Student Affairs Assessment Council Minutes
September 11, 2013
Attendance: Jo Alexander, Maureen Cochran, Rick DeBellis, Carolyn Killefer, Remi Nagata, Daniel Newhart, Juliana Recio,
Kayleen Salchenberg, Kent Sumner, Carrie Giese, Jeff Kenney, Chrysanthemum Mattison, Jodi Nelson, Daniel Cardenas,
Cynthia Stickle, Rick Stoddart, Jennica Vincent, Gabriel Williams, Robert Reff
The Strategic Planning Initiative 6 team engaged the Assessment Council in an interactive feedback session in which
Initiative team members challenged the Assessment Council members to brainstorm 1) Roadblocks: things that are
getting in the way of working towards the Culture of Inquiry and 2) Solutions: what are their ideas for how to get past
those roadblocks? The Initiative members will take this information into consideration as they move towards writing
formal proposals for taking action towards their goals. The following are discussion points that arose throughout the
small and large group discussions.
Roadblocks Brainstorm: One person quickly noticed that the roadblocks listed fell into 3 categories, as outlined below.



Data
o
What data are we legally allowed to collect and share? How long should it be stored? Some data are
difficult to collect due to confidentiality.
o It would be helpful if there was a systematic way to access data across departments; to know what
others are collecting & how to access it.
o We need to make sure data is being compared appropriately, not comparing apples to oranges.
o There is a gap in utilization of information that is gathered; there is a lot of unused data on campus.
o We need access to more expertise in data analysis.
Support/Time
o We lack institutional memory both in terms of what happens to students before, during & after college.
o Turnover in positions makes it difficult to preserve knowledge within the department/division.
o Sometimes the easy/quick solution can seem more appealing: instant gratification.
o There’s a learning curve: learning to think in broader terms, making connections across the university
 Need more training on different methodologies
 How do we know what to do to get to where we want to go?
 How do we get others in the department engaged in and excited about assessment? How can
we create buy-in and investment for the long term?
o IRB is a difficult, time consuming process; intimidating for first time submitters.
o Lack of time dedicated for reflection (the initial question, interpretation of results, etc.)
o There is risk in assessment; what if we only find out information that we already know? What if I find
out my program doesn’t work?
Territorial Roadblocks/Communication & Community
o Some people or units are territorial with data.
o Collaborative efforts can/should be prioritized.
o There is a need for community building activities.
o Modeling best practices
o Lack of transparency; how will this data be used?
1
Solutions Brainstorm: One theme that’s consistent across the solutions is “continuity.”



Data
o
o
University-wide student data policy
Utilize existing data by collecting identification numbers in order to combat survey fatigue; this also
provides opportunities for deeper data analysis.
o Conduct read alongs with students in order to ensure that they fully understand survey questions to
improve data quality
o Data curriculum which showcases which data is housed where.
o Add layers to the model; where does an individual’s role reside in the model?
o Create data checkpoints; check in with others to verify that the data is useful. Ask how the data ties into
the culture of inquiry & the division
o Draw upon the expertise in the room
Support/Time
o Increased FTE dedicated to assessment
o Training and coaching ideas
 Time management
 How to get through IRB
o Create a culture of prioritizing assessment & making time for it (with support from leadership)
o Conduct a 1-year study in which we ask /Assessment Council members to track how much time is spent
on assessment and indicate what value was added by taking that time.
Territorial Roadblocks/Communication & Community
o Encourage an environment of collaboration, partnerships, transparencies
o Create/maintain a safe space where people can share their “wins” and “failures”
o Group dialogue to process how we can do things better
o Performance evaluations: How are employees reviewed with regard to assessment (quality vs.
quantity)? Is assessment in their job description?
o How are department leaders supporting assessment efforts?
o What is really driving fear around/resistance to assessment?
o How do we instill an “open source” nature to what we do? “We win together”
o Identify and communicate what the important benchmarks/expectations are around assessment; set
units up for success rather than making them guess at what is important.
o Cultivate true belief and buy-in on the power of assessment
After the group discussion, Daniel shared some of the observations he has made during his first two months at OSU. This
presentation has been e-mailed to Assessment Council members. Please contact Daniel with any questions you may
have.
Next Meeting:
October 9, 2013
9:00 am-10:30 am
MU Council Room
2