March 27, 2002, 2002 Minutes


Members present: Trudy Banta, Victor Borden, Bob Bringle, Sharon Hamilton, Sara Heiliger, Susan Kahn, Steve MacLaughlin

Members absent: Karen Black

Report from NCA Annual Meeting

Susan reported on NCA"s day-long "Workshop on Self-Study." She followed a track for institutions nearing the conclusion of their self-study process and also had the opportunity to attend a session with Mary Breslin, our NCA liaison. Susan passed out the latest version of NCA"s Proposed New Criteria for Accreditation, which were distributed at the workshop. The new criteria expand the existing Criterion Three and, to some extent collapse the other current criteria into a new Criterion One. The new criteria place greater emphasis on planning, student learning, assessment, and engagement; in many ways, they are similar to what we are planning for our two special emphasis self-studies.

Susan noted that there is a new template for team reports that focuses on evidence that institutions meet the Criteria for Accreditation. Institutions are also now expected to report on distance education.

There was a discussion about distance degree programs offered by IUPUI:

  • Kelley Direct Online MBA
  • MSN Nursing
  • Master"s in Philanthropic Studies

Susan also reported that NCA has revised its matrices on levels of development of assessment. We need to identify what level we"ve reached and make the case for why we rate ourselves that way. IUPUI has assessment structures in place, but uneven participation across the schools. We also need to make explicit connections between planning, assessment, and budgeting processes. Finally, a challenge in the IUPUI environment will be to make as many faculty and students as possible aware of our assessment efforts and of the accreditation process and site visit.

Bob asked about how to show evidence of engagement with other educational sectors. The team suggested: Project SEAM, SMART, and Passport as possible examples. These items may also be relevant to other areas of the self-study like student learning.
Bob also asked for advice on how to show that civic engagement promotes an institutional commitment to diversity. For example, diversity seems to be inherent in service learning work. Diversity also includes working with different populations, having a positive campus climate for diversity, and being committed to helping everyone reach their potential. Bob noted that he wanted to make sure he represented the difference between doing diversity well and doing it poorly.

Sharon reported on the workshop for members of Reader"s panels she attended. She commented that NCA is looking for self-studies that are analytical and evaluative, with a minimum of description. She also noted that the template we will be evaluated on for our special emphasis self-studies is still unclear. Reviewers are saying, however, that they are tired of 200-300 page self-studies that are largely descriptive.

Trudy pointed out that Web pages do not present well and that it is almost impossible to read text when it is projected onto a screen. We need to rethink how we present, make more use of PowerPoints and less use of screen material from the Web site. The idea is that people will go to the Web site themselves; there is no need to show them.

Report from Civic Engagement Task Force

Bob has developed a draft of the milestones for civic engagement. He commented that the Civic Engagement Task Force and the Future Group have discussed whether we should ask individual schools to submit materials beyond what they"re providing in the Civic Engagement Inventory. He suggested using matrices to display what schools are doing with civic engagement.

The Civic Engagement Inventory is in beta testing stage; Steve will meet with the next test group soon. The plan is to send a memo to the deans in mid-April inviting them to submit entries to the inventory. There is some concern that we may not have enough material in the inventory, but it is important to remember that this is the first time we are doing this type of systematic review of engagement.