SLOC Meeting Notes 2018-2019

May 6, 2019

Attendees: Janey Skinner, Janet Carpenter, Sheri Miraglia, Craig Kleinman, Cherisa Yarkin

1. Brainstorm ideas for increasing membership.

    a. Targeted outreach to department chairs, “who in your department is interested in assessment, or coordinates SLO assessment         for the department or course(s)?” or “Do you have an SLO coordinator? Can we invite them to join the SLO Committee?”

        Outreach to particular departments:

        Janet – Arts faculty, Social Science (Darlene)

        Craig – English, CS, CNIT

        Janey – Nursing, Culinary

    b. Consider changing the meeting day to Friday, since Mondays have many other meetings, and classes

        Check first with Dave and Andrea to make sure Fridays 11am – 12:30pm work for them.

    c. Participation may be higher if it was not always necessary for members to come to meetings at Ocean.

        Plan: Sept and Dec meetings in person at Ocean, Oct and Nov meetings via Zoom

    d. In SLO update, add a recruiting sentence (Craig will draft)

2. SLO Committee description

    a. Changes to 2 sentences in VIII. Description and Goals.

        […] Facilitate workgroups to r Review annual assessment plans and methods and timelines for CCSF GE, IGETC and CSU         pattern outcomes, and ILO assessment as well as refining outcomes

        […]Assist with Serve as a forum for campus-wide dialogue that demonstrates that assessment results are being used to evaluate         the effectiveness of the Mission.

3. SLO Committee chair 2019-2020: Janey Skinner (unanimous)

4.  Aggregate assessment language

    a. Add “optional” at the beginning of the Argos, future improvements, and highlights questions

    b. Revise wording of PSLO prompt “based on your experience” section, “Review how well course outcomes map to PSLOs.”

5. CurricUNET training deferred to fall

6.  ACCJC May 2019 conference debrief (3A: Institutional Assessment of General Education to Strengthen Student Equity Initiatives)

    a. 80+ in the audience, feedback “most useful SLO talk we heard”

    b. This presentation was a nice progression starting 2 yrs ago with a talk about tools (CurricUNET), this time about using the tools,         and then next time, if we have the resources, showing how we made meaning and closed the loop.

    c. Other presentations of interest were Greg Stoup (A New Theory of Change) and the 5/2 plenary by Terry Hartle, (Seeking Sense         from Washington: A Moving Target).  

7. ILO 2 Report

    a. Has been reviewed by the Planning Committee, accepted by the Academic Senate, and presented to the PGC, where it was         received well. Comment “it is very well written and easy to read.”

    b. Information item for the Board of Trustees (checking on process).

    c. SLO web pages to be updated: Dashboard and Reports (plan to eliminate duplication in future website simplification)

8. GELO D&F report will be pulled together in Sheri’s remaining time (probably over the summer). Sheri likely will not have reassign     time in fall for SLO coordination, so she will hand off the stewarding of the report through the process.

9. Extra drop-in hours for end of semester.

    a. SLO coordinators to update the SLO Coordinators or CurricUNET Help calendars with their offerings.

    b. Check with Center deans about support needs

        Craig –Evans, Mission, John Adams, Downtown

        Janey- China Town

10.  Plus/Delta evaluation

    a. Good committee chair, organized, good at facilitation and staying with the agenda.

    b. Activity for the ILO 2 report qualitative analysis was great.

    c. Meetings are where the work of the committee happens. Aim for activity at every meeting.

    d. Trello has worked well.

 

April 8, 2019

Attendees: Janet Carpenter, Janey Skinner, Sheri Miraglia, Craig Kleinman, Dion Libutti, Cherisa Yarkin

1. ILO 2 Report

    a. Expanding participation in discussion of the ILO 2 report
        * Schedule a Flex workshop. Sheri will pilot this idea in Spring 2020 with the GE Areas D/F report.
        * Create short video summaries of key points (2-4min). Dave has expertise, returning fall 2019. Could also tape the 5/2/19                         presentation to the PGC via Zoom.
        * Make a presentation of the report to the Communication Studies Dept.
        * Share the report with the SSO Workgroup.

