IEAC Administrative Assessment Sub-committee Meeting

Main Page Content

April 30, 2014


Attendees: Leah Barrett, Lin Becker, Alissa Gee, Claire Goverts, Debbie Jacob, Dawn Jones, Dan Petree, Karen Riotto, Jamie Scheid

Absent: Mike Andriatch, Bob Henry, Janie Hinds, Megan Sarkis

  1. Middle States Monitoring Report Visit:

    The evaluators felt very good about our work. The draft of the report was positive. We should receive a final copy of the recommendation that goes to the Middle States organization very soon. The Middle States accrediting body meets at the end of June. We will receive final confirmation that we are in compliance sometime in July. We need to do a mid-point report in 2017; what we don’t know is whether the mid-point report will ask for emphasis on the current standards, or if we will be asked to focus on the new accrediting standards that Middle states will be coming out with in next 12-18 months. We don’t know how that transition will go between a mid-point report on what just happened or how we’re preparing for the next set of standards.

  2. What's next for the IEAC Administrative Assessment Sub-committee:

    The Director of Assessment position is posted. Eileen Daniel is chairing the search committee. We hope to have new person on board in July or August to take leadership for Assessment. We want to have some documents for the new people to react to as they begin their work; for example the KPI document. We want to give them our thoughts on what the KPI’s should look like in reference to our Strategic Plan. We should also have thoughts and recommendations in place related to Peer Institutions.

    Each of the College divisions gave a presentation to the Budget & Resource Committee that contained data. A recommendation was made to the President’s Cabinet after our last meeting about how the budget ties to assessment. The understanding is that a form will be distributed to the Vice Presidents in reference to requests for strategic initiatives: committing to paper what your area’s strategic priorities are, what resources you need, and/or what resources you are internally allocating to move this strategic priority forward. This committee’s role is to work with Budget and Resource to make sure data exists to determine/justify funding.

    We will pass information about KPI’s and Peer Institutions to the Institutional Effectiveness and Accountability Committee; they will determine needs in the fall.

    We will try to have this group meet in June and August.

  3. KPI Discussion:

    Leah created a matrix of KPI’s. On the left side of the document the first half has items that are currently in our KPI document. The second half is a list of items shared at our last meeting –things that Jeff Lashbrook brainstormed.

    The matrix shows how the KPI’s connect with our Strategic Plan. Each Strategic Goal should have a corresponding KPI. A column for Global Measurable Outcomes should be added to the document.

    View the 2012-2013 KPI's

    In the Strategic Plan we have NSSE scores that were specifically identified by President’s Cabinet. These should be added to the KPI’s.

    Strategic Plan Goals and corresponding KPI’s Discussion Notes:
    1.1 Number of Service Learning courses offered.
    1.2 We have data related to the number of Living Learning Communities and the number of students participating.
    2.1 This could be the number of courses we have for each SUNY General Education outcome. 2.2 A list of accredited programs (this tends to be specialized professional programs).
    3.1 We could get the number of students who present at undergraduate conferences or programs; perhaps we could use the information associated with student travel grants.
    3.2 Relates to work being done by the Hip-Hoc Committee.
    4.1 The Leadership Program has engagement practices data.
    4.2 There’s no KPI associated with it, we just need to create a timeline from where it started. 4.3 Ties back to 3.2.
    4.4 We don’t have anything on the diversity of faculty and staff data. The Diversity Committee should be able to provide some information.
    4.5 We have a lot of data to document about Health and Wellness Programming and its expansion.
    5.1 FaMP has a website of its own; this could be a list of what we have done.
    5.2 This refers to fiscal sustainability; however it could refer to green sustainability as well. This is a work in progress to be measured over time.
    6.1 There is a lot of data to support this.
    7.1 There are a number of grants that require partnerships (Grants Development), 3-1-3 students, student teacher placement, community service projects.
    7.2 The number of businesses participating in career fairs, internship placements, regional businesses that we do business with.
    7.3 We could pull data from Activity Insight. We have done a better job of quantifying community service projects, we applied for President Obama's recognition.

    Is there anything listed under “Pursue Something Greater” that would be a KPI? It might be helpful to know the number of hours of full time teaching faculty vs. adjunct faculty.

    Leah will put notes together and ask for feedback at next meeting.

  4. Peer Institution Discussion:
    EduVentures provided the names of institutions in the Comparative and Aspirant Peers groups. IPEDS Automatic is what our students are coming in to in reference to GPA, SAT, and Socio-economic status. This discussion will occur in June.
  5. Next Meetings:
    June 18
    August 15

Last Updated 10/25/17

Close mobile navigation