September 16, 2011
|Members Present||Ex-Officio Present||Guests Present|
|Ruth Beattie||Richard Greissman||Leah Simpson|
|David Royster||Bill Rayens||Chris Thuringer|
|Ben Withers||Mike Shanks|
1. Approval of Minutes – there was not a quorum present. Will be circulated by email and voted on.
2. Revised Assessment Plan – the goal was to officially endorse the plan but we could not do that since we only had three voting members present. Those attending the meeting did discuss the plan at length and the general sentiment was that the plan should be endorsed. It was also agreed that a statement about ownership of the Core and the problem of securing raters should be drafted and attached to the endorsement. During this discussion Simpson and Rayens explained the valid, yet simpler, rating plan in the revised proposal. Both noted how it was constructive pushback from the College of Arts and Sciences, particularly through Dean Kornbluh speaking on behalf of the A&S faculty and their Chairs, that led to these changes. Debra Sharp suggested there was precedence for using retired faculty to act as raters, if the need should arise.
3. Multisectioned Courses – the Committee discussed a complaint that was registered by a faculty member who does not agree that courses with multiple sections should either all be UK Core or none be UK Core. Rayens and Greissman agreed to set up a meeting with this faculty member to discuss this further, if necessary. It was also agreed that this complaint was most likely one that was best handled at the Department level, or the College level. Discussed ensued on how to make sure others are not confused on these and related UK Core issues. It was decided that there should be an attempt to get Department Chairs and DUS together on a regular basis to discuss the UK Core. Rayens was charged with trying to set up an initial 7:30 a.m. breakfast meeting. This was preferred to a first suggestion of having IGEOC members go to departmental meetings.
4. Rubric Subcommittees – the following subcommittee structure was set up by Rayens. This action did not require a vote of any kind:
Arts and Creativity – Ben Withers will Chair, and he will recruit 2-3 other people
Social Sciences – Jane Jensen will Chair, and she will recruit 2-3 other people
NMPH – Ruth Beattie will Chair, and she will recruit 2-3 other people
Foundations – David Royster will Chair, and he will recruit 2-3 other people
SIR – Heather Bush will Chair, and she will recruit 2-3 other people
Humanities – We do not have a Chair but it was suggested that Rayens go to the Humanities Template
Committee to try and find a Chair and, perhaps, members.
It was also suggested that the four Inquiry rubric committee chairs meet and agree on the same set of criteria, all pointing to overarching program outcome 1, though the performance indicators might all be different. Same was suggested for the Quantitative Foundations and Statistical Inferential Reasoning rubric committees. Chairs agreed to have rubrics completely finished by the end of this semester (Fall 2011). All rubric committees should work with Leah Simpson from the Office of Assessment.
5. Other – No formal discussion was had concerning the UK Core Exceptions Subcommittee Proposal, but a very lively and informative discussion ensued about transfer issues. The discus