Assessment Advisory Board

November 18, 2003

 

Present: T. Boggess, I. Cucina, Wavell Fogelman, G.Goodnough, N. Mathis, B. McCahan, Kathleen Norris, Alice Staples

 

The meeting started at 2:05 pm.

 

1.                  Agenda and minutes approved with changes made to the dates.

 

2.         Old Business

                  2.1 Institutional Assessment Plan Subcommittee – no report

 

2.2  Professional Development Subcommittee

ü      Nick reported on his email to student services offices (i.e.: the Registra, PASS, ITS, HUB, etc).

ü      Responses were given to Irene to compile.

ü      Generally there was a great interest by all who were contacted.

ü      Directors and PATs seem to need a beginning workshop on assessment

·        Misconceptions and fallacies regarding assessments

·        ITS Director expressed a high interest in workshops

ü      Stephen Lambert responded that his background is in Benchmarking Activities. He might be someone we ask to do a faculty/staff workshop in the future.

ü      Possible people to target to help with future workshops include:

·        Kathleen Norris – survey utilized for M.Ed students

·        Royce Robertson, Ken Heuser, and Irene Cucina – iwebfolio

·        Julie Bernier – on use of student data to improve teaching and learning.

·        Bob Fitzpatrick – Foundations of Excellence

 

3.0              New Business

3.1  Irene disseminated the data from CSXQ. Please review and be prepared to discuss possible questions for the CSEQ that will be given to first year students in the spring.

 

3.2              Agenda add ons :

3.21          Trent brought the evaluation used in the Business department. He reported that the same form has been used for the past 20 years and was edited about 10 years ago.

3.22          Every member of the Business Department uses the evaluation form.

3.23          Barb reported on the HPER Department committee to update the course evaluation forms. She also discussed the need to bring the Faculty Welfare committee into the discussion. What can they do to help?

3.24          The evaluation form should be viewed as a tool to generate data to improve teaching and course development.

3.25          Natural Science department has a form that most faculty use but lacks established procedures for who reviews the evaluations.

3.26          When and where evaluations are given was a concern.

3.27          English is moving toward a standardized method for evaluation

3.28          An ongoing problem that the Advisory Group will continue to evaluation.

3.29          All members are asked to bring the evaluation forms used in their departments to the next meeting.

3.30          This topic will be on the agenda for the beginning of next semester.

 

 

Meeting adjourned at 3:05.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Irene Cucina

Scribe