    b. Aspects of the report

        * Communication (ILO 2) is an important theme noted at multiple levels at the college. This report uses multiple measures,             including:
            - structured conversations addressing specifically ILO 2.b. in Flex Day and subsequent departmental discussions, SSO                 Workgroup, Associated Students.
            - review of CCSSE results, GE Area A results.
        * New section added: Value of a Communication ILO. Input from committee: make an explicit connection to CCSF’s mission.
        * Mapping has improved since the prior ILO 2 report, showing CQI in that process. More than 70% good mappings.
        * Since the life of the report is in engagement, keep but adjust section on page 3/4 with prompts about “topics the report touches             on” that might help readers to focus as they read.
        *No changes proposed to ILO 2 language.
        * Question: Table 4 (p 9) meaning of “enrolled but not assessed” – clarification: assessment of ILO 2 is ground-up, from SLOs             mapped to PSLOs that map to the ILO. This category reflects students enrolled in classes where mapped SLOs were assessed,             but who themselves were not assessed for that SLO.

    c. Next steps for the ILO 2 report.

        * Craig will finalize the report, incorporating feedback from today’s meeting, and create a slide show draft for the 5/2/19 PGC             presentation.
        * Janey will present to PGC.

2. SLO Websites

    a. Looked at Skyline, Sacramento City College, San Diego, Long Beach
    b. Liked:
        i. Team picture
        ii. Links to clearly formatted and readable examples of assessments for both SLOs and SSOs
        iii. Description of roles (faculty, administrators, SLO coordinators)
            1. Information/links organized by role
            2. e.g., on landing page, tabs for each role
        iv. Clean, uncluttered, concise frameworks
        v.  Immediacy, clarity of language and presentation

    c. What makes a good website? A place where people can get questions answered. Link to accreditation, but not the central         message/purpose. Communicates importance of complete cycle, including reassessment after changes. Clarity, simplicity, ease         of keeping updated.

    d. Primary audience those responsible for conducting assessment; faculty, some classified, and admin.

 

March 4, 2019

Attendees: Janet Carpenter, Jen Kienzle, Janey Skinner, Sheri Miraglia, Craig Kleinman, Dion Libutti, Terrance Chuck, Cherisa Yarkin

- Welcome and introductions

- Meeting schedule: Agreed to adjust meeting schedule to meet 4 times a semester, on the first or second Monday of the full months. Will cancel the 3/18 mtg, next meeting is 4/8.

- Activity on qualitative data from conversations on ILO 2b

Chair had prepared materials for qualitative analysis of the responses received to the Flex day activity for ILO 2.b. - demonstrate respectful interpersonal and intercultural communication.

Data reviewed included all 24 responses received through 2/27/19.

Committee worked in pairs, each of which reviewed one of the 4 questions on response form:

1. What is your understanding of ILO 2-B? What does it mean to you?

2. What are we doing well regarding ILO 2-B? Please give specific examples from your department.

3. What could we do better to help students achieve ILO 2-B? Please give specific suggestions of things your department could do.

4. Any other thoughts that you would want included in the assessment of ILO 2 on communication?

Identified 4- 5 common themes among the responses to each question, and color coded for later synthesis by the SLO coordinators. 

- Reviewed the CCSSE data related ILO 2, and discussed implications. Highlights where CCSF students reported higher levels than the CCSSE 2017 cohort as a whole include more often citing receiving or providing peer tutoring, and citing that the college encourages contact among students from different economic, social, and racial or ethnic backgrounds. Number of books read can also be seen as related to communication. 

Areas where CCSF students reported lower levels include discussing grades or an assignment with an instructor, making fewer class presentations, writing fewer than 5 papers (of any length) in a semester. Regarding discussions of grades and assignments, members noted it might be a good thing that students do not feel the need to discuss grades or assignments with faculty, as that could indicate faculty are communicating clearly and effectively on those topics, reducing the need for individual follow-up. Questions about the lower ratings on presentations/papers included whether CCSF has a higher percentage of CTE courses/lower number of students enrolled in English courses than the CCSSE cohort,  or more PT students (as taking fewer units would lead to fewer assignments per semester). 

- Presentation to the ASCCC SLO Consortium (January 2019) was well received. CCSF is in the forefront of making SLO assessment meaningful, and using disaggregated data. Other colleges are interested. Most colleges are struggling with the idea of closing the loop, using what is learned via assessment to make meaningful change, figuring out how to tie assessment to other institutional initiatives like Equity and Guided Pathways. There is room for improvement in the procedural process of linking aggregate assessment to course outline revisions, but it is not clear that other colleges have figured out how to do that well either. Sheri and Craig will be making a similar presentation to the ACCJC conference in May, and Craig will be attending a ASCCC curriculum conference on 3/15/19. 

