sloasc-12-19-14-agenda

sloasc-11-21-14-agenda

• Key points of interest

sloasc-10-17-14-agenda

sloasc-2-21-14-agenda

Friday, December 19, 2014

8:10 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.

Counseling Conference Room

Present: Vicki Jacobi, Michael Jiles, Mark Williams, Brandy Young

• Approval of Minutes from November 21, 2014 – Approved without changes.
• Continue discussion about review and approval of SLOs

Points of discussion:

• Is there a thread between CSLOs within a discipline?
• Does there need to be a common theme among CSLOs within a discipline?
• Discussed the objective criteria/standards of what an CSLO should have:
  • Currency (current event content)
  • Skills content
  • ISLO alignment
  • Discipline Content
  • Measurable

3. Develop a review process

Recommendation

• The committee will create a vetting process for SLO and COR integration. For example: Advisory committees and/or faculty will develop a COR and CSLOs. The SLO committee will review the SLOs to see if they contain the set criteria that is listed above. Once reviewed, the COR/CSLOs will be reviewed by the Curriculum Committee for approval.
• The SLO committee should not be the body that reviews the COR for content.
• Training for all faculty should be made available on Fridays.

4. Dialogue Day – This item was not discussed.
5. Discuss next meeting – day/time and length – This item was not discussed.

Minutes-December-19-2014

Friday, November 21, 2014

8:10 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.

Counseling Conference Room

Present:            Paul Blake, Jill Brown, Joe’ll Chaidez, Geoffrey Dyer, Vicki Jacobi, Michael Jiles, Michelle Oja, Brandy Young

• Introduction – New SLOASC member Michael Jiles – This item not discussed.
• Follow Up on Curriculum Discussion/SLOASC Charter – No Action Item Points of discussion:
  • The Curriculum Committee has recommended that SLO/ASC be the group that reviews SLOs when submitted on Course Outline of Record
  • Should the members of the Alternative Committee Assignment workgroup develop a process for reviewing SLOs as they are submitted with CORs?
  • Should SLO/ASC review its Charter once again?
  • With the new Accreditation Standards, SLOs must now be attached to CORs
• SLO “Tech Review” Process/Rubric for CSLO & PSLO Approvals – No Action Item Points of discussion:
  • SLO/ASC meetings used be conducted the same way that the current Curriculum meetings are conducted in order to review and approve SLOs in a systematic way
  • The goal of SLO/ASC was to ensure that SLOs were “meaningful and measureable
  • Comprehensive Program Review could be the time when all SLOs are reviewed at the course and program level – look at one whole program at a time
  • How are SLOs currently approved? Are they approved?
  • During Comprehensive Program Review, all SLOs be refined by discipline faculty
  • SLO/ASC should also look at SLOs for courses and programs as they are submitted
  • SLO/ASC should meet more frequently than once a month in order to review SLOs.

• Dialogue Day – This item was not discussed
• Other – No Action Taken

Rubric presented by Vicki that measures competency, content concerns and Basic Skills

The committee discussed the difficulty of eLumen housing a rubric to contain these three separate concerns and in creating reports that would make this information apparent to faculty. The committee discussed presenting ideas like this in Senate, Faculty Reports, FIGs, and other venues.

• Next Meeting – December 19^th and January 16^th, Inservice conflict.
  • The next meeting will be on December 19^th at 8:10 a.m. in the Counseling Conference Room

Minutes-11-21-14

Friday, October 17, 2014

8:10 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.

Counseling Conference Room

Members Present:        Joe’ll Chaidez, Geoffrey Dyer, Vicki Jacobi, Michelle Oja, and Brandy Young

Members Absent:         Michael Jiles

Guests Present:            Jill Brown, Michelle Beasley, and Paul Blake

1. Introduction – New SLOASC member Michael Jiles – Not present
2. Follow Up on Curriculum Discussion/SLOASC Charter

Mark and Vicki have been discussing how to integrate SLOs in to the Curriculum process. When CORs are reviewed in Curriculum, should SLOs be reviewed as well? The question is should the responsibility be that of the Curriculum committee or SLO/ASC? Some key points of discussion:

• PSLOs and CSLOs aren’t “dovetailed”
• Do our SLOs follow the spirit of what faculty want which is for students to learn
• Need to elevate CSLOs so that they are outcome based and not learning objectives
• The Liberal Arts Emphasis -Communication PowerPoint presentation slides were reviewed – this presentation was given at the Curriculum committee meeting. The curriculum committee has given SLOASC the task of evaluating
• The Liberal Arts Emphasis – Communication degree will be the first degree to be evaluated focusing on CSLOs and PSLOs
• Vicki is working with Dan Hall to create a virtual grid/matrix to help align CSLOs and PSLOs. This will be incorporated with the eLumen mapping tool.

Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Steering Committee

3. Update on SLO Alternate Committee Assignment Task Force The SLO Alternative Committee Assignment Task Force members are Michelle Beasley, Jill Brown, Paul Blake, Tori Furman, and Stephanie Walsh. The task force has been charged with creating a rubric to measure SLOs. The task force used the Degree Qualifications Profile created by the Lumina Foundation as a starting point. The rubric is still a work in progress.
4. Summary of 2014 SLO Conference & Strengthening Student Success Conference

• Vicki discussed a presentation by Dr. Marshall from Cal State San Bernadino. An example from the presentation was based on CSLOs. Three major factors should be represented in CSLOs. 1. Who the audience is. 2. What the behavior is. 3. What the context is.
• Vicki expressed that it would be great to have Dr. Marshall visit the TC campus for a presentation or possibly obtain a video of his presentation.

Minutes-10-17-141

Friday, September 19, 2014

8:10 a.m. – 9:00 a.m.

Cougar Room

Members Present:      Jennifer Altenhofel, Geoffrey Dyer, Vicki Jacobi, Michelle Oja, Brandy Young

Guests Present:          Mark Williams

1. Charter – Mission – No changes to the Charter for this 2014/2015 year.
2. SLO Alternate Faculty Committee Assignments – Mark Williams

Mark distributed a handout outlining the formation of ad hoc workgroups to review course and program level outcomes. The outcome of this exercise is to ensure that the SLOs are meaningful, measurable, minimal and complete. The three faculty chosen to lead the group are Michelle Beasely, Stephanie Walsh, and Tori Furman. Some comments made:

• We need to try and include faculty from the Math/Science division
• We need to elevate the conversation
• We need focus time – always running to catch up
• There are too many SLOs – baroque
• The focus of many course SLOs are on grading
• A good example of course SLOs used by David Layne include the components Cognitive – K, Psychomotor – S, and Affective – A
• Some faculty have varying approaches to SLOs

Mark also discussed the SLO conference at Bakersfield College on November 17^th. It has not been decided who will be invited to attend. That depends on the budget.

3. eLumen Demonstration – Brandy Young

Brandy gave a brief demonstration of the “new” eLumen. There are new features that will enable faculty to tie SLO assessment data to program review and budget allocation. Navigation is more intuitive and training will begin this fall semester.

Minutes-9-21-14