LIST OF EXHIBITS FOR STANDARD 2

EXHIBIT  2c.4

 NCATE Standard 2 Meeting Minutes January 2006

At this meeting, the committee discussed using data for program improvement, assignments for specific action plan tasks, and narratives for each of the COEHD departments.

NCATE Standard II

Meeting Minutes

January 10, 2006

The meeting was brought to order by Chairperson Flo Winstead. Members in attendance were Thomas Cothern (LPSB), John Trowbridge, Camille Yates, and Cheryl Edwards.

Non-attendance: Thomas Caffery, Jason Hancock, Thomas Devaney, Michelle Hall, Dee Jacobsen, and Danny Acosta

AGENDA ITEM #1: Ms. Winstead reported that Danny Acosta, a faculty member in the Math Department, College of Science and Technology, has joined the committee, although he was not present.

AGENDA ITEM #2:  The minutes from the December meeting were approved.

The committee revisited procedures for formal complaints.  The group learned that procedures are found in the student handbook.  Procedures for requesting changes in grades are found in the catalogue.  It was pointed out that we do not collect anecdotal data from candidates that is used to assess programs, although students provide such in SOTs, which are given to individual course professors/instructors.  Dr. Trowbridge noted that SOTs data are also forwarded to the department head.  There are mechanisms by which candidates can lodge complaints and voice their concerns. These are usually resolved by individual professors/instructors, the department head, and/or the dean. There are student representatives on the dean’s committee that can speak for candidates in this forum.  Ms. Winstead will follow-up at the DAC for clarifications of “formal complaints” and summarization of resolutions.

Ms. Winstead and Dr. Yates are also members of the portfolio committee, which will facilitate communication and sharing of information between that committee and ours.

AGENDA ITEM #3: Review Action Plan

Ms. Winstead reviewed the Action Plan with the committee.

            Action Plan Item #5:  PASS-PORT—When students apply for the current graduate program, they are required to complete the four M-PEC questionnaires.  It is expected that students will do the same in the redesigned grad program slated to begin in June 2006.

Ms. Winstead reported that she will present information on the assessment system (request for information – formal complaint procedures) at the January 18 DAC (Dean’s Administrative Council) meeting.

            Action Plan Item #3: Change “gate” to “portal.”

            Action Plan Item #2: Use of Data—Dr. Trowbridge asked for a list of all assessments from Ms. Winstead. He drafted a form of assessments, noting what they are, who administers them, who sees them, and what actions are taken and by whom.  (Attachment)  An area to be addressed is what actions are taken by the person who sees the assessment reports.  A myriad of reports can be generated through PASS-PORT. Others are available through the Office of Institutional Research. 

AGENDA ITEM #4:

            Action Plan Item #1: The committee will write a narrative to clearly describe the Assessment System by the February meeting. 

1. Assessment System: The assessment will be divided into program sections.  We can combine initial preparation undergraduate and graduate (MAT) programs in the report.  We need to include the recently update COEHD Conceptual Framework. The committee noted that the key assessments used to monitor candidate performance are identified in the chart.  The chart noting assessments to be completed in each portal can be translated to a narrative.
2. Data Collection, Analysis, & Evaluation:  We need to show how the electronic system is used.  We need to pull out sections in the main chart to include in various sections of the report in this section of the report.
3. Use of Data for Program Improvement: Dr. Trowbridge suggested looking at the rubric guidelines (Unacceptable, Acceptable, Target), because we also need to identify improvements in regard to the unit, faculty performance, candidate achievement, etc. Dr. Trowbridge will continue to work on this.

NOTE: On February, 1, 2007, the SPA reports are due.

Other tasks assigned:

*  Dr. Devaney and Dr. Jason Hancock will work on the assessment system narrative for Ed. Leadership, including procedures for data collection and analysis.

*  Ms. Winstead will develop a flowchart of procedures.

*  Tommy Cothern (LPSB) will facilitate Employer/Employee Follow-up collection of data with Livingston Parish teacher and principal surveys near the end of the semester.

*  Dr. Yates will draft information on the initial undergrad and grad (MAT) assessment system. 

*  In the narrative, we do not need to address a strategic plan, as in 1999 the COEHD Strategic Plan for 2006 Report was set forth.  Ms. Winstead has a copy of this report, and it is available on the NCATE Exhibit Room (website). We need to show what was and what was not achieved. Dr. Edwards will draft a response on this.

    The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, February 14, 2006, 2:00-4:00, TEC #2013.