- Continuing discussions from last time on the prompts for aggregate assessment, reviewed and approved changes. Need to follow up on technical details of how re-ordered questions are implemented in CurricUNET.  There is more work to be done to help faculty understand why aggregate is required; we are working as a community to problem solve how to make assessment meaningful. Currently many aggregate assessment reports are perfunctory, but 10-20% indicate thoughtfulness and faculty/departmental conversations and could be shared out as examples.

 

February 4, 2019

Attendees: Jeanne Lim, Jen Kienzle, Janet Carpenter, Natalie Smith, Cherisa Yarkin, Janey Skinner, Sheri Miraglia, Craig Kleinman

I. ILO 2 -- multiple methods ILO 2, look at the data with SLOC

ILO assessment is based on mapping PSLOs (program student learning outcomes) to the subelements of the ILO. At CCSF, programs are defined as degrees and certificates. Course level SLOs map to PSLOs, so ILO assessment is based on the CRN-level assessment virtually all faculty conduct each semester.

For the ILO 2 report, summaries of the results of SLO Committee review of PSLO-to-ILO maps. Overall, 71% of the mappings were deemed valid, with the fewest valid mappings for ILO 2.b. - demonstrate respectful interpersonal and intercultural communication. It was also noted that, post unmapping, there was relatively little change in the overall calculation of SLO results (meets, developing, no evidence).

Idea: extend the analysis of # of cr/nc programs mapping to the ILO subelements, to report as a percentage of cr/nc programs.

Discussion of wording:
ILO 2.a. OK
ILO 2.b. Discussed demonstrate versus engage or express. Not a strong need for change.
ILO 2.c. "Recognize and interpret creative expression." Fewest programs mapped to 2c. Discussed whether the wording should be changed to be more general, which would still be in keeping with the CCSF mission. Programs such as CS could then map.

Q:do those writing new curriculum find it difficult to map to ILO 2? PSLOs can map to any of the subelements, is it a problem if one subelement has fewer maps? Note that the language of ILO 2.c. is not in the mission statement, so could be modified.

II. Look at aggregate assessment prompts and look for a few aggregate assessments to show

  1. Prompts are wordy, consider streamlining.
  2. Keep enough information to provide guidance to writer.
  3. Put subheadings at the start of each prompt, e.g., "looking back," "looking ahead."
  4. Combine or switch the order of prompts 2 and 3. Making changes in SLOs and in the course are inter-related.
  5. Include "click on report icon to access the outcome assessment summary data."
  6. Omit "reference individual CRN reports"
  7. Add "How to access your reports" at the end.
  8. Make clear other kinds of data can be inclued (e.g., Technical Advisory Committee recommendations, achievement gaps)
  9. Assure an updated example is available at the link at the top of the screen.
    Summary: Simplify, add headers, link to an example, combine the update curriculum/slo prompts.

III. What do you go to the SLO website for? what are the pages of the website that you use?

There is a lot of information available, which was helpful when time allowed for perusal.The SLO dashboard is referred to by SLO coordinators.
Members will email Janey if they find themselves using any of the SLO web pages in the upcoming month.

IV. SLO Committee members as a resource for CurricUNET too -- at a later mtg do some training?

All present interested. To be scheduled for upcoming meeting.

 

December 3, 2018

Attendees: Cherisa Yarkin, Janey Skinner (chair), Sheri Miraglia, Andrea Niosi, Janet Carpenter and Natalie Smith

 

aRecruitment for SLOC. Members agreed to reach out to faculty in their departments, and/or people who have expressed interest in assessment, and encourage them to join the committee. Recognized that recruitment to committees is a challenge across the college.

b. Feedback on using new Curricunet interface, routine CRN reports. SLO coordinators reported that there has not been much change to the level of support requests compared to last year. Discussed the value of providing flexibility in accessing support, via, e.g., offering SLO drop-in sessions, Zoom sessions, the online SLO help request form/email support, and the option to make appointments with coordinators. Discussed communication to faculty about CRN assessment reporting and aggregate assessments, with a focus on what the faculty find useful, how they would like make the reports work for their curriculum improvement efforts.

cUpcoming conferences. The proposal to the Annual ASCCC SLO Symposium  (Jan 25, 2019 in Santa Ana), "Institutional Assessment of General Education to Strengthen Student Equity Initiatives," was accepted. Sheri will draft the presentation slides, and share for feedback. Janey is backup presenter if needed. A similar proposal has been submitted to the ACCJC conference (Apr 30 - May 3 in Burlingame); anticipate notification of whether accepted in January.

dILO 2.

