Assessment Meeting Notes
Feb. 7, 2012
Members Present: Justine Shaw, Marla Gleave, Cheryl Tucker, Erik Kramer, Shannon Sullivan
Reports:
1. Assessment software progress
The software development is progressing well. The software will replace the forms that
people currently email to Justine to be uploaded. With the “show cause”, the software
implementation timeline has been accelerated. Utpal wants faculty to start entering data
starting this spring instead of fall semester. This will not allow for a pilot program with a
smaller test sample testing out the software.
2. Assessment Coordinator
Although the MOU remains to be negotiated, the current plan is for Erik Kramer will be the
Assessment Coordinator starting in the fall. He will be attending the State Senate
Accreditation conference that is also covering assessment issues.
Discussion Items:
1. Completer/Leaver Survey
Due to technical difficulties, committee was unable to preview the revised
Completer/Leaver survey.
2. ACCJC Recommendations
o Course level outcomes: need to have course descriptions and outcomes available on
WebAdvisor.
o Degree/certificate PLO needs to be listed along with program requirements in the
catalog.
o Course outlines need to be included in a course’s syllabus. There needs to be an
emphasis on publishing the CLOs to ensure students are informed about the
expectations of the class.
o Page(s) to a handbook (bulleted list)
o Centralized syllabus storage that is available to the public
3. Assessment Updates
Possible consequences to not completing the work:
o Departments will not get equipment on needs addendum lists. Some departments
don’t have a budget for equipment so this might not be effective.
o It should reflect in the faculty evaluation if the person is actively participating not
based on assessment results. This would have to be negotiated with the CRFO since
the current MOU only covers area coordinators.
o Erik Kramer will ask other schools what consequences they have while he’s attending
the conference.
Institutional-Level Outcomes
CR needs to develop institutional outcomes that are tied to the mission and goals of the
school. Maybe data from Institutional Research and the Completer/Leaver survey can be
used to develop objectives. Justine Shaw has suggested to Utpal that we schedule a districtwide meeting at 1:15 p.m. on March 30th (fifth Friday) to discuss and develop institutional
goals. She suggested that outcomes might be drafted by the major planning committees.
Old/Current Forms
In the fall, old forms will be made easily assessable to the public so any identifying or
confidential information will need to be removed. This will have to be done by the faculty
who completed the forms.
Student Services
The Student Services area is close to being proficient with assessment; however, there is
still some confusion about the difference between goals and outcomes. More training is
needed, having weekly meetings, review assessment report-outs. Student Learning
outcomes have been added but found out that Program Learning Outcomes needs to be
added as well.
Re-instituting College Hour
Justine will ask about the possibility of reinstituting a college hour or assessment hour.
Dedicated time to do assessment tasks with colleagues or be in the office scoring assessment
artifacts.
4. Review of 3-year plan goals and progress
Goals to be added
Fall 2011
15. Student Services assessment training.
Spring 2012
16. Reporting on assessment software.
17. Centralize outcomes and make publically available.
18. Facilitate the writing of institutional outcomes that are tied to mission and goals.
19. Remind faculty to include outcomes and other essential information on syllabus.
20. Include PLOs in catalog.
21. Additional Student Services training and revised assessment plans.
Fall 2012
11. Have confidential information removed from forms before they are made public.
12. Remind faculty to include outcomes and other essential information on syllabus.