Seminar II: Core Themes, Objectives and Achievement Indicators
Susan Kalina UAA– Facilitator
February 17, 2010
OUTLINE FOR THE DISCUSSION: Share experiences, ideas, and challenges for new model from all
perspectives. (Evaluators were present in the group); to broadly look at all the processes on campus and
integrating and alignment of the processes.
Seems that the mission statement and strategic plan driving the creation and identification of the core
themes.
Anchorage had a month to identify core themes. Rather than looking at strategic plan to create the core
themes they recruited the steering committee to discuss and create core themes and they did align
somewhat with the strategic plan but other themes outside the strategic plan emerged as well.
Student participation:
Challenge in engaging students the institutional discussions are a challenge across the institutions
represented. Ideas to engage students:
 Brought students together for a two day leadership using an appreciative inquiry model to get
the information and themes from them.
 Students on committees bring the student perspective and drive toward the a particular
interest of the students; better practice is to integrate students in committees rather than
separate from the work.
Program assessment and learning outcomes:
Outcomes assessment made easy for those who you need to gather the information and what indicators
will tell what information is needed to determine achievement (or not) of the outcome. Learning
outcomes assessment made understandable by asking faculty pointed questions (not using the
vocabulary) about what student will learn in the course, how the learning occurs and changes made in
the course.
Alternative to assessment is setting own standards rather than having them imposed upon the
institution.
To what extent might it be acceptable that the outcomes identified are somewhat speculative
particularly in the year one report? Commission will be looking for the questions asked about outcomes
and response to answers and evidence or recommendation for continued refinement.
We heard that the language is not “measurable” but “assessable” and the question remains are we
measuring what we need to know to determine outcomes attainment? Are we using the right data
points to get the measurement of outcomes achievement? Assessment data used to close the loop and
make changes based on the discovery. Perhaps the commission will be looking at our continuous
improvement processes and the application of the process rather than the results.
Assessment of other areas outside academics:
 Student success conversation across the functional areas is included in the new model.
 Creating a sense of how functional departments fit into teaching and learning is a challenge.
How to deal with core themes? Committees ultimately did the recommendation for response to the
core themes and the evaluators. People who have a passion for the core theme and the tools can be
taught. Passion about the theme important and the nuts and bolts of assessment can be taught.
Steering committee needs broader voice that the committees bring to the table. Community campuses
(branch) can be brought in to discuss their interpretation and fit in the overall mission and address of
core themes – representation from those groups important.
Integration of the core themes started at the accreditation workshop and the conversation about how
core themes are interwoven began before beginning the actual processes.
Tracking the data for the accreditation process using a software product on the market – not that great.
Others asked for creation of the software to track the data based on the institutional need not on the
software available. The latter much more flexible as the changes in the process occurred and the key is
search ability.
New model requires a broader leadership model and questions about reporting structure for a point
person responsible for accreditation need to be asked and will be answered over time. The new model
needs to be institutionalized.
Core themes tied to tenure and promotion?? It is possible it will become a part of it. Unions will
influence the degree to which this occurs. The level of student learning outcomes will not be as deep as
to effect faculty tenure and promotion.
Create a sense of urgency around the implementation of the new model so as not to get sidetracked.
And a change in leadership impacts the process of implementation of the new model and impacts.