August 30, 2010 minutes
Henderson State University Assessment Team
Dawson Room, 4:00 p.m.
August 30, 2010
Present: Jeff Bailey, Lenette Bailey, Deborah Coventry, Lecia Franklin, Bernie Hellums, Margaret Hoskins, Pam Ligon, Vernon Miles, Ginger Otwell, Phillip Schroeder, Brett Serviss, Wrenette Tedder, and Bob Yehl
Absent: Joyce Shepherd, Karen Spradlin
Next Meeting: September 13, 2010
Chairman Schroeder called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. He welcomed Lenette Bailey who is replacing David Thigpen as a team member.
Phillip commented that he did not find a replacement for former team member, Matthew Bailey. Wrenette Tedder informed the group that Carl Stark has found a graduate student replacement.
Recognizing unit success: Much discussion was given as to how to select the first outstanding academic and non-academic units for recognition in their assessment endeavors this year.
A committee was formed to develop a rubric for selecting future units to recognize. Brett Serviss, Pam Ligon and Wrenette Tedder will serve on this committee. Brett will act as chair. The committee will have a rubric in place by the November 8 meeting for the entire team to review.
The Team agreed that recognition will be an annual award. The academic unit will be identified during the Faculty Excellence Awards in the fall. The non-academic unit will be acknowledged in the spring during the Staff Awards. An announcement will be included in the September newsletter. Wrenette will look over the assessment plans and suggest outstanding units for the Team to consider.
Target units in need of assistance: The goal this year is to have completed assessment plans for all 84 units. No holes. The Team will focus their efforts on those units requiring the most assistance completing their plans. A more proactive approach in aiding those units will be necessary. The Team may continue providing assessment workshops opportunities to those areas.
According to a rubric developed by the Assessment Office, a 1-4 rating was given to the assessment plans. Those rated a zero or one requires the most attention. Those rated a two are partially fulfilling and those receiving a three only have minor revisions. There are 4 academic units with a rating of 1 and 2 academic units receiving a zero rating. Three of the non-academic units received a rating of one. Eight academic and 13 non-academics units received a two rating. The primary focus will be targeted those units with a zero and one rating.
The meeting adjourned at 5:03 p.m.
Pam Ligon, secretary