Shared Governance Assessment Committee
January 20, 2016 Meeting Notes
8:00 am in LBR362 (Marine Room)

Grunder, Doug - ESP representative, joined 9/2015, term expires 2018

Jenkins-Ball, Marcia ESP representative term expires 2018
King, Sandi - Faculty, School of Health Sciences, term expires 2016 (Vice-Chair)

Myton, Dave - Associate Provost for Assessment, Education and Graduate Studies (Secretary)

Denger, George - Faculty, School of Arts and Letters, term expires 2018
 Hildebrand, Robert College of Business and Engineering, term expires 2016 (non-replacement position)
 Johnson, Steve - School of Physical Sciences, Term expires 2018
 McCready, Mindy - Faculty, Lukenda School of Business, Term expires 2018 – (excused)
Moening, Joe - Faculty, School of Engineering and Technology Term expires 2018
 Light, Barb - Faculty, School of Education, Term expires 2018
 Olson-Pupek, Kristina – School of Public Safety, Community & Behavioral Sciences Term expires 2018

Rose, Jillena – School of Arts and Letters, Term expires 2017
Zimmerman, Greg - School of Biological Sciences, Term expires 2018
Wood, Sharmay - AP representative, Term expires 2017

Schemm, Evan - Faculty, School of Mathematics and Computer Science, Term expires 2018 (Chair)
Schupp, Mari - AP representative, Term expires 2018
 Christensen, Spencer – faculty, representing all constituencies
Vacant, School of Recreation Studies and Exercise Sciences (no term listed)
Vacant, Student
Vacant, Student
Guests: (none)
Part A: Committee Activity
1. Called to order at: 8:05 am – 139 days to the Academy Results Forum
2. Introductions were made around the room, new members were warmly welcomed.
3. Approval of minutes from November 30, 2015 unanimous.
Part B: Active Topics
1. Program Review – BJLight reviewed some edits to a Program Review Draft (revised draft copied below). The committee agreed to retain the five-circle graphic. The term data in Section 2 was changed to ‘evidence’.
New questions were added to Section 3. The Committee discussed the requirements of HLC Criterion 5C (the institution links its processes for assessment of student learning, evaluation of operations, planning and budgeting) to the framework of the Program Review template. It was felt that the template did contain sufficient specificity. The committee noted the importance of including a follow-up to previous review section, and a section identifying action for the future. Barb will incorporate this discussion into the next revision and send an email version to the committee.
2. Next meeting in two weeks: February 3 at 8 am in LBR362. Myton will reserve the room.
3. TAP mini-grant. Committee reviewed the application TAP funding. Motion to recommend funding up to $1500
(McCready/Rose) to support the proposal from Physical Sciences requesting $1715 for ACS exams. The committee considered that in building a sustainable model for assessment requires that the school develop a funding model for future. Approved: 11,0,0 (yes, no, abstain).
4. Adjourned at 8:50 am (Motion Denger/McCready – unanimous)
5. Next meeting date: February 3
Part C: Holding Area
1. Frequency of Assessment a. “every outcome, every course, every time it’s taught” and “every outcome, every program, every year” b. Faculty in each school shall develop and publish course and program assessment plans which ensure program quality, educational achievement through the regular and ongoing assessment of student learning consistent with the HLC Criteria for Accreditation. In general, plans should incorporate an
Page 1 of 6

expectation that every outcome has been assessed within the previous 5 years, or a cycle consistent with external accreditation review. c. Academy project progress in meeting Project Goals – see January 8 memo. Can a school just wait until year 5 to start any assessment?
2. HLC Criterion Review a. Criterion 5 – Resources i. 5.C.2 The institution links its processes for assessment of student learning, evaluation of operations, planning and budgeting ii. 5.D the institution works systematically to improve its performance b. Criterion 3 – Teaching and Learning: Quality, Resources and Support
3. Targeted Assessment Projects a. Application from physical sciences for ACS exam purchase; sent by email 11/30 and 1/18
4. Program Review a. Academic Program Review Template b. Administrative Student Support Program Review
5. HLC Academy for Assessment of Student Learning a. Data sets needed to support narrative b. February 2016 Update – draft sent by email January 15 (Academy Update v.8.docx) c. Results Forum – Project Impact Report – (LSSU Academy Project Final Impact Report 2015.docx) d. Academy Poster (2015 Results Forum Poster v.X.ppt) e. Travel Team (June 8-10) f. Table swag for meeting
6. University Assessment Plan – last updated November 2012 a. Last updated November 2012 – new draft sent by email January 6 (AssessmentPlan_Feb2016_v1.pdf)
7. Surveys. a. Assessment Perceptions – Non-academic Co-Curricular (from spring 2015) http://www.lssu.edu/assessment/documents/Assessment-perceptions-staff2.pdf
b. Assessment Perceptions – Academics http://www.lssu.edu/assessment/documents/Assessment-perceptions-faculty2.pdf
8. Review of charge a. http://www.lssu.edu/sharedgovernance/assessment/charge.php
9.
Review of surveys a.
http://www.lssu.edu/assessment/documents/Course-
AssessmentReportSpring2012.pdf
b. Draft spring 2016 follow-up survey https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/CKN6BSG
10. Recommendation on release time a. “The committee recommends that release time be made available to academic schools to carry out the coordination of assessment and p rogram review.”
11. Assessment in Program Review - “Memo to Chairs - Program Review. The University is committed to delivering quality programs. Please submit a program review narrative that addresses program quality through measures of external validation and program assessment. This may be an opportunity to additionally define program needs. The program review narrative is expected to be less than five pages. Programs that are externally accredited may provide an executive summary of their accreditation report with references to the original document as their Review.”
12. The committee recommends that a definition on “the practice of assessment and validity of the assessment process” be established and proposes the following: The formal standards for practice and validity of assessment in a school shall be collaboratively established and approved by the faculty of that school.
13. Review of General Education assessment a. General Education Courses report b. General Education Outcomes report
14. Syllabus Review of Student Learning Outcomes
15. Program Assessment – review of the assessment sections of current program reviews
16. Co-curricular Assessment
17. Administrative Services and Support Assessment
18. Strategic Plan Assessment
19. Assessment Vocabulary
20. LSSU-specific name for assessment system (other than Tracdat), i.e. Anchor Access is really Banner INB
Page 2 of 6

Part D: Other matters Rising
1.
Page 3 of 6

Page 4 of 6

Page 5 of 6

Page 6 of 6