Gathering Evidence Team Minutes
Wed., Nov. 2, 2005
East Campus, 3-113
Present (expanded meeting): Linda Anthon, Nick Bekas, Kira Bishop, Philip Bishop,
Emily Hooker, Maryke Lee, Melissa Pedone, Julie Phelps
Debrief Feedback
The committee discussed feedback on the gathering evidence process that was
submitted to the committee by the following individuals and groups: David Rogers,
Patrick Nellis, Emily Hooker, Philip Bishop, and the participants of the Susan Hatfield
consultant meeting. This discussion resulted in the following recommendations that will
be submitted to the LET for final approval.
Recommendations
1) The main goal of our first Year of THINK assessment project is to test the assessment
tools (rubrics) and processes to feedback to future iterations. It is NOT to collect data
on THINK that will be useful to a broad audience.
2) The use of general THINK assignment criteria accompanied by example assignments
or prompts should be used to solicit student work from faculty. (In lieu of specific
THINK prompts.) Philip Bishop developed the following draft assignment criteria:
 Engages all or most of the dimensions of the THINK rubric.
 Is challenging enough to produce a range of student achievement.
 Is intelligible and assessable by non-experts in the discipline.
 Is short enough to assess quickly (no more than 1000 words).
3) Faculty participants should use the analytic rubric to score their own student work
for submission to the LET. (See clarification of fall and spring testing below.) The
scoring will be followed by a debriefing session to discuss revisions to the rubric or
process.
 Fall 2005: Volunteer LET members will use the rubric to score student
work for an assignment that meets the THINK assignment criteria.
These volunteers will submit 3 low, 3 middle, and 3 high examples of
student work to the LET for use as possible anchor papers. Volunteers
will also meet to debrief the process and suggest revisions for spring
implementation.
 Spring 2006: Faculty members will be recruited to participate in a
professional development program structured around the THINK
assessment process. These participants will attend two introductory
workshops: “Get to Know the THINK Rubric” and “Thinkability
Assignment Workshops.” (Note: Anyone who attends the rubric
workshop in the fall will not have to attend that one again in the
spring.) The participants will then implement a thinkability assignment
and assess the results with the THINK rubric (or adapted version).
Participants will submit class sets of the assignment, scores, and a
reflection on the process. Finally, participants will attend a focus group
to debrief the process and make recommendations for future
assessment projects.
4) Efforts should be made to include Deans (Provosts?) in the communication loop to
encourage the use of LET assessment work in departmental and program assessment
plans.
Potential Timeline
Nov. 9, 2005
Commitment from LET volunteers to use rubric to score a THINK
assignment, submit 9 anchor papers, and debrief experience.
Nov. 10, 11
Rubric workshops
Dec. 2005
LET volunteers debrief process and make final process revisions
Jan. 2006
Advertise Year of THINK faculty development program and
assessment project to recruit participants
Feb 2006
Rubric and Thinkability workshops
Mar/Apr 2006
Faculty participants implement thinkability assignments and score
using rubric.
April 2006
Faculty participants meet in focus group to discuss rubric and
process. Class sets of scored student work submitted to the LET.
Summer 2006
Interdisciplinary teams conduct holistic scoring on the submissions
and debrief that process. Deans are informed of assessment
process, outcomes, and how departmental assessment plans might
include LET work. Recommendations are made from lessons
learned for the Year of COMMUNICATE.
Questions LET must answer
1. Does the LET accept all the recommendations of the expanded Gathering Evidence
Team? If not, which ones does it not accept?
2. Who will volunteer to implement and score think assignments this fall to debrief in
December?
3. If we use the volunteers to generate anchor papers, do we still need to have the
November anchor paper meeting?
4. Will we rotate through TVCA as a four-year process or add one competency each
year and work on them all concurrently?