2017 Agenda

December 11, 2017

Time

11am - noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Tami Eitle

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (University Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Review a first rough draft of Core 2.0 Curriculum Committee Mission, Charge and Areas of Responsibility and Membership and provide feedback and revisions. This is meant to start a conversation.
• General Education Mission and Program Outcomes(we currently have a mission statement and goals, then individual learning outcomes for each Core area, but no program-level outcomes.

Desired Outcomes

• Suggested revisions/changes to draft
• Strategies for obtaining input from faculty on general education learning outcomes

Topics For Future Meetings

• Review of Update Core Recommendations to see what of use to our discussion might be in that documentation.

Please review the new Assessment and Outcome Committee (AOC) webpage.

You can find the current Core 2.0 mission and goals here.

Core 2.0 Curriculum Committee page

November 13, 2017

Time

11am - noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Tami Eitle

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (University Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Introduction to Core Equivalency Review Committee (CERC) considerations (Discussion of AP seminar, Discussion of request to waive Q core)

Desired Outcomes

• Understanding the AP Seminar course and looking at a sample syllabus.
• Thoughts about process to handle some standard requests like waiving the Q due to learning disability.

Topics For Future Meetings

• Structure and membership in Core Curriculum Committee and Steering Committees
• Review of Update Core Recommendations to see what of use to our discussion might be in that documentation.

October 30, 2017

Time

11am - noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Tami Eitle

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (Univ. Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Plan for learning more about what is happening in all of our current Core 2.0 courses (collect syllabi, look at enrollments, what courses are not being taught, look at what other data????)
• Begin brainstorming what learning outcomes (knowledge and skills) are critical for all students.
• Brainstorm strategies we might use to gather input from faculty to inform our future discussions of learning outcomes for our General Education Program.

Desired Outcomes

• Data we want to collect on current Core 2.0 courses
• Brainstormed list of possible learning outcomes
• List of potential strategies to gather input from faculty

Topics for Future Meetings

• Structure and membership in Core Curriculum Committee and Steering Committees
• Review of Update Core Recommendations to see what of use to our discussion might be in that documentation.

To Get the Conversation started:

• Through study in the sciences and mathematics, social sciences, humanities, histories, languages, and the arts

Focused by engagement with big questions, both contemporary and enduring

Intellectual and Practical Skills, Including

• Inquiry and analysis
• Critical and creative thinking
• Written and oral communication
• Quantitative literacy
• Information literacy
• Teamwork and problem 

Practiced extensively, across the curriculum, in the context of progressively more challenging problems, projects, and standards for performance

Personal and Social Responsibility, Including

• Civic knowledge and engagement — local and global
• Intercultural knowledge and competence
• Ethical reasoning and action
• Foundations and skills for lifelong learning

Anchored through active involvement with diverse communities and real-world challenges

Integrative and Applied Learning, Including

• Synthesis and advanced accomplishment across general and specialized studies

October 9, 2017

Time

11am-noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Rachel Anderson (Keely Holmes will keep minutes)

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (Univ. Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Use rubric to assess Core 2.0 program
• Review Core 2.0 Assessment Report Draft

Desired Outcomes

• Talking points for Accreditation Visit

Accreditation Visit Meeting

Core 2.0 Curriculum Committee meets with evaluators at 11am on Monday, Oct. 16 (Tentative, time could still change)

October 2, 2017

Time

11am - noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Tami Eitle and Rachel Anderson (Keely Holmes will keep minutes)

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (University Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Review Posted Steering Committee Membership and Charge for Sterring Committees (8 - 10 minutes)
• Review Assessment Plans and Reports for Core 2.0 using NWCCU rubric (20 minutes)
• Discuss key points for overall assessment of Core 2.0 (see notes below) (20 minutes)

Desired Outcomes

• Data and notes to use for a draft of overall Assessment report for Core 2.0 (State of Core and State of Assessment of Core)

Notes about Core 2.0 Assessment:

1. No assessment plan for Core 2.0 overall
2. Individual learning outcomes for each Core area instead of Core 2.0 outcomes
3. Implementation of Assessment is by Core area and is disparate and inconsistent
4. Pretty certain that individual core courses do not all include Core area learning outcomes in syllabi which makes it difficult/impossible for curriculum to align with outcomes
5. Measures - Validity and Reliability have been low
6. Feedback? Has there been any feedback before now?
7. Results used? Individually within some areas (US and Q) there is evidence that the results have been used.
8. How does this inform us? What is the plan moving forward?
   1. Possibilities for discussion:
      1. Develop a cohesive overall Core 2.0 assessment plan and process 
      2. Develop a set of Core 2.0 learning outcomes rather than having outcomes for each core area.
      3. Come up with a better data collections strategy
      4. Define measurable, valid measures
      5. Define procedures to ensure inter-rater reliability 
      6. Define process of feedback on assessments and closing the loop using a centralized committee (like this one).

September 25, 2017

Time

11am - noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Tami Eitle and Rachel Anderson (Keely Holmes will keep minutes)

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (University Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Review Assessment Plans and Reports for Core 2.0 using NWCCU rubric (50 minutes)
• Review Posted Steering Committee Membership and Charge for Steering Committees (5 minutes)

Desired Outcomes

• Data and notes to use for a draft of overall Assessment report for Core 2.0 (State of Core and State of Assessment of Core) 

September 18, 2017

Time

11am - noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Tami Eitle and Rachel Anderson (Keely Holmes will keep minutes)

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (University Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Review Minutes from 9-11-2017 meeting (3-5 minutes)
• Questions about how Core 2.0 is represented in MSU's Seven Year Self-Study (5 minutes)
• Begin review of Assessment Process (20 minutes)
• Begin review of Assessment Plans and Reports for Core 2.0 (25 minutes)
• Review Posted Steering Committee Membership and Charge for Steering Committees (5 minutes)

Desired Outcomes

• Common understanding of how Core 2.0 and its assessment is represented in MSU Seven Year Self-Study
• Clarity of Current Assessment Process and begin thinking about improvement or alternatives.
• Assignments for next meeting: Review other Core 2.0 Assessment Plans and Reports.

September 11, 2017

Time

11am-noon

Location

Reid 415

Facilitators

Tami Eitle and Rachel Anderson (Keely Holmes will keep minutes)

Committee

Doug Downs (W), John Lund/Beth Burroughs (Q), Greg Notess (Library), Michael Everts (Inquiry), Diane Donnelly (Univ. Studies), Dean Adams (R), Carl Igo (US), Deb Blanchard (US), Ada Giusti (D), Jack Brookshire (CS)

Agenda

• Introductions
• Update on Update Core (10 minutes)
• Core 2.0 and Accreditation (30-45 minutes)
• Review Core Steering committee membership/Future meeting agenda items (5 minutes)

Desired Outcomes

• Common understanding of how Core 2.0 and its assessment is represented in MSU Seven Year Self-Study
• Expectations of the Core 2.0 Committee during the accreditation visit Oct. 16-18
• Assignments for next meeting