Home
Self Study Design

Assessment Plan
Standards at a Glance
Middle States Commission on Higher Education

Designs for Excellence

Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education
Committee Membership
Steering and Standards Committee Pages
Middle States College-Wide Events
Timeline
Resource Library
Drafts of Middle States Self Study Document
E-mail Your Comments
Community College of Philadelphia

 

Standard 14 Committee Minutes: 01/14/2003

 

DATE:01/14/2003
TIME:3:30 to 5:00 PM
PLACE:W2-5 Conference Room
PRESENT:Sonya Lott-Harrison, Deb Rossi, Warren Berman, Marcia Epstein, Emilie Harting, Madeline Marcotte, George McCasland, Elaine Taliareni, Joan Monroe
  1. Distribution of materials
    • #31 "Revised Action Plan for Standard 14 Committee"
      #32 "Standard 12 Action Plan"
      #33 "Assessment of Student Learning: Options and Resources"
      #34 "Middle States Self-Study Faculty and Staff Questionnaire"
  2. Standard 12 overlap
    • Sonya reported that she and Deb will meet with the co-chairs of the Standard 12 Committee to discuss possible overlap between their task and ours. She requested that we review their action plan, which became #32 on our working bibliography, to give her (during our next meeting) our perception of possible overlap. Later, Sonya amended this request, making the review of Standard 12's action plan secondary to issues discussed in item #5.
  3. Discussion of survey questions
    • Deb reported that she and Sonya got a survey from a recent meeting on educational effectiveness. The survey is crafted to elicit specific information from faculty and staff, information that may prove useful to several different Middle States committees. We have the chance to "piggyback" on to this survey for our own purposes.

    • Deb then proposed that we look at the last four questions to see if responses to those questions would be helpful to us. After a short discussion during which Elaine and others questioned what kind of responses #20, for example, would get, we decided to write our own survey questions. Warren proposed a two-tiered approach, first asking what assessment tools faculty use and then how faculty use those tools to improve their courses. The results of our discussion are these questions:

      1. Which of the following methods do you use to assess student learning?

        1. Rubric grading scales
        2. Project of paper portfolios
        3. Group projects or activities
        4. Written assignments
        5. Objective tests (i.e multiple choice, true/false, fill in the blank, matching?
        6. Essay tests (either short answer or essay
        7. Other

      2. Do you use student learning outcomes to improve your course?

      3. If yes, please explain in what ways you have used student learning outcomes to improve your course.
  4. Meeting times
    • We briefly discussed our meeting time and settled on returning to a 3:30 PM start time.
  5. Interview questions
    • In order to ensure continuity, Deb and Sonya proposed that, before we break up into smaller, focused groups, we devise questions that each group can use to guide their data collection. To prepare to do this next week, Sonya asked that we review "Assessment of Student Learning: Options and Resources" and our action plan to get ideas and clarify purpose. She also asked that we consider which area of our action plan we would like to work on.

Assignments for Next Week:

  1. Priority: Read the "Assessment of Student Learning" (#33) and our action plan (#31) to prepare for our next meeting (see item #5).
  2. Secondary: Review Standard 12's action plan (#32) and consider areas of potential overlap.

Next meeting: Tuesday, January 21, 2003
Time: 3:30 PM
Location: W2-5 Conference Room

Recorder: Madeline Marcotte