March 9, 2007
Posted by () on [PUBL_DATE]
Assessment >>

Unfinished Business:
Standardized grading rubric for writing for all courses/programs: Significant discussion occurred involving the process for dissemination and how to assure faculty buy in to this important process. The goals for use of the standardized grading rubric were reviewed and are listed below
Reemphasize that the grading of writing quality extends beyond just English courses to all courses (English courses is not the only place that students learn about quality writing, and combining technical skills and writing skills is important)
Reinforce for student that faculty campus wide believe that writing and communication ability is important and should be addressed throughout the curriculum
Rubrics used to grade writing should be similar in all programs, so that terminology used is familiar to students, and that criteria for grading are consistent.
Action: Ron will speak with English faculty, and will begin the process of dissemination of the rubric to faculty for comment (perhaps through the faculty senate)

Alan will set aside a time during the fall administrative days so that all faculty, including adjunct faculty can be familiarized with the goals and use of the rubric.

Daryl will contact Dave Raymond to see if we can place the grading rubric issue on the agenda for the next Faculty Senate meeting

Follow up for CAAP testing:  Daryl researched the 2 issues from the last meeting:
Can we continue to use computers in English Comp for the final, and submit the computer typed version to CAAP: Yes, but this will impact the comparison to national norm, since most school do not allow this. However, some colleges do, and it would still allow us to demonstrate progress towards goals and comparison to national standards. Action: We should only be doing this test if we can maintain our current computer testing process. The faculty member currently teaching English Comp on campus is agreeable. Ron will contact the off campus English Faculty as well.
What types of research reports are generated? Reports will include both student specific data, as well as group aggregate data. Samples were distributed. Though the data is minimal, it does allow comparison to national standards, will allow for internal interrater reliability assessment, and will help establish a baseline for analysis. Since it doesn’t measure grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc, it was suggested that we also purchase the writing assessment. Action: Approve purchasing and using the CAAP multiple choice exam as well as the essay writing exam. Daryl will complete requisitions, and Ron will notify the English faculty.
Alan Punches- annual reports from other committees- we discussed at a previous meeting, the need to have annual reports from the major committees completed and submitted to a central location (ie Academic or Presidents Office) so that this committee could address those items that are on the assessment plan. To date, this is not being done. Action: Dr. Punches will follow up to see if we can work to make this happen, at least starting this year. The Committee chairpersons could assist in doing a summary report annually.
Curriculum Mapping: We are at a point in the assessment of general education outcomes where we need to once again take a look at the general education outcomes and where they are located in each program. Specifically, we are interested in the writing skills. This had been done with the documents associated with the definitions of the educated person, but given recent curricular changes, we need to redo this process.
Action: Three of the 4 Department Chairs are present on this committee- They have been asked to look at each program (all levels) and identify which courses generally require a written assignment. Daryl will develop a checklist/sheet to assist with this process. (see attached)

New Business

Analysis of ‘the educated person” and “the aim of an NMTC/NMCC education”. We still have many old posters up describing our definition of an educated person, and there have been some issues with these. Since these have not been looked at for a while, it would be worth reevaluating those documents. Whose responsibility is it?  Action: Alan will forward the documents to me, so they can be distributed, and then will have the academic department review them and update them as needed (i.e. changing name to NMCC)


Respectfully submitted,

Daryl Boucher

Last changed: Mar 13 2007 at 12:01 PM