(i. Mapping/possibly look at some of the discordant mappings. It appears that this task was completed by SLO coordinator prior to this meeting. **omit?)

ii. Mapping ILO 2 and incorporating multiple methods. Discussed the prompts for the February Flex Day (we need to coordinate with the Professional Development Committee and HR that organizes Flex Day schedule and instructions.):

  • Looking at ILO 2b -- Demonstrate respectful interpersonal and intercultural communication.
  • For the ILO 2 Assessment Report, we would like some discussion across the institution of what we are doing well and where we could grow. Please include in your Faculty Meeting on Feb. 5 Flex Day a discussion of the following questions.
    • Please read ILO 2b: Demonstrate respectful interpersonal and intercultural communication.
      What are we doing well? Please give specific examples from your department.
      What could we do better? Please give specific suggestions of things your department could do.
      Any other thoughts that you would want included in the assessment of this ILO?
      Please put the notes of your discussion into this Google Form (one response per department). (or alternatively give us your notes -- but pretty please type them into the form for us...)


e. Update on GE reports D & F. Mapping is mostly done. ORP is working with vendor on tool to extract SLO reporting data from CurricUNET, and will update the Argos data block when those data become available. Reaffirmed GELO reporting approach by SLO team - data analysis to be presented via various venues (Academic Senate, student services, etc.) for reflection and use in improvement efforts by affected areas (rather than SLO team making recommendations).

fWebsite. Idea for spring 2019 is to start a clean list of items that are important to be available on the SLO web site, then use that list as the basis for the SLO pages on the new Drupal site, anticipating that work will occur sometime 2019-2020. Discussion: many existing pages can be archived, topics and coverage can be streamlined. 

November 6, 2018

Attendees: Janey Skinner (chair), Sheri Miraglia, Andrea Niosi, Janey Carpenter, Cherisa Yarkin

  • Recap of upcoming schedule: 
    Next SLO Committee meetings are on 12/3/18 and 2/4/19. For February Flex, SLO coordinators will offer a drop-in session to support curriculum updates.

  • Go over the examples from a GE and a CTE course about writing SLOs and discuss the process of writing SLOs. (How to write/revise your course SLOs)
    General education courses align with GE Area outcomes.
    CTE courses align with program outcomes. 
    Some courses may map to multiple GE Areas, programs, or both.
    (Programs map down to courses; courses map up to GELOs and ILOs)
    Both the Gen Ed and CTE examples look helpful. Agreement on aesthetics and ease of interpreting the images and overall depiction of the process in the CTE example. “More graphical is better.” Document can help faculty revise/consolidate existing course SLOs, and establish new ones.

  • Discuss ILO 2 plan to use Student Engagement Survey and Faculty Department discussions of 2-B at a Flex Day.

CCSSE – representative sample, research-based survey and analytics, systematic and reliable data. Agree that the 6-7 questions relating to communication make sense as part of the ILO #2 report.

Flex activity Feb 5, 2019–  SLO team will ask department chairs to include discussion of ILO 2.b, “Demonstrate respectful interpersonal and intercultural communication.” Team will create a simple online form for department chairs to submit responses to a couple of prompts. Activity creates an opportunity for faculty to discuss ILOs, which rarely happens otherwise. This topic fits well with other campus discussions such as equity and student experience.

Follow up: draft prompts for response form, set timeline for communication with department chairs and deans.        

  • SLO Consortium mtg -- submit a proposal?

SLO assessment conference in Santa Ana on January 25, 2019. Proposals are due 11/14. Suggestion: proposal under the disaggregation of assessment data topic area - Looking at Institutional Assessment Data Using an Equity Lens, focusing on our GELO reports. Sheri is willing to attend the conference to make the presentation.  

