SACS QEP Development Committee

April 2, 2012

Attendance: R. Burt, M. Marshall, A. Trehub, L. Lock, C. Relihan, B. Bailey

1. Update on meeting with Provost and Drew Clark.

  • a. D Clark, Director of OIRA, will meet with Constance and Associate Provost Dr. E. Winn regarding the effect of the ePortfolio program on allied centers.
  • b. The budget must come under $500,000 per year.
  • c. The draft QEP is to be submitted on Sept 1, 2012.
  • d. The committee discussed the manner in which the draft will be reviewed, the time frame, who would review the document and the possibility of the QEP being discussed at the Provost’s open forum.

2. K Yancey comments/review of the QEP.

  • a. The committee discussed the definition of career ePortfolio.
  • b. Discussion over adding an action item to the QEP to develop guidelines to developing career ePortfolios, an action item to illicit assistance from alumni groups, industry advisor councils as well.
  • c. The possibility of having persons from an industrial advisory board who can be on the QEP advisory committee to help liaison with employers.
    • i. Making presentations to employers to educate.
    • ii. This action item can fit under communicating with the community action item.
  • d. “The social interactions are key” = students can help each other.
    • i. This could open up an action item to develop physical spaces for student interactions
      • 1. Collaborative spaces that don’t cost too much.
      • 2. Many of these spaces already exist on campus. Need an inventory of what exists.
        • a. This may fold into a current inventory for classroom space, an inventory of “soft space”.
  • e. Bringing in existing staff to mentor the ePortfolio project
    • i. Brings in staff training. This would add another action item – staff training.
  • f. Discussion over assessment.
    • i. How can departments assess their involvement with the QEP? 
      • 1. 2 different assessments:
        • a. Program level
        • b. Department level – assessments at this level would allow departments to pass along comments to the advisory committee.
    • ii. How much time will people need before they begin assessments?
      • 1. The program could be collecting information/data early on, but others may need more time.  Give departments time will push the program to start earlier.


  • a. R. But will do the definitions and budget.
  • b. A Trehub will edit and clarify learning objectives 3 an 4.
  • c.  L Elmer will work on the timeline. Shift the timeline forward and add the new action items.
    • i. Also work on learning objectives 1 and 2. Separate out the outcomes that will support the process of building an ePortfolio and support the development of a career ePortfolio.
  • d. L. Lock and C. Relihan will work on the assessment.
  • e. M. Marshal will continue to work on the sections, incorporating comments from K. Yancey.

4. Discussion over how to assess the program.

  • a. Discussion over a simple assessment, i.e., looking at the increase in the number of departments that participate over the years, to a more complex assessment, such as looking at the advancement of ePortfolio development across units.

5. Snappy Title update

  • a. Camille of Communication and Marketing, has volunteered to help out after graduation.

6. Next meeting:

  • a. Look at the QEP document and plan out what can and will be done, i.e., assign future tasks.
  • b. Committee has decided to meet every other week to allow for members to work on document.  Next meeting on 4/6/2012.

7. Before ending the meeting, the following topics were discussed:

  • a. Discussion over inviting another guest speaker, possibly B. Eynon.
  • b. Discussion over the selection of outside reviewers.
    • i. D. Stoeckel is to present the following list to D. Clark: l. Bidwell-Bowles (LSU) , B. Cambridge, Chris Anson (NCS), Carol Rutz (Wisconsin)

Last Updated: Dec. 26, 2012

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