COUNCIL ON ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT (CAA)
MINUTES, NOVEMBER 8, 2007
UNH 107, 3:30 – 5:00
Members present: Irina Birman, Seth Chaiken, , Sue Faerman, Bill Lanford, Joette Stefl-
Mabry, Bruce Szelest, ManKit Tse, Rose-Marie Weber, Peter Duchessi, Anna Politano,
Stacey Chen
Members absent: David Wills, Kristina Bendikas, Mike Christakis, Marjorie Pryse, Bill
Roberson
Lanford convened the meeting and welcomed Anna Politano to the Council as an
undergraduate student representative.
Review and discussion of the minutes of the September 20, 2007 culminated in a
clarification by Lanford that GEAC was not being asked at this time to take on the
assessment of other university-wide programs, but he would like to discuss this issue at
some future date. The minutes were approved as written.
A preliminary committee membership list was distributed and amended. The re-worked
Program Review Committee and General Education Committee membership rosters are
attached.
It was noted that the GENERAL GUIDING PROCEDURES AND PROTOCOL OF THE
COUNCIL ON ACADEMIC ASSESSMENT (CAA) most recently circulated have
“draft” at the top of them. It was agreed that the Sept version of this document was
should be considered the final version. Szelest agreed to distribute electronically to all
members along with the minutes of the Nov 8 meeting. Please see the attached MS Word
doc.
Szelest presented to the Council, via overhead projector, an Excel file that details the
planned student learning assessment activities of each academic program that has
developed assessment plans to-date. He noted that while much activity has been planned,
we do not know exactly where academic programs are in executing their assessment
plans. Next steps are for his office to distribute these summaries back to the deans and
ask them to provide updates in the near future on what has been carried out, how results
have been used to inform the curriculum and student learning, and to note any changes to
these plans going forward. He also noted that we (the University) need to do a better job
of following up with academic departments in the future, and in providing them with any
assistance needed to better execute and make use of assessment results. Documenting
the closing the loop activities will also be crucial to our Middle States re-accreditation
efforts going forward.1
1 Our decennial Middle States self-study is due spring 2010, but preparation is beginning now.
Council members asked if the assessment summary by academic program could be made
available to all programs going forward to give our faculty and program directors
examples of what others are doing. Szelest indicated this could be done.
Two other issues arose in discussion:
1. Some members thought it would be helpful to include on the assessment summary
report other measures that indicate level of department instructional activity and
faculty resources. Szelest noted that those data are already available
systematically via the Electronic Department Profiles maintained by IRPE. They
and other related information can be visited from the IRPE web page at:
http://www.albany.edu/ir/whatdata.htm
2. Other members inquired about assessment resources for both the Council and for
programs in the process of developing their self-study. Szelest noted that it might
be helpful to have a workshop or training session for the Council at some future
meeting date that Roberson, Bendikas, and he might facilitate. There seemed to
be a general sense of consensus among those present that this would be a good
idea. In the meantime, he noted that the Director of Program Review and
Assessment now maintains an Assessment Web site with numerous resources,
including disciplinary examples, that can be found at
http://www.albany.edu/assessment/
Szelest then distributed handouts prepared by he and Bendikas (see attached) and
discussed the overall process that this campus uses to assess the General Education
categories on a rolling basis. This is the execution of the University Senate approved
General Education Assessment Plan. There are a number of roles played by the Gen Ed
Assess Subcommittee that was constituted under the Gen Ed Committee of UAC, and
now those functions have presumably moved to the CAA’s Gen Ed Assessment
Committee, which is now being formed. Szelest agreed to present again this process
summary to the CAA’s Gen Ed Assessment Committee at a future meeting of its
choosing.
The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Bruce Szelest
