COUNCIL ON ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT (CAA)
DRAFT MINUTES, MARCH 27TH, 2013
UNH 105, 9:00 AM – 10:30 AM
Members present: Adrian Masters (Chair), Janelle Adsit, Greg Albert, Deborah Bernnard, Sue Faerman, Jennifer
Goodall, Ilka Kressner, Greg Nowell, Sean Rafferty, Joan Savitt, Brian Stephenson, Bruce Szelest. Staff present:
Joel Bloom, Steven Doellefeld.
Members absent: Diana Dumesnil, Sylvia Roch, Kevin Williams.
1. Call to order.
2. No new members to introduce. A visitor, Stephanie Ernestus, visiting from ITLAL’s “Preparing Future
Faculty” program, was introduced.
3. The minutes of the January 30th meeting were reviewed and approved with minor revisions.
4. Chairs’ Reports

CAA (Adrian Masters). The Chair discussed the importance of continuity on the Council and its two
committees and asked members to consider staying on for next year. The matter of the relationship
between the General Education Advisory Board (GEAB) and its relationship with the GEAC was
raised, and it was suggested that Sue Faerman discuss the relationship at the April meeting. The
question was raised as to whether the general education categories to be covered within the programs
would conduct assessments that would be evaluated by the GEAC or the PRC. The Chair will raise
the matter of including assessment plans in the departments’ proposals, and ask about which body
will review the assessments.

GEAC (Deborah Bernnard). The Committee has met twice since the last Council meeting. The
mathematics assessment (2010-2011) did not go well, partly because the category was broken down
into three sub-categories, while retaining general math objectives for other courses. Assessment
professionals are working with Sue Faerman and Leslie Halpern to develop math learning objectives
that will work for all courses. It was also determined that the GEAC should be reviewing assessments
of courses in the University in the High School (UHS) program that meet general education
requirements. The Committee will assess Social Sciences before the end of the term.

APRC (Sean Rafferty). The Committee met and began its discussion of the new mid-cycle review
process for student learning outcomes reporting, starting with the History Department. A discussion
of difficulties smaller departments face in completing assessments took up much of the meeting. The
Chair will prepare an initial draft of the Committee report.
5. Director’s Report (Joel Bloom). The Director discussed a draft outline for a mid-cycle review report he
prepared, along with concerns that it would lead to reports that are longer and more detailed than the
Council intended. He added a bit more information about the proposed math learning objectives, adding
that Sue Faerman and Leslie Halpern will be talking to representatives of the key departments as the next
step. Program reviews this year are proceeding apace. The Chemistry review team was in town earlier this
month, and the Math and Spanish reviewers will be coming in April. Assessment response rates for
courses in Arts and Humanities are better than previous terms. Steven and Joel will contact instructors
and ask if they would like assistance with the end-of-term parts of the forms; Leslie Halpern will follow
up with instructors who have not turned anything in yet. Joel and Steven will conduct information
sessions for sampled instructors.
6. Old Business. None.
7. New Business: Review of GEAC draft of Natural Sciences general education report (Brian Stephenson).
Two draft reports were discussed, along with issues including response rate, quality of information
provided by instructors, and the representativeness of participating courses. It was decided that the GEAC
would meet again to re-draft the report and bring it to the April meeting.
8. Adjournment