ࡱ> *,)a  jbjb11 "[[ 2222222h  h2prrrrrr,+R}222R22pFZ2222pV@22p g. p0x##p2hhDhhMinutes for CEPP meeting of September 25, 2007 In attendance: Deb Hall (Chair), Terry Diggory, Erica Bastress-Dukehart, Rik Scarce, Pat Oles, Muriel Poston, Sadie Kitchen, Kyle Nichols, Dan Nathan Minutes of September 11 were modified and approved. Minutes of September 18 were modified and approved. Deb Hall announced that Rob Linrothe and Kate Leavitt will attend the 10/2/07 CEPP meeting to discuss the proposal to split the Department of Art and Art History into separate departments. The meeting was dedicated to the discussing the role of the Director of Assessment and the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL). CEPP launched into a general discussion of assessment and the issues included: Presently, assessment is only occurring at the department/program/course level There is not a larger synthetic view of the data to address interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary aspects such as visual literacy, intercultural learning, or the quantitative reasoning requirement, to name only a few There is not a collective examination of data to address student learning Assessment incorporates many distinct aspects that range from student learning goals in individual courses and disciplines to larger institutional goals, thus a simple and encompassing definition is difficult to craft Such a range of skills requires that the job description for a Director of Assessment (or an Assessor of Something) be broad and include several different skill sets The discussion then moved into aspects of a CTL. The issues included: An appropriate structure of a CTL A Center for Teaching and Learning may not the best name to incorporate the many roles that it would serve CEPP realizes that assessment is only a piece of the CTL Other aspects of the CTL might include: pedagogy, best practices, writing center, peer advisors, academic technology. CEPP briefly discussed the sequencing of the Director of Assessment and the CTL. It was, again, generally agreed that a CTL appears to be of greater interest to CEPP at this time. Nevertheless, CEPP recognizes that assessment has to be a broader conversation within the faculty and that the CTL has to be brought to the faculty. However, CEPP needs to gather more information on other CTLs and have a more cohesive vision of how one would operate with the Skidmore framework before broadening the conversation. CEPP is unsure whether to have the full committee frame the vision of a CTL or to use a task force. A consensus was not reached by the end of the meeting. Respectfully submitted by Kyle Nichols p & F G H  hRa6 h?*hRahF8 hRa6hRa/012 7   # @ A   & FgdRa & FgdRagdRa  1h/ =!"#$%@@@ NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH DA@D Default Paragraph FontRiR  Table Normal4 l4a (k(No List  z /0127#@A 00߀00000000000000000000 00 00 00 0ʀ 000000 00 00 00 0ʀ0000      8@0(  B S  ?W^fwy|NV   :`lXp,Au_q Mh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohpp^p`OJQJo(hHh@ @ ^@ `OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHoh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJo(hHh^`OJQJ^Jo(hHohPP^P`OJQJo(hHq M,A`                           @`