Assessment CommitteeChairs: Heidi Broad-Smith, Jan Greico Members: Charge: The charge of this committee is to develop and implement a comprehensive assessment plan for determining institutional effectiveness. The committee will examine existing assessment practices and strategies, and will explore, propose, implement and analyze new ones. A primary function of this committee is to communicate ongoing and proposed assessment activities to the campus community
Minutes:
The meeting was called to order at 12:40 p.m., and opened with a discussion of the proposed operating plan for 2009. The discussion included conversations on Bloom’s Taxonomy and providing rubrics campus-wide or just for the assessment committee; how the process of providing assessment education will be delivered to the NMCC community, and establishing a means to communicate more effectively with the College community, which included developing an Assessment Corner in the weekly Toward Excellence newsletter . There was also discussion that using what we currently have in assessment may not work as we are out of step language wise with everyone in the Northeast., and we need to do asessmet from the bottom up. There was further discussion about the Accounting Information Systems curriculum mapping provided by Colleen. The mapping shows a reduction from 24 outcomes to 9, and there are no Gen Ed outcomes. Mapping will help develop program/institution outcomes. A further discussion followed about where are the official outcomes and how do we use them. The catalog is the updated “last word: to which we all need to be accountable. Questions were raised about CSSE, SSI and reports to the board, and how do/will these tools fit into assessment. The committee also looked at models of rubrics used by other schools for program assessment. Additional, the issue of where existing assessment information is stored was raised, with the comment that the committee should see what the College has before “reinventing the wheel.” This resulted in a recommendation to get copies of the 2008-2009 program reviews from the Academic Den’s office. Following discussion, Jen Graham moved to postpone discussion and action on all but the first two agenda items (see attached). This was approved unanimously. Item II: June NEEAN Conference After discussion the committee recommended that Sue Dugal, Colleen Harmon, Jan Grieco, and Brian McDougal will attend the conference.The committee will ask for professional development funding for all those attending except Jan Grieco who will pay the costs for her attendance. There was a discussion of the visual mapping of alignment for medical assisting. The committee is struggling to define the language from the Suskie book to actually map out parts of Sue Dugal’s curriculum. The following questions were raised: Is it important for program goals to be consistent with the department and institution? Do we all have to use the same language? We need to determine how language will be used in order to work with departments and faculty. We need to indicate how program outcomes support college level outcomes. The committee was charged with reviewing language in pages 116-117 of the Suskie book and focus on the medical assisting documents provided by Sue Dugal, with an eye to working on common language. Laura McPherson moved to adjourn at 1:30 and was approved unanimously. Last changed: Mar 12 2010 at 10:59 AM Back |
|||
 |
||||||||||
|
