SACS QEP Development Committee

August 24, 2012

Attendance: R. Burt, B. Bailey,  L. Elmer, D. Stoeckel, L. Lock, M. Marshall, P. Stamm, and B. Sanderson

1. Determine upcoming meeting schedule

  • a. The committee decided to meet Tuesday mornings from 8 am – 10 am at Goree Hall.

2. Feedback from Faculty Senate Presentation.

  • a. Overall, comments from the Faculty Senate and others in attendance were positive.
  • b. Drew Clark, in attendance, providing positive comments with regard to the committee’s efforts in developing the ePortfolio program.
  • c. An Engineering faculty member spoke up during the meeting with great interest.
  • d. Diana Lavender approached the committee with an offer to help promote the ePortfolio program. She has had much success in using her personal ePortfolio to gain employment after being laid off due to economic reasons.
    • i. A good testimonial to help promote and have valuable insight on the use of web design freeware.

3. Update on revising the draft.

  • a. Task Update: Everyone was supposed to send in “New Adopter” information
    • i. Committee reviewed the portion of the draft concerning new adopters.
      • 1. Building Science, pharmacy, Nursing, Art, English MA, Study Abroad Program, New Media Club/Student Writing Council.
      • 2. Students of the New Media Club/Student Writing Council are posed to be ePortfolio tutors or mentors.
  • b. Staging – Year 1: Preparation
    • i. The committee discussed different aspects with regard to developing structure, supporting faculty, supporting students and assessment needs.
    • ii. The committee discussed concerns over the purpose of seed grants in the program based on the need of the users. The need will change and this will help provide better control over where money goes and how it is spent.
      • 1. Discussion over the deliverable from the individuals who received the grants. Perhaps a progress report on how the seed grant helped them fulfill the 4 learning objectives of the ePortfolio Program.
      • 2. The Program will need to provide clear instructions to the receivers of the grants on how to write the report.  Specify requirements that will fulfill assessment needs of the Program.
  • c. Discussion over the Program’s timeline: Year 1 = Preparation, Year 2 = Initial Launch, Year 3 = Growth and Refinement, Year 4 = Comprehensive Assessment and Revision,
  • d. D. Clark stated that the 5th year Interim Review document will be done by Summer 2013, currently document shows the 5th year review as 2016.

4. Vetting Process

  • a. The submission of the QEP document for public review will begin somewhere near September 12, 2012.
  • b. The QEP document is to be submitted to the University Administration (i.e., President, Provost) by mid-October.
  • c. How to announce the public review
    • i. Put an announcement in Auburn Daily or maybe use it as a Take Five interview.
    • ii. Auburn Commons announcement for Alumni.
    • iii. Present at the Faculty Senate meeting
    • iv. Need to draft a press release to AU Daily.
    • v. Meet with Cabinet on September 10.
    • vi. R. Burt commented that Camille Berkley of the Marketing Office should be contacted to either sit on the committee or assign a representative.
      • 1. B. Bailey volunteered to assist.
  • d. Discussion on assessment:
    • i. How will progress be reported? Number of students, number of courses, etc…
    • ii. How to assess the quality of assignments and the ePortfolios?
    • iii. Test the rubric on the learning objectives
      • 1. Ask for representative samples for the program to test or individual faculty test a sample of ePortfolios against the rubric.
    • iv. L. Lock added: What methods (i.e., rubrics) did they use and what were the outcomes? How did you use the results and what was the impact.
  • e. Some of the initial cohort will be ready for a formal assessment but other will be others that won’t, so first year would be more of a progress report.

5. Committee began discussing the timeline again:

  • a. Committee will work on the QEP document until September 4 (approximately)
    • i. Committee will work on individual sections
    • ii. Sept 4 is the committee release of the document
    • iii. Committee will aim to make the QEP document ready for public review by September 10.

6. Next meeting: Sept 4, 2012.

Last Updated: Dec. 26, 2012

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