College Assessment
Committee
Meeting
Wednesday,
November 30, 2005
2:00 p.m.
Computer Training
room
Miller Hall
Members present: Members
Absent:
Don Anderson Kathy Bahr
Mary Jo Carnot Robert
Stack
Margaret Crouse Lois Veath
Monty Fickel
Don King
Toni Mathewson
Sam Rankin
William Roweton
Steve Taylor
I.
Review of revised Web site
a. Bottom
half of left-hand column less vital
b. Under
co-curricular functions
i.
Why not list under units?
ii.
Student outcomes – academic advising, career and placement services,
library
iii.
There are more programs than what is under extended campus
iv.
Individual administrator is responsible for assessment benefit of
organization
v.
Physical facilities change to “Support Function”
1. Either
3rd under person PR or in co-curricular
c. Under
each unit
i.
Objectives
ii.
External standards
iii.
Client satisfaction
iv.
Student outcomes
d. Under
each department
i.
Personnel – names, photos, title
1. Photographs
a. Decide
on photos of each faculty, department head, or none at all
ii.
Programs offered
1. What
are we assessing?
2. Make
sure the answer is on the site
3. Things
that aren’t assessed lead to questioning why not
e. General
studies
i.
Should placement be under Arts and Sciences? or under each department
that has general studies?
ii.
Problem with the current layout:
1. “Out
in Siberia”
f.
Arts and Sciences
i.
General Education and Honors program
g. Graduate
and Professional Studies
i.
Graduate program
h. Under
programs there needs to be a contact person
i.
Assessment history
i.
History is not lost, but the deans and heads don’t have them
ii.
How much history is needed?
1. Should
find as much as possible, but not spend too much time on it – the new
developing plan should be the main focus
j.
Each program matrix is on the Web site
k. When
will deans meet with department head to sort out?
i.
Roweton will present to executive staff this week
l.
Anything in the area not mentioned or incorrect, let Don Anderson,
Webmaster, know
II.
Institutional Plan
a. Next
meeting January 25, 2006
b. The
draft needs to be worked on
c. Unclear
– instruction has caused some of the change
d. Under
communications – how are student reports shared?
i.
Answer: They’re not
III.
For next meeting
a. Pair
up into groups and review separate components
i.
Groups
1. Characteristic
of effective student assessment
a. Rankin,
Roweton
2. Annual
reports
a. Fickel,
Stack
3. Schedule
of assessment event
a. All
members
4. participating
units
a. Weakness
is co-curricular
b. Crouse,
King, Taylor
5. Web
site
a. Carnot,
Roweton