LEARNING OUTCOMES COUNCIL
January 29, 2015 Minutes
Approved – February 26, 2015
Co-Chairs:
Present:
Absent:
Recorder:
Berta Cuaron, Wendy Nelson, Marty Furch, Susan Miller
Michelle Barton, Berta Cuaron, Michael Deal, Kelly Falcone, Erin Feld, Marty Furch,
Michael Gilkey, Adrian Gonzales, John Harland, Cheryl Kearse, Naomi Lowe, Susan
Miller, Norma Miyamoto, Michael Mufson, Wendy Nelson
Melinda Carrillo, April Cunningham, Brooke Crawford, Sarah De Simone, Mollie
Smith, Brian Stockert, Rocco Versaci
Marty Furch
The meeting was called to order at 2:05 p.m.
1. Approve Minutes 1/22/15
Minutes approved as amended.
MSC Miller, Lowe
2. Announcements
Marti Snyder is absent today because of a family emergency.
Wendy announced that the Intercultural Competency workgroup assigned to develop a working rubric
would be meeting on February 6.
Marty congratulated Vice President Cuaron on her retirement at the end of this academic year and
promised some celebration to come.
Michael Mufson announced upcoming productions by the Performing Arts Department.
3. GE/ILO Relationship
Wendy reviewed the background issues leading to a discussion of whether to make a distinction between
General Education Learning Outcomes and Institutional Learning Outcomes. She mentioned the ACCJC
2014 annual report in which the reporting of these was separated. She also reviewed with the members
the models that had been presented to LOC in the past as well as the Chancellor’s Office definition of
General Education. Lengthy discussion ensued of the definition of each and the overlap of the two.
Included in the discussion were these questions:




Is one set of outcomes a subset of the other?
What do we expect of all students upon leaving the College?
How does length of time at the College influence our decisions about separating GE outcomes from
ILOs?
How would we assess GE separately? Can the Office of Institutional Research and Planning pull just
those courses for assessment? Michelle Barton indicated that could not happen. Others thought that
the coding on the course would allow those courses to be identified.


Can certificate programs address all of the ILOs? Their focus is on the training within the curriculum
and may not easily capture the ILOs. Shorter certificate programs in particular would be challenged to
meet certain ILOs, e.g. writing.
An ILO is intended to meet degree requirements.
The membership concluded that General Education outcomes and Institutional outcomes shall remain the
same.
4. SLOAC Feedback Process
Marty reviewed with the Council the benefits of a process to provide feedback to faculty on course and
program assessment plans, including language, assessment methods, timeline for assessment, and
strategies for analyzing results. After discussion, the members agreed that the feedback should come from
each department’s SLO Facilitator. Susan will lead a discussion group before the next department chair
meeting in February for the SLO Facilitators to emphasize guidelines for evaluating course and program
SLOs and to address current issues they may be experiencing.
The discussion will continue at the next meeting on February 26.
5. Dashboard Evaluation
This agenda item was postponed for the next LOC meeting.
Next Meeting: February 26, 2015
2:00-3:30 p.m.
AA 140