WASC teleconference, 30 Jun 06 - Revision history

Murray: /* Capacity versus Effectiveness */

2006-06-30T22:35:42Z

Capacity versus Effectiveness

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:35, 30 June 2006
Line 37:		Line 37:
	Question (by Henry): any other institutions who have looked at honor codes?		Question (by Henry): any other institutions who have looked at honor codes?
	* A: not really		* A: not really

			== Next Steps ==
			* WASC will prepare a letter with fuller feedback; should go out by end of next week

Murray: /* Capacity versus Effectiveness */

2006-06-30T22:33:48Z

Capacity versus Effectiveness

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:33, 30 June 2006
Line 34:		Line 34:
	* Capacity: look at structure of courses, sequencing, etc		* Capacity: look at structure of courses, sequencing, etc
	* Assessment: figure out what specifically to look at and whether it is accomplishing what we would like		* Assessment: figure out what specifically to look at and whether it is accomplishing what we would like

			Question (by Henry): any other institutions who have looked at honor codes?
			* A: not really

Murray: /* Capacity versus Effectiveness */

2006-06-30T22:28:08Z

Capacity versus Effectiveness

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:28, 30 June 2006
Line 29:		Line 29:
	* A (Carolyn): many opportunities for students to integrate what they are learning in their classes		* A (Carolyn): many opportunities for students to integrate what they are learning in their classes
	* Suggest that we think about the ways that we will split out capacity in first visit and effectiveness in the second		* Suggest that we think about the ways that we will split out capacity in first visit and effectiveness in the second

			Example: student workload
			* Expect we would be looking course by course to understand what students are getting out of it
			* Capacity: look at structure of courses, sequencing, etc
			* Assessment: figure out what specifically to look at and whether it is accomplishing what we would like

Murray at 22:17, 30 June 2006

2006-06-30T22:17:07Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:17, 30 June 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{righttoc}}
	* Present (CIT): David Goodstein, Henry Lester, RMM, Barbara Green, Carolyn Ash, Miriam Feldblum		* Present (CIT): David Goodstein, Henry Lester, RMM, Barbara Green, Carolyn Ash, Miriam Feldblum
	* Present (WASC): Theresa, Paul (WASC), Jeff,		* Present (WASC): Theresa, Paul (WASC), Jeff,

Murray at 22:16, 30 June 2006

2006-06-30T22:16:50Z

New page

* Present (CIT): David Goodstein, Henry Lester, RMM, Barbara Green, Carolyn Ash, Miriam Feldblum
* Present (WASC): Theresa, Paul (WASC), Jeff,

== Questions ==

=== Intro comments ===
* Thanked us for our proposal
* On paper we have not presented some of the areas that WASC uses
* Will be particularly interested in student learnings and outcomes

=== Process ===
* Theresa: what was the process that led to these three issues? Eg, what is the campus self evaluation process and why are these the most appropriate issues?
** A: CUE came up with the topics; decided to switch graduate to undergraduate
* Where other constituencies were engaged?
** A: CUE came up with the topics
* Issues that came up previously that weren't addressed
** Diversity - A: this is an issue that is always present
** Humanities - A: this is in very good condition
* Paula: the commission will want to know what we have done against these issues

=== Outcomes assessment ===
* Outcomes assessment is very important
* Question about ABET accreditation. RMM summarized what we been doing
* Looks like they will want some type of outcomes assessment

=== Capacity versus Effectiveness ===
* Increasing emphasis on student learning; how will two stage visit play into this
* A (Carolyn): many opportunities for students to integrate what they are learning in their classes
* Suggest that we think about the ways that we will split out capacity in first visit and effectiveness in the second