1.    PRELIMINARIES

A.    Attending: Bain, Galizia, Hjelm, Lawrence, Salzman, Sirotnak, Thackray.

II.    BUSINESS

A.     Categorization of Programs: Lawrence passed out a revised version of "Criteria for Evaluation Status of Assessment Activity," a chart showing the types of assessment instruments in use across the campus, and a table of the status of assessment activity by program.  General agreement was voiced on the revisions from the first draft.  Discussion centered on the "in progress" category and what efforts would need to be expended to get these programs into the "satisfactory" category.  It will be the goal of CTL to have all programs reach the level of 'satisfactory."

People debated the relative merits of a direct approach (here's where you fall short of qualifying for the "satisfactory" designation, and here's how to remedy these deficiencies) compared to a more indirect approach (pairing "in progress" programs with "excellent" programs, promoting incremental gains, etc.). Sentiment favored the more direct approach, especially since some programs have not made much progress to date and because the issue is linked with university accreditation.

These documents will be forwarded to Dr. Lawson for distribution to the Council of Academic Deans.

B.     Ways to Mentor Programs: Discussion centered on ways to involve additional programs in developing an assessment plan that will meet the criteria for "satisfactory." Suggestions included: 1) assigning individual members of CTL to work with programs; 2) having an "assessment fair" in the ballroom where representatives from programs might ask specific questions of programs that have instituted components that have proved valuable (e.g., identify a program that has an especially effective alumni survey form); and 3) sponsoring a panel discussion devoted to specific components of a successful plan.  Consensus seemed to favor points 1 and 2 over point 3 because of the inertia that characterizes some programs.

C.    Discussion occurred concerning the advisability of talking directly with new Graduate Dean, Paul Tate, regarding lack of progress in conducting assessment activities in graduate programs.

IV.    ADJOURNMENT: 2:00 p. m.

Approved:

R:\GROUPS\ISUSTATS\CTL\minutes\120597.wpd