|
PBA Home >
Institutional Research & Analysis >
Outcomes Assessment > AOC meeting notes 10/21/02
Assessment Oversight Committee (AOC) meeting notes 10/21/02
| Attendees: |
Michael Grant, chair
Gordon Brown
Sam Fitch |
Rodney Taylor
Candice Miller
Graham Oddie |
Lou McClelland, staff
Perry Sailor, staff |
Absent:
Elease Robbins, Jim Sherman, Padraic Kenney, Merrill Lessley, Ronald Melicher, Stephen Jones |
New Member
Graham Oddie, Associate Dean, A&S |
Mike reported on visits made by him, Perry to department reps (chairs, undergrad directors)
regarding undergrad assessment, plus some that also included Rodney and Candice and dealt
also with grad assessment. Conclusions:
- They're doing assessment, but they don't think of it as that.
- They don't respond to anything but visits. Ignore mail, even from provost.
- Most who don't report don't see value of reporting. Most don't know reports are on web.
- Possibly we should change the reporting schedule. Visit regularly? Set up 1/3 - 1/3 - 1/3 cycle of visits?
Reports? (See below for Mike's summary of decisions made later regarding reporting schedule.)
Rodney: Pessimistic about ever making assessment part of department culture in departments where
it isn't already.
Gordon: We (math) give MFAT. Had slacked off, now give to all seniors. At least lip service among
faculty to idea that it's a good thing. Did make curriculum change once based on content of MFAT.
Mike: Should we evaluate quality of units' assessment efforts?
Sam: We could at least recognize as "good" or "exemplary."
Mike: Maybe coordinate with PRP, since they overlap a lot. Assessment as "midterm" with respect to PRP, every 3 years. Plus one-page annual updates.
Rodney, Sam: 3 year report, 6 year report evaluated for quality (add comments), feeds into PRP. Connecting to PRP gives process teeth.
Mike: Will help convince units it's of use to them, it's important. I'll talk to Susan Kent to make sure it's okay, will fit in mechanically.
Lou: Even before that, you (Mike) should read PRP manual.
More discussion followed, all summarized in email to committee from Mike, as follows:
At our meeting last week, we decided to make some recommendations of considerable substance.
- We decided to send 'reminders' to all those units with whom
we have met and from whom we have yet to receive a report specifying
Friday, December 6th as the deadline for getting those reports to
us.
- We decided to revise the annual reporting requirements to be a
single page listing of activities to be accompanied by any request
for support from the AOC budget (no report, no budget request
accepted)
- We decided to float an idea by Susan Kent AVC for Faculty
Affairs which would effectively connect and integrate the Assessment
process with the PRP, recognizing that assessment is already
specified as part of that process, that faculty already are
accustomed to PRP, that it is taken seriously and that such a move
would 'stabilize' assessment for the foreseeable future, and that
AOC would be dealing annually in a substantive way with only 1/7th
of the campus departments each year.
- The basic idea suggestion derives from units sense that annual
is 'too often' partly so we are going to recommend that in the third
and 6th years of the PRP cycle units write 5 page reports of the
type we are asking for now to fill out the details, results and
actions resulting from the actions listed in the annual 1 page
report to AOC. The 6th year report would be reviewed and analyzed
and commented upon by the AOC and those comments sent to the units.
The units would presumably cut and paste their 6 year report to AOC
directly into the PRP with little extra work required and they
could, if they chose, submit the AOC comments to PRP process as
well.
I've met and talked with Susan Kent and she was very
positively enthusiastic about this idea and we agreed that I should
write up a slightly more formal proposal for consideration by the
PRP committee, get their endorsement and then we submit to Provost
and Chancellor for formal adoption. Unless I hear strong dissension
from those of you not able to attend the meeting, I will proceed
along this course and circulate a draft to the AOC people for
comments soon.
- We decided the report to the Chancellor, Provost and to NCA was
to consist of some general overview remarks, some specific examples
of good programs, a summary of our activities as AOC and a link to
the web page where all the unit by unit reports are posted. Other
suggestions are welcome.
PBA: PS-- L:\IR\OUTCOMES\aoc\notes021021.doc
|
