Program Outcomes Essay – Discussion Group 2
Facilitator – Troy Smith
Recorder – Mark Cannon
Oct. 2, 2007
Question #1, Does the essay adequately portray the University?











Good enough
More in some areas than others
Question: Has the “culture of assessment” permeated all departments?
o We’ve made a shift, there’s effort there
Concern: There are no general guidelines/benchmarks as to what is good assessment. We’re
committed, but how can we know if we are doing a good job? Maybe we jump too quickly to the
case studies in the essay.
“I totally disagree”, the truth is carefully stated, and the essay has captured the essence. The
University purposefully has no specific guidelines as to how to do assessment, this is left up to
the departments.
Maybe there needs to be a brief paragraph stating what is expected from the departments in
the introduction, could reference the tables on page 7.
Concern: Breadth vs. depth in our essay. Our 3 case studies show good depth, but maybe
lacking in breadth?
o The website provides (or will provide) detailed information about each department.
o Maybe this whole essay is just too long, a lot of this stuff could go into appendices.
Concern: our case studies are all “good” examples. Should we give some examples of
departments that are not doing a good job?
o Maybe we need some kind of table at that just summarizes where each department is in
terms of assessment. A “one-shot snapshot” of how we look across campus.
Concern: we need to talk about the issue (maybe not in the essay) that many departments have
one assessment “guru” who takes care of assessment while others in the department don’t
agree with or know what is being done (or care about it).
o Maybe our “snapshot” table could address this by stating what % of each department
are comfortable with their current assessment plan.
Question: is it true that those who were once against the assessment process are now becoming
involved as implied in the end of the report?
“I’m surprised that we’re not seeing more backlash against assessment”
o Here at BYUH, the backlash is that people just close their doors to it and hope it dies
out.
o Backlash is that departments find it hard to put together the resources (time and dept.
cooperation) necessary to do the assessment
Question #2, Where is this essay incomplete/inaccurate?



Question: does the conclusion accurately portray where we are with assessment?
o No general consensus… but most seemed to think that there’s progress in some places.
Chad Ford does not agree with what said about his department (ICS). He feels that they’ve
developed plans that allow them to “teach to the exam (IDI)” so that they look good. In many
cases he thinks they are comparing student’s grades to assess how they’re doing.
Teaching is more art than science, is very difficult to assess. We’re just not there yet.





Don Colton feels that if his dept. (IS) was one of the ones that was picked as a good example
then there’s “trouble in River City”. Doesn’t feel that they are doing it right. However, if we are
showing that dept. are at least seeing that change is needed as a result of this process, and then
making those changes (i.e. the section in the introduction about the Religion dept) then that’s a
good thing.
We’re assuming that departments are getting together and discussing these issues and that
assessment plans reflect this. If this is not happening then we need to do some re-evaluating
(Bill Neal).
The statement on p. 17 talking about external assessments/accreditations done on some of the
departments (specifically Education) should be given more weight. The fact that the Ed. Dept
has been re-accredited and that the State never has any problems licensing their graduates
because of this, etc. (Brent Chowen, I think).
Some feel that there are many things they want to put in their mission statements that just are
not easy to assess, so they leave them out.
The issue with assessment: do we say, “Let’s come up with a test that we’ll do really well on”, or
do we say, “let’s find out how we’re really doing even if the result is disappointing.”
Attendance included: Perry Christensen, Leslie Fife, Don Colton, Peter Chan, Chad Ford, Bill Neal, Brent
Chowan, and two others.