Ac Minutes 10-9-08

Entire Assessment Committee Meeting Minutes October 9, 2008 3:00-5:00 in Room 3603 Claire Stuart-Quintanilla ran meeting, Chair Minutes taken by Stephanie Owen, Recorder Total of 18 members attended meeting I. Old business • No old business to report II. By-Laws • Under III, Article III, instead of saying “membership is required,” it should state, “committee members expected to attend.” III. Pre-test results • Determined that during an Executive Board meeting, the results for the pre-test will not be revealed until after gathering the post-test data. • This was decided since there was concern at last large group committee meeting that instructors, if they knew the results, may teach to the test or be biased when conducting post-test. • Chair asked the entire committee if they would like to postpone the administration of the post-test, which was slated for October 27-31 and/or when post-test data needed to be turned into Dean Javier, which was originally slated for November 17th to November 26th. • So move…Ali Khan moved to keep the original date for administering post-test and changing the date when graders needed to turn in their results to Dean Javier from November 17th to November 26th • Seconded by Hope Essien • Unanimous vote to approve turn in date change IV. Post-test mechanics • Important to administer the exact test in the same manner as done in the pre-test. • There was some decision on whether two graders would be needed for the post-test grading or if one would suffice. • Some members felt that the average of the results from the two graders of the pre-test could be used for the post-test which would than require only using one grader for post-test. • Some members felt that two graders still needed to be used for the posttest to ensure the measuring instrument works and that it remain consistent with the procedure taken in the pre-test. • Some of the issues discussed on the above matter included: more time to grade the results so only one grader needed for post-test; issue of graders bringing more to the grading process for the post-test having already gone through the process (with the pre-test) thereby bringing more specific elements when grading (bias); and importance of keeping two graders to preserve the established validity of the instrument set by the pre-test phase. Assessment Committee Meeting 10-09-08 Minutes taken by Stephanie Owen

1

•

V.

VI.

VII.

So move…that two graders be used and that the same graders who graded the pre-test also grade the post-test • Math mentioned that in the pre-test they did not score blank responses • Biology mentioned they gave full credit to students for simply responding to certain components of the test and if they should alter how they determine scoring for that component in the post-test grading. • It was determined that everyone should follow the same practices they used in the pre-test with the post-test Adjunct requests • Vice President O’Malley needs to know who will be grading for the posttest. • Everyone agreed that the same adjuncts that graded the pre-test need to grade for the post-test. Those departments needing adjuncts include biology, chemistry, social science, respiratory care, and surgical technology. Assessment Day • Ali Khan went over what will occur during assessment day • It was determined that two follow up emails need to be sent reminding faculty and staff about assessment day and its events. One will be sent the Friday before assessment day (October 17th) and another message Monday, October 20th • Assessment Day is slated for October 21, 2008 • Stephanie Owen will ask committee members to help tape cats images (CATS) around campus either to be done the night before or early the day of Assessment Day. • T-shirts and pencils will not be purchased since the paperwork stalled at the Business Office. CAAP test • Administration asked if the Assessment Committee would be interested in overseeing/administrating CAAP testing. • CAAP is a national standardized test that tests five areas of student knowledge (math, reading, science, social studies, and critical thinking). The test would require commitment by instructors and would take up a week class time to administer. The test will cost $10,000 but it was unclear who would pay for it (the Committee or the College?). • Some committee members thought it would be great to see how students stand on national level (great to have national benchmark) and they also felt that any opportunity to generate more assessment data could only benefit the students, the committee, and the college. • Some committee members felt the previous CAAP tests has never been used effectively in the past and that it would be a waste of money to administer this test if there wasn’t a clear plan made prior to committing to using the CAAP. Old data from previous CAAP needs to be reviewed.

Assessment Committee Meeting 10-09-08 Minutes taken by Stephanie Owen

2

VIII.

IX.

Faculty would need to be told long ahead of when the CAAP would be administered so there won’t be any “surprises.” • Some committee members asked if it would be possible to only administer the section related to their discipline/relevant to what they’re teaching. Everyone thought it would suffice to test students on the critical thinking portion only. • So move…Jane Reynolds moved to use the critical thinking component next Fall 2009 provided that planning and treatment (have an opportunity to review old data and educate the committee (and the college) on CAAP and/or other national assessment testing software) conducted prior to then • Seconded by Ali Khan • Unanimous vote to learn more about CAAP, other assessment testing software, previous CAAP data, and to administer the critical thinking component of CAAP in Fall 2009 (if all other parts are fulfilled) • So move…David St. John moved to have the option to administer discipline specific portions of the CAAP for department assessment purposes • Seconded by Edna Boone • Chair will discuss with Vice President O’Malley on whether departments can administer parts of the CAAP test specific to their discipline. • Chair and Co-Chair will discuss with Department Chairs about using the CAAP as part of the Department Assessment Plan (using CAAP as an assessment tool in their Department Assessment Plan). HLC October Report • Report has been written up by Executive Board and turned into VicePresident O’Malley who has approved the report with some request for minor changes. • Will be sending the report to HLC tomorrow morning. The final report will be available on the blog. Miscellaneous business • Executive Board will discuss the minutes process so that minutes get to the large group committee members in a timely manner for approval. • There was a need to push the Assessment Committee blog by encouraging everyone to go to the blog for all minutes and pertinent documents related to committee activities and reports. • Committee has a budget and will discuss how to use it during executive board meetings, which will in turn be shared with the large group Committee members.

Meeting adjourned at 4:50

Assessment Committee Meeting 10-09-08 Minutes taken by Stephanie Owen

3