SACS QEP Development Committee

February 27, 2012

1. Review of minutes from Feb 20, 2012. No comments.

2. Kathleen Yancey visit update.

  • a. The committee developed a draft agenda for her visit.
    • i. Arrives at 10:30 on 3/27
    • ii. 11:30 – 1 pm, discussion with QEP Committee and others over QEP.
    • iii. 2 – 4 pm, meet with QEP committee to discuss plan.
    • iv. 4 – After dinner, tour of campus and dinner.
    • v. On 3/28, meet with QEP committee from 8 – 11
    • vi. Departs from Auburn 11:30 – noon.
  • b. QEP committee will send a draft of the plan to Dr. Yancey before her visit.
  • c. D. Stoeckel is to reserve a room at the Student Center for the 3/27 meeting with K. Yancey.

3. Review of the Consumer Affairs Department ePortfolio Presentation.

  • a. See attached summary.
  • b. Discussion over FERPA issues related to the University possibly requiring students to use specific software packages.
    • i. D. Stoeckel tasked with asking D. Clark if someone from AU legal counsel could talk to the Committee about FERPA issues related to ePortfolios.

4. Complete action items so that draft plan can be made available to Kathleen Yancey.

  • a. Review of the Administrative Structure section.
    • i. The discussion centered on the location of the QEP program within the university. The following 3 options were determined for the location of the QEP program at Auburn University:
      • 1. Direct report to the Provost’s office
      • 2. A dedicated position within the Office of University Writing
      • 3. A dedicated position with AU Libraries.
    • ii. The committee discussed how to construct the administrative hierarchy of the Career ePortfolio program.
      • 1. M. Marshall will present a draft administrative hierarchy at the next meeting for review.

Summary of Presentation by Consumer Affairs Faculty:  February 24, 2012

Presenters: Professors Paula Peek;  Dr. Veena Chattaraman; and Dr. Hye Jeong Kim

Invited by Carol Warfield (chair); and

QEP members present: Margaret Marshall, Bliss Bailey, Laura Elmer

The department has three tracks and offers a portfolio course in addition to the senior capstone course for each track. When the department started including the portfolio course, they saw successful job placement skyrocket. Apparel students take the portfolio course their junior year to apply for internships, and then revise their senior year on their own. Others take the portfolio course along with the senior capstone.

The faculty members teaching these courses have identified common features that stretch across the three programs – interior design, apparel design and merchandising. Those features are:

  • collateral package of materials (resume, business card, a leave behind, a teaser, a thank you letter);

  • banding and marketing tools (logo, format, layout – to create a coherent identity)

  • showcasing process and outcomes (this is tied to their accreditation, but also expected in the field that students can demonstrate skills and understanding of processes)

  • multiple formats (print, digital (cd) and website)

  • comprehensive – creative, technical and analytic

  • In the course the instructors include a programmatic focus (to be sure the standards are met), an industry focus (students target the employers they would like to work for and tailor their documents for those employers; course includes components to help students develop a career plan and gain interview skills), and a student focus (self-reflection, developing a philosophy, self-presentation and empowerment for success; students need to articulate their goals and abilities through words and visuals).

    Now include blogs because designers get recognized first through their blogs. Constantly updated sites, visuals are included for every skill, portfolios are targeted to employers and showcase appropriate work, but the website tabs provide an organizational structure. Some students create more than one portfolio for different target audiences. Merchandising portfolios include references because they use photos from others.

    Questions we asked:

    1. could the students do this work without the course? NO
    2. what software is used and how do students learn that? now using wixx – open source – and a TA for one of the courses created a user guide to help, but students mostly figure it out during the course
    3. what would you need to push this work to the next level? what would you want in exchange for agreeing to participate in the QEP? money and release time. would be really useful to team teach, but all three faculty are over-extended with other courses. limited lab space, only one tech support person for the whole college, so equipment grants would be very attractive. Dean noted that they would expect to share the cost of creating appropriate spaces, but resources through the QEP project would help them. they will think more about what they would want/need and what they would be willing to do as participants.

    Last Updated: Dec. 26, 2012

    Auburn University | Auburn, Alabama 36849 | (334) 844-4000 |
    Website Feedback | Privacy | Campus Accessibility | Copyright ©