Assessment Committee Meeting
March 2, 2012
Members Present: Marla Gleave, Rachel Anderson, Hillary Reed, Clyde Johnson, Cheryl
Tucker, Paul Chown, Angelina Hill, Justine Shaw, Erik Kramer, Erin Wall, Christina
Bauss
Reports:
1. Assessment software progress
Paul Chown will develop a separate closing the loop form for the software. This will
mirror the current process of having separate planning and closing the loop
documents. After the closing the loop document is developed for the software, Paul
will send it to the committee members for testing.
The ACCJC wants Distance Education courses assessed and discussed separately
from the face-to-face versions. Paul Chown will add a check box to the forms that
will allow faculty to indicate if the course is a virtual course.
Hillary Reed suggested having all program reviews share the same deadlines (early
October for Needs Addendums and Assessment Plan updates and early spring for all
other PR forms and all assessment reporting); this will not only streamline the process
and make it easier to track, but it will make it a more sustainable process.
2. Program Learning Outcomes/Course Learning Outcomes
The ACCJC has recommended that PLOs be incorporated into the 2012-2013 catalog
Shereen Cockrum has complied PLOs from submitted plans to make this possible.
They have also recommended that CLOs be more readily accessible to students, this
will be done by having CLOs included on course syllabi, which should be posted on
MyCR even if the instructor does not use MyCR for other purposes.
3. Report about State Senate Accreditation/Assessment Conference – Erik Kramer
Documents from the conference can be found on the State Academic Senate website;
Erik will email the link to the committee members.
Main points from the conference
a. The mapping structure needs to be explicit in the planning documents. The
CLOs need to align with PLOs and GE outcomes and to Institutional
Outcomes.
b. Barbara Beno stressed that if your institution is on warning focus on fixing the
recommendations first.
c. All learning outcomes need to be student-centered. One of the ways to win
over faculty resistant to participating in the assessment process is to explain
the point of assessment is to have students learn. Participating in assessment
process is a way to get the resources you and your students need.
d. Participating in assessment has be to negotiated with the faculty union and
other unions.
e. Use existing assignments as assessment artifacts. Barbara Beno said you can
use the same assignment to assess CLOs, PLOs, GE outcomes and
institutional outcomes.
4. Basic Skills Assessment
Basic Skills information will need to be pulled from program review documents to
get the big picture.
Discussion Items:
1. Completer/Leaver Survey
Angelina Hill sent the most current version to all the committee members and has
gotten more feedback. A timeline for the administration of the survey needs to be
discussed at the next Assessment meeting.
2. Assessment Coordinator Transition
Erik Kramer will be the next Assessment Coordinator. A MOU is being negotiated so
the transition can start after spring break with Erik coming in as a Co-coordinator. At
that point, Erik will take over the education piece of assessment and Justine will
continue with the planning piece, be the primary assessment representative for
various meetings, as well as continuing to be the primary email contact.
3. Additional Workshops
More help sessions including software training will be scheduled after Erik Kramer’s
reassign time as co-coordinator begins right after spring break.
Announcements:
1. Assessment Fridays
This meeting was something the Accreditation Oversight Committee came up with. It
will be scheduled on Fridays from Noon to 1 p.m.. There will be themed
conversations at the meetings; topics will be generated by the Program Review
Committee and other accreditation and planning groups.