback was provided. Oty
asked about a facilitator, and suggested one that does not have a pre-determined interest over the
meanings of these outcomes. The focus groups will be split up into three groups with no more
than 15 people: group 1 will cover outcome 1A, group 2 will cover 2A, and group 3 will cover
3B. Discussion centered on the participants for these groups. Heflin said there will be three
types of participants: faculty who teach general education courses that currently assess the
outcome, those who may want to assess the outcome, and those who have an interest in the
outcome and that the committee may assign, such as the library. In addition, some members of
the general education committee will also be assigned as observers to these focus groups.
Discussion then centered on departments that may want to assess certain outcomes, and Oty said
that there needs to be more uniformity about outcomes that are measured in one department, but
not another, even though they teach similar classes. Agricultural economics was an example of
this type of course.
6. In continuing the discussion about the focus groups, Heflin suggested perhaps changing some of
the words in the learning outcomes, while leaving the philosophy and intentions intact. Heflin
suggested checking with the Board of Regents about these changes. Johari said that some of the
learning outcomes are goals, and some are learning outcomes, and it is dependent upon which
department that is doing the measuring. Oty said any proposals should be open to the entire
faculty on campus to get more input.
7. Next, Heflin assigned committee members to these focus groups. Heflin said he would be present
at all three meetings. For outcome 1A on April 7th, Geiger volunteered to attend. For outcome
2A on April 14th, Sukar volunteered. And for outcome 3B on April 21st, Tabatabai volunteered.
Heflin also asked student rep Nicole Bucher to attend.
8. Oty suggested doing an RSVP for potential participants in the focus groups. Oty said these focus
groups will help determine a common understanding of each learning outcome. Penick said that
hopefully these focus groups will agree on types of instruments, embedded test questions, etc.
that could be used by everyone teaching a particular course.
9. Next discussion centered on departments and the learning outcomes that they assess. Oty said
that the goal is to have every student at Cameron be assessed in each learning outcome, but that
some departments may assess the same outcomes in multiple classes, and that this may result in
too much data. No actions were suggested.
10. Next meeting scheduled for Tuesday, April 5th at 2:00 PM in the McMahon Centennial Complex.
11. Meeting adjourned at 2:50 PM.