Introduction

Newsletter                    

Resources

Committee Portal

Accreditation Timeline

Criterion Committees:
Criterion 1
Criterion 2
Criterion 3
Criterion 4
Criterion 5

HLC Criterion 3 Meeting Notes

August 19, 2004

            The HLC Criterion 3 Subcommittee met August 19, 2004.  In attendance were Mike Mitchell, Chair;  Joy Fitzpatrick; Kristin Anderson; John Arle; Geoff Eroe; Adriana Loera; Cory Merkel;  Pam Rogers; and Don Richardson. 

Mike began the meeting by welcoming everyone back and noting that two of our members of last year are on sabbatical:  Dana Fladhammer and Liz O’Brien.  The committee agreed that we might need to solicit some new members, including someone from Student Services.

                Mike then detailed the committee’s goals for the fall and spring.  During the fall, we should complete our initial study/evaluation of the criterion’s sub-points, and then revisit out data collection.  During the spring, we need to oversee the report writing while revisiting the data collection.  Mike and Don will be meeting regularly to begin writing the report.

            Meeting dates for the fall semester were set as follows:

            August 30

            September 20

            October 4

            October 18

            November 15

            December 6

Meetings are to be from 2:00 to 3:30 with the exception of September 20 which will begin at 2:30.  At the December 6 meeting we should review the prepared report.  We will try to secure the Library multi-purpose room for the meetings.

            Some of the information we need should be contained in the department goals reports filed with the Dean of Instruction at the end of 2003-04.  These are end-of-year reports.  Mike will follow up with Patti Schellhase.

            The committee reviewed the charges of 3a and 3b and discussed feedback to students.  Student writing—outcomes assessment—isn’t measuring student outcomes.  Rather what is measured is institutional success.  Assessment is actually measuring the success of the instruction.  Students should have access to assessment, measuring of outcomes.

            A review of the suggested data to be gathered for 3c suggested that we need to include “Smart Thinking”; Sandra Wells is in charge of this.

Respectfully,

Don Richardson