Assessment Oversight Committee (AOC) meeting notes 11/03/03
Mike on recent events
Mike reported on recent experiences. Spring report accepted by NCA. Oral presentation to Deans' Council - they were hostile. Nothing new, but one dean said he's convinced assessment is a passing fad, they shouldn't do too much. Another complained that reports have to be done twice, for NCA and the AOC. Mike replied that a little cut-and-paste goes a long way. Provost backed efforts, saying assessment important to (1) external constituencies, (2) NCA, and (3) the university itself.
Mike will be doing a report on CU-Boulder outcomes assessment at conference next week at UNC in Greeley. Recently did one at CSU.
Grad student survey
Candice reported on the graduate student survey: Working with Jeff Scheil and Cathy Kerry of PBA. Web form with e-mail notice. Tested Friday 10/31, going out Friday 11/7. Nine and a half pages. Some items customized for CU-Boulder, most not, for comparison to several other AAU schools also administering. Will be done this year, in fall 2005, then every 4 years. Masters and doctoral students, no MBA, no law. Census administration - no sampling.
Topics: mentoring, advising, sufficient guidance, teaching, post grad school plans, quality of life.
Sam: How different from the problem we have with surveys at the undergrad level, i.e., that students are not qualified to judge anything about programs but their own satisfaction? No applicability to program quality.
Lou: Doesn't solve this problem but does collect after-graduation plans.
Adrian: Questions about frequency of meeting with advisor, frequency of advice on dissertation, provide good assessment information.
Lou: Big goal is to get some comparative data.
PRP reports to be submitted to committee: How do we respond?
We're supposed to read, comment back to unit. Mike distributed list of departments due this year.
Have to make assignments - who reads what reports? Some discussion, decided each report would have two readers from committee, who would make comments, then pass on to committee as a whole.
Clarification: above is internal communication, NOT to be posted on Web.
Some institutes, etc., on Mike's PRP list, not included in OA requirements. Consensus was 7 units on list required to submit. Discussion of whether to assign, e.g., soc. sci./humanities reports to soc. sci./humanities members, or go the other way and avoid that. Finally people just called out ones they wanted to do.
Aerospace engineering: Steve, Lou
Note added 3/3/04: For various reasons, many of these assignments changed since the meeting, and psychology was added to the department list. The revised list is:
Aerospace Eng -- Steve, Lou and Edwin
NSSE Mike and students, integration Jim Sherman.
Jim Sherman and Graham Oddie will be assigned to produce (overall report? Reports back to units?)
Sam: Reports back to units should be to all units at same time.
Do we need to do additional notification to units beyond chancellor's e-memo? Do we need to remind them of available funds for OA? Should we send notice to deans, ask them to be responsible for their units?
Lou: Only two deans involved with this year's list, AS and Engineering. In her opinion, if they don't get additional notification about report due to AOC, we won't get anything. Need to remind them about appendix due to AOC.
Sam: Too late for reminder to do assessment for 03-04, can do for 04-05. Too late, that is, to ask them to do assessment, but not too late to ask them to report this year's assessment that they're already planning/doing. Should send two notifications - one soon, one early in spring semester.
Lou: PRP startup meeting scheduled, but don't remember when. That might be good for Mike to attend, take model of what we want.
Last revision 03/05/04
PBA Home | Strategic Planning |   Institutional Research & Analysis |  Budget & Finances |
Questions? Comments? | Legal & Trademarks | Privacy
15 UCB, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309-0015, (303)492-8631
© Regents of the University of Colorado