Assessment Council
Academic Senate Office
Telephone: (989)774-3350
Fax: (989)774-2038
th
Minutes – February 13 , 2017
Present: S. Berkshire, M. Kreth, S. Richards, T. Stohlman, T. Periyaswamy, S. Bechtel, S.
Naeve-Velguth // Absent: D. Gray, E. Vandeusen // Guests: C. Brookes, D. Richter, M. Senter,
Y. Su-Ritzler, M. Carson
1. Meeting Called to Order: 8:33 am
2. Approval of Minutes: Kreth motioned to approve minutes from 01-23-2017. Stohlman
seconded. Motion carried.
3. Announcements:
a. CSE vacancy: Brian DeJong (E&T) or Anja Mueller CHM) to move forward to
Senate for approval on 2/21/17.
b. HSBS vacancy reminder
c. Order of Business: New Business and then Old Business
4. Old Business:
a. a. Proposal to adopt CMU assessment council definitions for introduce, reinforce, and
emphasize (IRE)
• Outcome Introduced - introduces a concept for a program outcome for the
first time; there is a focus on basic knowledge, skills, or competencies
• Outcome Reinforced - enhances or strengthens the opportunities for achieving
a learning outcome that has already been introduced
• Outcome Emphasized- promotes a level of mastery of a program outcome;
outcomes might include integration, evaluation, and application of knowledge,
skills, or competencies
The members discussed using the word “courses within each explanation and
concluded the sentences may limit credit for prior learning experiences and cocurricular experiences. Therefore, the members agreed to remove “courses” from the
definitions. There was also discussion that “reinforced” cannot be included in a
course that is introducing a program learning outcome, since one cannot reinforce
something that is not introduced. Therefore, the course should focus primarily on
introduction the outcome in various ways. In addition, course objectives are different
from learning outcomes. Kreth motioned to approve. Periyaswamy seconded. Motion
carried.
b. Assessment Summer Awards Criteria (Mary & Stephanie): Senter distributed letter
but the members will discuss more and vote next meeting. Senter also suggested that
one way to get the funding would be to reallocate a portion of the provost assessment
incentive award.
c. CAEP discussion at PEAC (Mike): Postponed until next meeting.
d. Assessment Bylaw Language Examples (Deborah, Feb 27 meeting): Postponed until
next meeting.
5. New Business:
a. Assessment Plans for Review:

Guest Christi Brookes and Daniela Richter: French Major, BA/BS (New) –
Stohlman thought the first target would be difficult to meet since there
seems to be two targets stated for one outcome. However, the department
thinks they are fairly confident that they will be able to achieve it. Carson
edited target 1, measure 2 and measure 3 to include ‘acceptable rubric
score” to keep the language consistent and clear with the rubric.
 Guest Christi Brookes and Daniela Richter: French Major, BS in Education
(New) - Senter will upload exit interview to assessment plan
 Guest Christi Brookes and Daniela Richter: German Major, BA/BS (New) –
Carson made a change in the first targets and findings. The language was
changed on the exit survey target.
 Guest Christi Brookes and Daniela Richter: German Major, BS in Education
(New) – Stohlman moved to approve all 4. Berkshire seconded. Motion
carried.
 Tamil: Fashion Merchandizing and Design: Fashion Product Development
Conc. BAA, BS (Online) – The mission seemed relatively vague and was
missing context with the program’s purpose. Members felt the mission
submitted in the new program proposed (blue form) may provide a detailed
mission statement for the new program. There was a recommendation made
to contextualize and standardize the language in the goals. Adding language
to make it more specific to the program would provide a little more direction
on each of these goals. Measure 1 FMD 560 rubric needs to be more specific
on how each individual point is earned, especially on the bigger point
values. There is no variation that explains why a student may not achieve
the maximum points. The rubric should to be more distinct. Each area of the
rubric should be coded to indicate which SLO is being measured.
 Focus Group Measure: An outline of the focus group question needs to
be included in WEAVE.
 Curriculum Map: Course levels 300 & 400 seem to be missing from
the curriculum map. In addition, student learning outcomes can’t be
emphasized until there is reinforcement. The SLOs Planning, Testing,
Calculating/Synthesizing and Technology are introduced and then
immediately emphasized with no reinforcement.
 Tamil: Fashion Merchandizing and Design: Visual Merchandising Conc.
BAA, BS (Online) – Stohlman moved to postpone the evaluation on both
until the next meeting. Kreth seconded. Motion carried.
b. Letters for Review
 CCFA: Art & Design (Yenpin) – Postponed until next meeting.
 CS&E: Earth and Atmospheric Sciences (Yenpin) – They have 4 programs.
One called environment science is fairly new and in the 1st or 2nd year, so
they have no feedback to provide yet. The geology major with the hydro
concentration was recently put on hiatus last month so there is no feedback.
Meteorology and general geology are both doing a good job in collecting
and analyzing data. The assessment plans are dated. The data collected
doesn’t seem to match their old plan so a revision is recommended. Based
on a previous department meeting this department may be revising their
curriculum.
 Psychology major – Kreth thought the language in this letter leaves the
impression that recommendations are optional. The letters should reflect
what is in the policy.
 Anthropology and 3 Sociology majors – On track.
Kreth motioned to approve all 3 letters with recommended changes. Berkshire seconded.
Motion carried.
Note: Laura Cochran has made the changes to African and African Diaspora.
6. Other:
a. Congratulations Provost Incentive Awards Recipients:
 Stephanie Richards, Communication Disorders
 Greg Smith and Kathleen Donohue, Joint MA/Joint Ph.D. History
b. a. 2015-2016 Assessment Council Goals
1. Enhance Assessment at CMU:
 Assessment Leader Awards
 Summer Assessment Teams
2. Submit a Proposal to transfer to a more robust assessment management
system such as TaskStream (ongoing)
3. Recognition for faculty involvement in assessment through the department bylaws
4. Improve communication with the faculty community (what should syllabi say
relative to assessment, CETL help/partnering, promote CMU assessment
news)
5. Assessment Transparency: What to report on the assessment website. Right
now we include mission, goals, and SLO’s
6. Revisit the charge of the AC. What role does AC have in ‘off years’?
7. Assessment Leader Awards: Provosts office agrees but how will this be
evaluated. Provost’s Assessment Leadership Award
8. RPT Letter from Provost
Link to academic senate and to charge of committee
https://www.cmich.edu/AcademicSenate/secure/Documents/ASSESSMENT%20COUNCIL.pdf
Upcoming Conferences:
March 31 – April 1, 2017: Higher Learning Commission Annual Conference (Chicago, IL)
Assessment Conferences: http://www.assessmentconferences.com/
7. Meeting Adjourned: 10:05 am
Respectfully submitted,
Katja Babcock
Student Assessment Committee Volunteer.