University of Arkansas

University of Arkansas - Fort Smith

Committee on Assessment of Learning Outcomes

Meeting of = October 18, 2007

Minutes<= o:p>

<= /span>

A meeting of the Committee on Assessment of Learning Outcomes was held at 3:30 p.m. on Thursday, October 18, 2007, in Room 114 of the Flanders Building at the University of Arkansas - Fort Smith. Members in attendance were:

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; Cathy Bain&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Henry Rinne

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; Jan Dickinson &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &= nbsp; Bob Sell

Genice Doo= ly &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; Matthew Utz &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p;

Kim Downin= g &nb= sp; &= nbsp; &= nbsp; Ray Wallace

&nbs= p; &= nbsp; David Dubriske = ; &n= bsp; = ; Margaret Tanner, Co-chair

M. Suzanne= Horne &= nbsp; &nbs= p; L. VanOsdol, Co-chair &= nbsp; &nbs= p;

John Jones= &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; B. J. McKim, secretary

Lori Norin=

&= nbsp; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp;

Dr. L. VanOsdol called the meeting to order. The minut= es of the September 20 committee meeting were distributed and reviewed. Dr. Jan Dickinson made a motion th= at the minutes be approved, and the motion was seconded. The minutes were approved as disse= minated.

A packet of the following documents was distributed:

• &nb= sp; Agenda for today’s meeting

• &nb= sp; Minutes of the September 20 meeting

• &nb= sp; Quantitative Reasoning Rubric

• &nb= sp; Global and Cultural Perspectives Rubric

• &nb= sp; Technology Literacy Rubric

• &nb= sp; Goal Plans

CLA – Follow-up: Dr. VanOsdol started by thanking the committee members who served as proctors for the testing sessi= ons. She also thanked Dr. Henry Rinne for arranging access to the English classes that were used for the administration of the test. Dr. Rinne asked if the sessions were long enough since the class times were only 75 minutes not th= e 90 minutes suggested. The response was positive that all students finished wit= hin that time limit at each session. David Dubriske pointed out that the Seniors would probably be more detailed with their responses, as it would be expect= ed, so, the time limit should be the whole 90 minutes in the Spring. It has been discussed that the capstone classes will be utilized for those sessions; th= ey meet for longer class periods. Dr. Cathy Bain inquired if there would be fair representation with the capstone classes and the response was positive because we will only be testing Bachelor candidat= es. Dr. Margaret Tanner and Dr. VanOsdol will work on getting the specific courses identified so those instructors can be notified before the semester starts. Ideally, the testing could be included in the syllabus for the course.

Rubrics: Dr. Tanner opened discussion by calling attention to three of the rubrics she wanted to discuss at today’s committee meeting.

The first rubric was Quantitative Reasoning which Dr. = Tanner and Genice Dooly had reviewed. Both agreed that the wording was clear and a= ll three objective statements were distinguishable. Dooly told the committee t= hat she could relate this rubric to Health Sciences. Dr. Tanner believed that t= his rubric was in good shape with no major problems. She asked Dubriske to shar= e it with the Math Department.

The next rubric considered was Global and Cultural Perspectives which Matthew Utz and Dr. Bain had reviewed. They recommended = that no specific number of cultures should be stipulated in the rubric. Dr. Bain pointed out the first objective does not apply to Education but the second objective does. Utz said that they do not apply to math but could to reading and writing. Bob Sell made the comment that it is not required that every program address every competency.

The committee discussed the use of the phrase “i= n the discipline” within the rubric. The decision was made to leave this expression in the rubric.

The discussion turned to the lack of an assessment ins= trument for our general education program. It was pointed out that the general education courses can provide useful assessment information. Dr. Ray Wallace asked what was used in the past (which was the CAAP test) and why it was discontinued (it was dropped at the state level.) In the example of the CAAP test, student outcomes were unreliable in some incidences. It was pointed o= ut that there cannot be a void, a general education assessment must be done. At this point, the CLA (Collegiate Learning Assessment) which assesses critical thinking skills, is the only instrument being used. Dr. VanOsdol said that she would look in= to what else is available.

Dr. Tanner directed the discussion back to the Global = and Cultural Perspectives rubric, and Dubriske indicated that students need to understand the objectives and how they fit in the world overall. The commit= tee decided that if we can separately assess the ULO’= ;s after completion of the gen ed requirements, the existing rubric would be fine for use by departments.

The committee will discuss the following rubrics at th= e next meeting: Technology, Communication, and Analytical Skills.

CALO PLANS: At this time, there are areas in two Colleges that are not complete and need to be addressed, these being the College of Applied S= cience and Technology and the Co= llege of Arts and Science= s. We need to make sure that plans exist and work on getting them submitted. Dr. Tanner asked everyone to email her if they did not find any evidence of a p= lan in any area.

Dr. VanOsdol concluded the meeting by recapping the importance of a timely completion of the rubrics and mentioned the three th= at will be discussed at the November meeting.

With no further business to discuss, a motion was made= by Dr. Bain for the meeting to be adjourned. Having being seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30.

B. J. McKim

Recording Secretary

&nbs= p; Page 2

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = = CALO Minutes – 10/18/07