ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE

Minutes of November 12, 2004

Board Room - 11:00 a.m. (Morning Session)

 

The morning session was convened by President Gaertner at 11:10 a.m.; a quorum was present.  The sign-in sheet from the List Serve is attached.  In attendance were Jim Dudek, Troy Ferguson, Ursula Gaertner, Marilyn Kockrow, Geraldine Little Whiteman, Joan Nelson, Janet Red Feather, Verine White, Susie White Thunder, and Gerry Giraud.  EXCUSED ABSENCES include Shannon Amiotte, Stephanie Charging Eagle, Trudy Ecoffey, Shauna Pourier, and Irvine Twin.  ABSENT were William Swanson and Karen White Butterfly.

 

Ursula said the President asked us to discuss the concept of a University, and to consider a center of excellence in the areas of research, learning and development.

 

Discussion ensued about the need for credentialed people.  More PhD’s would be needed to sustain graduate level programs.  In some fields, Master’s degrees are considered terminal (e.g., the MSW).  We should be thoughtful about where we require these degrees.

 

Someone questioned whether a doctorate would help Lakota Studies instructors teach Lakota better.

 

Ursula asked for a Motion to determine whether we want a University.  Most committee members felt the President was, at this stage, only requesting that we discuss the issue (brainstorm ideas).

 

Joan mentioned some far-reaching ideas for the Nursing Department.  Through articulation agreements and other enhancements, could there be a Nurse Practitioner’s program?  Wellness clinics could be developed within communities staffed by NP’s.  Make it a Lakota perspective to integrate traditional health and healing and obviate the need to travel to Rapid for services.

 

Gerry mentioned a BSN is in the original strategic plan.  Joan didn’t see it there and wondered whether we could pull in faculty at competitive salaries with those of other institutions.  We could consult the Chronicle of Higher Ed for guidelines.  We could coordinate with IHS to get more care out to the community, more crisis centers.

 

Discussion ensued as to whether there was a threshold question to discuss, that is, whether we really wanted to become a university.  The question was raised, what can’t we accomplish as a community college or four year college that we can as a university?  Are there funding/grant implications?

 

Gerry G. suggested we look around the state and notice that “the university is the trend.  Ursula hearkened us back to our name change in 1984, suggesting the desire to become a university is part of the swell of positive emotion in the emerging college.

 

Joan says the key issue is whether we retain our standard as a place of excellence, regardless of what we call ourselves.  Our graduates want to progress to keep pace with national standards and to further develop for the benefit of the reservation.

 

Ursula asked for a shift in focus to the issue of assessment, since we’re that committee.  What does it mean?  Do we follow the national testing standard?

 

Gerry suggested we considered the implications of moving away from open enrollments toward academic standards that restrict enrollments.

 

Janet raised a point of order and asked whether we could offer ideas under the three headings of learning, research and development.  The group, after general discussion, indicated the committee was not ready to discuss those areas until it had resolved the threshold issue of whether to become a university. 

 

Ursula mentioned we need exit criteria for our developmental courses in English and Math.

 

Gerry said we need to coordinate with the high schools to prepare students for college, and asked whether we have some control here with our GED program.

 

Ursula mentioned that absenteeism is a big problem in the high schools.

 

Jim stated we need statistics on the percentage of HS students who go on to attend college.

 

Gerry stated we need an assessment entrance exam that would determine that students are prepared to enter the program at the college level; if they are not, that needs to be addressed through the appropriate referrals to services.

 

It was suggested that there be more dialogue/input into the governance on the reservation and work with the tribal council so that concerns about education could be addressed by the political system.  We were adjourned for lunch at 11:56 a.m.

 

ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

November 12, 2004

Board Room -- 1:12 p.m. (Afternoon Session)

 

Call to Order.  Chairperson Ursula Gaertner called the afternoon session to order at 11:12 p.m.

 

2. Prayer.  Verine White offered the opening prayer in Lakota.

 

3. Roll call of members present.  Ursula asked for roll call.  In attendance were Jim Dudek, Troy Ferguson, Ursula Gaertner, Marilyn Kockrow, Geraldine Little Whiteman, Joan Nelson, Janet Red Feather, Verine White, Susie White Thunder, and Gerry Giraud.  EXCUSED ABSENCES include Shannon Amiotte, Stephanie Charging Eagle, Trudy Ecoffey, Shauna Pourier, and Irvine Twin.  ABSENT were William Swanson, and Karen White Butterfly.

 

4. Reading of Minutes of October 15, 2004.  MOTION by JOAN to approve the Minutes with friendly amendments, SECONDED by Susie and passed UNANIMOUSLY.

 

5. Officers’ Reports:  Officers Marilyn and Janet had nothing to report.  Ursula will see that we are provided with copies of The Role of Grades in Assessment.

 

6. Committee reports:

 

            a. Gerry, Ursula and Jim will stay with the current policy and move it forward through the system. 

 

            b. Per Gerry G., the Gen Ed proposal passed PWO, but they need Mike F. to “walk it” up here for Board approval.  Then we’ll have a basis for choosing the Gen Ed assessment

 

            c. Professional Development Committee:  In the area of assessment, per Jim and Ursula, the timing is not fortuitous.  Gerry G. will offer a workshop.  Jim wants to see critical thinking and holistic approaches emphasized.  Gerry will Email typical assessment topics.  Gerry will be happy to keep development opportunities gathered in some sort of binder and be responsible for centralization so faculty know where to check for or report opportunities.

 

            d. The Flow Chart hasn’t been not assigned.  Gerry said we should work with it, but not just yet.

 

Ursula noted that the Institutional Assessment Calendar has already been approved by the Assessment Committee and can be moved to PWO for acceptance.  Ursula will Email a copy to Joan and we’ll take it up at the next agenda.

 

Marilyn and Jim asked where we access faculty evaluations in order to have them timely concluded.  Gerry G. reported they’re still working on some things but that the forms should be up and running on computers at the college centers.        

            e. The 2002-03 Assessment Report -- summary of what’s happened with assessment in that year regarding Developmental/Gen Ed/and Depts. -- we need a record for this year.  Gerry pointed out that NCA does not require us to assessment everything every year.  Departments decide upon their assessment individually.  Gerry will send a notice out to through the committees.

 

7.  New Business:

 

            a. Discussion ensued about the function of the PRAXIS, the CAPP and the COMPASS tests.  We should consider which test(s) we want to use.  At the end of the two-year core, we need to determine whether students have the skills we want them to.  A draft of the assessment report will be sent to all employees.  Craig Howe has developed a Lakota knowledge test that will be built into the program.

 

            b. We have a verbal promise from Tom to provide budgetary support for the COMPASS tests and other assessment activities.

 

8. Announcements:  None were offered at this time.

 

9. Adjournment:  MOTION to adjourn by SUSIE, seconded by MARILYN.  The meeting was adjourned at 2:08 pm.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Janet Red Feather,

Recorder

 

EXHIBITS:  The sign-in sheet and proposed agenda are attached.  Also attached is “ Exhibit “A”, General Education Assessment (5 pages).