I. PRELIMINARIES
A. Attending: Belzer, Bosworth, Dean, Hjelm, Jones, Kruger, Kunicki, Nitse, Price, Wabrek, Egger (guest), BainExcused: Das, Devine, Dobson, Enos, Fisher, Paulson, PehrssonB. Minutes: MSC to approve CTL Minutes for October 1, 1999MSC to approve CTL Minutes for November 3, 1999
A. Vice-chair selection: Sharolyn Belzer reported that her phone contacts with Council Members resulted in no one being willing to assume the Vice-chair position this year and consequently to assume the chair of the Council for the 2000-01 academic year. Sharolyn was asked if she would be willing to chair the Council for two years and Patricia was asked if she would be vice-chair for a year and a half. Both persons agreed. MSC for Sharolyn Belzer to continue to be chair of the Council during 2000-2001 and for Patricia Dean to be vice-chair during the remainder of this year and during the 2000-2001 year and then to assume chair of the Council in fall of 2001.B. Report from Task Force on structure and function of the Teaching and Learning Resource Center: Sharolyn and Phil reported that attending the Lilly conference had been a great experience. Both said that the sessions were excellent. In addition, they obtained useful information and have compiled a resource notebook that will be made available to other council members as well as faculty. A copy will be kept in the Office of Institutional Research and Alan Egger will have a copy. Sharolyn and Phil said that this was a conference that they would recommend other faculty attend in the future for faculty development.
They also talked to other people regarding the future of the Center at ISU. Suggestions that they received involved: having a full time director, having secretarial support, being located outside of the administration building and having the Center be funded on state appropriations rather than soft money. A first step is to draft a mission statement. They talked with Jim Eison from the University of South Florida. Both Sharolyn and Phil thought having Jim Eison visit ISU would be beneficial. He would be a useful resource to help the Council develop a Center and would be an effective presenter for faculty development.The Task Force will meet and put together a plan to reinstate the Center at ISU. The plan will be presented at the January 2000 meeting.C. Assessment: Sharolyn reported on the meeting with Dr. Jonathan Lawson, Academic Vice-President, Dr. John Jones, Director of Institutional Research and Council members on November 12, 1999. She reported that Dr. Lawson's message indicated that ISU needs to do assessment and that faculty need to be involved. She then asked for feedback and responses from CTL members. Some CTL members questioned the need for an assessment process. Other members asked if funds and release time would be available for the assessment coordinators. Members indicated that Dr. Lawson had responded that these requests would be dealt with on an individual basis.
Dr. Jones also said that he is willing to meet with departments on an individual basis to help them develop the assessment plans for their respective departments. People also asked if they could e-mail him regarding assessment issues and questions and Dr. Jones said yes. Dean Hjelm reported that he had informed the departmental chairs in the College of Arts and Sciences of Dr. Jones' willingness to meet with departments and that the chairs appreciated this opportunity. Some Council members expressed that they thought the Assessment Manual provided good guidelines but individual departments may need assistance in applying the guidelines to programs within the departments.
D. Involvement of the CTL in the assessment process: The Council then discussed involvement of the CTL in the assessment process. Some members thought that the Council could have an overseeing function. The Council members could encourage compliance and when particular department met the assessment criteria, a congratulatory note could be sent to them. When departments did not meet the criteria, the Council could try to encourage them to do so by making the department aware of resources to facilitate compliance. Other members expressed that they thought the Deans were responsible for compliance and that the Council should serve as a mediator. Others thought that the Council might be advisory to departments not in compliance.
John Jones said that at some campuses, a pool of money is available for innovative practices and that receiving these funds is based on ideas identified during the assessment process. The assessment process allows departments to develop a rationale to apply for such funds. Perhaps the Council could help award money if ISU adopted such a system.
E. Assessment Statement: Council members reviewed a statement on assessment that was drafted Spring 1999. The Council has been asked by the Faculty Senate to develop a written statement on assessment. Members asked if the University has a written policy regarding assessment. No one knew the answer to this question. This item was tabled until the next meeting. In the interim, Sharolyn will investigate whether the University has such a policy and will draft an assessment statement. She will circulate this draft via e-mail to Council members for their input and suggestions.
F. Permanent Meeting Time: The advantages of a permanent meeting time were discussed. This would allow faculty members to know in advance if they could attend CTL meetings. If the meeting times conflicted with their schedules, another person could consider being the Council representative. Fridays in general seemed to be a time available for most Council members. The third Friday of the month would allow various task forces to meet prior to the Council meeting. Lorie Chatfield will send out schedules for Spring semester to identify when most Council members are available to meet. She will then inform Sharolyn of the results.
G. Items deferred for future meetings:
1. Report summarizing the process used in assessment of Goal 9
2. Revisiting summary reports of 1999 discussion groups
3. Assessment of General Education Goals
4. How Council members are selected
5. Matching Faculty Senate description and By-Laws of Council
6. Council's web site
7. Discussion groups for 1999-2000 (Information literacy)
IV. ADJOURNMENT: 2:35 p.m.