 

Half the meeting on mapping ILO 2

October 8, 2018

Attendees: Cherisa Yarkin, Andrea Nisoi, Janet Carpenter, Sheri Miraglia, Janey Skinner, Jennifer Kienzle, Natalie Smith

Agenda:

What have committee members heard about aggregate assessment?  Anything though the grapevine?  Janet reports that it's being done in Art, and she feels it's useful, particularly the look at equity along with the large number of reports.  Janey reported that her department has had some interesting discussions around which SLOs are preferentially being addressed.  It does not appear that so far it's been a huge problem to do the aggregate assessments along with course outline updates.

GE Area G2 Language - the committee has agreed to move the revision of CSU Area E language to match CCSF G2 to the Academic Senate for approval to make mapping of PE/Dance courses more logical.  We will propose using our G2 language and replacing CSU E.

Guidance Document for revising SLOs - The SLO Coordinators shared the draft they've created to assist faculty with writing SLOs.  Feedback generally is that this document would be useful, particuarly when writing SLOs.  The team will continue to work on refining and making the document more visually accessible.

6th Annual Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) Symposium is on Friday, January 25th at Santa Ana College. - CCSF coordinators/committee members/faculty are invited to attend.  Janey reviewed some of the topics that were covered last year.

ILO 2 Mapping Work - continuation.

September 10, 2018

Note:  Formal minutes were not kept for this meeting.  The following agenda was discussed:

Update on GE Area D/F Mapping
Update on GE Area Recommendations
Discuss Institutional Assessment Plan
GE Assessments and Program Review - should we make a connection
Update on SSO assessment
CRN level assessment completion
ILO 2 mapping discussion
Committee Membership

August 27, 2018

Attendees: Janey Skinner, Janet Carpenter, Cherisa Yarkin, Andrea Niosi

  1. Introductions

  1. Committee membership

    1. Janey has been appointed chair for this semester

    2. Action: Janey  will check who is officially on the committee (and Janey, Janet and Andrea will each check in with one or two people on the list on website)

    3. Action: SLO Committee website needs to be updated with verified current members

    4. Invite Wendy Miller

    5. Next meeting (9/10 1:00-2:30) and then see if folks come, if they don’t then switch back to 11-12:30 time slot (which is better for SLO coordinators)

    6. 9/19 ASEC meeting: ask for  assistance in recruiting new members; specifically members from departments  in the GELO areas under discussion this year (departments that are part of Area E; and Areas D & F, as the SLO team is getting started on that report)

  2. Institutional Assessment Plan

    1. New GE assessment timelines - all agreed on those proposed, and particularly the Area D & F combination given that F is a subset of D

    2. Action: Revise assessment plan with new GELO and ILO assessment timelines

    3. Clarification re Aggregate Assessments and Curriculum updates:  Agreed to the August 17, 2018 start date for the change regarding linking aggregate assessment to course outline updates, given that is the date that the new aggregate assessment prompts became available in CurricUNET


Role of recommendations in assessment reports

    1. Should institutional recommendations be developed by SLO Coordinators? College could be held accountable for seeing recommendations through.

    2. Change role of committee to facilitating the conversation around findings not making recommendations

      1. Which schools have meetings that the SLO coordinators could present at for current GELOs?

      2. Reports really highlight equity so we should present more to the equity committees

      3. To encourage wider use, suggest adding links for the ILO and GELO reports to the Program Review Data and Resources page, include in communications about data available for reflection and planning

  1. Area E discussion and review

  • agreed to change the title of the section about dialog from "college-wide" to "Academic Senate and Academic Senate SLO Committee discussion"

  • agreed to change from including list of specific suggestions, to emphasizing the findings from the data analysis

  • suggestion that SLO coordinators look into whether there are school meetings of relevant areas in the fall at which SLO coordinators could present the report and facilitate dialog

  1. ILO #2

    1. agreed that SLO Committee will look at PSLO-to-ILO mapping in the fall

Agreed that there will be a planning session to develop the methodology for assessment, including multi-measures approaches, at the start of spring semester.

Previous Notes

Notes: Fall 2018 and Spring 2018

Notes:  Spring 2017

Notes:  Fall and Spring 2016

Notes: Fall and Spring 2015

Notes: Spring 2013 through Fall 2014