Academic Administration

CASL - May 4, 2009

Present:  Bilin Tsai, Julie Ernst, Wayne Jesswein, Mary Keenan, Michelle Hatcher, Sue Darge , Geoff Bell, Jerry Pepper, Olaf Kuhlke, Jackie Millslagle. 

Minutes from the April 17 meeting were distributed; please send corrections to Jackie. 

In considering the feedback Jackie received from the Academy mentor, the group agreed to move forward with one set of learning outcomes that would encompass gains from academic and student life programs

The group continued discussions on institutional learning outcomes working from the Student Development Assessment Team documents.  At several points throughout the discussion of each domain, the group discussed that our goals and institutional outcomes should be what we strive to achieve in each student, and that an assessment plan is a living document that can be changed as we begin the process of measurement and reflection. 

Domain #3.  Self-Realization.  (see April 17 meeting notes).  There was continued discussion on whether to include examples of developmental areas, and subsequent agreement there should not be. 

Domain #4.  Relationships.  (some discussion in April 17 minutes).  As materials for faculty are prepared and distributed, the dimension—effective communication—will move from Life Skills to the Relationships domain.  The current outcome was slightly modified, adding ‘interpersonal’ to reflect the one-to-one vs. group interactions. 

Domain #5.  Social Responsibility.  This domain seemed to fit well with both the current liberal education objectives, as well as the proposed objectives.  There were no changes to the current proposed outcomes that fall in this domain.

Domain #6.  Life Skills.  There was considerable discussion as to whether this domain should be included.  Some suggested it might imply there is no “skill” involved in the first five domains.  There was also concern about how outcomes in this domain could be measured (Sue Darge suggested that the NSSE measures this area well, and there are other inventories available).    Reflecting again on the point that our outcomes are part of a living document, the group reached consensus to keep the domain, but modify the SDAT outcomes as follows:

Throughout the meeting, the group had continued and lively discussion about where the responsibility for measurement lies.  Bruce Munson who couldn’t attend this meeting had emailed thoughts to Jackie, which were shared with the group.   The group was “processing” the concept that no single program will be required to address all institutional outcomes; it is unlikely that any single program could.  Each program, however, will be responsible for measuring its own outcomes, and identifying how program outcomes contribute to institutional outcomes.  A central system will be needed to track the connections between programs and institutional goals and outcomes. 

Jackie and Nancy, Recorders