PROGRAM EVALUATION COMMITTEE Kwantlen MEETING Kwantlen UNIVERSITY COLLEGE 1 Introduction ofNew...

download PROGRAM EVALUATION COMMITTEE Kwantlen MEETING Kwantlen UNIVERSITY COLLEGE 1 Introduction ofNew Members

of 28

  • date post

    20-Jul-2020
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    0
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of PROGRAM EVALUATION COMMITTEE Kwantlen MEETING Kwantlen UNIVERSITY COLLEGE 1 Introduction ofNew...

  • Kwantlen UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

    1 Introduction of New Members

    2 Agenda confirmation

    3 Minutes of January 22 meeting

    4 Business Arising from Minutes

    5 ChairsReport

    6 Discussion and Development of Program Review Indicators

    7 Additional Items

    1

    ii

    m

    8 Next Meeting

    9 Adjournment

    PROGRAM EVALUATION COMMITTEE MEETING

    Feb 19 2003 215 415 pm Room B 206 Feb 20 2003 130 430 pm Room G 2110

    Agenda February 19

    Agenda February 20

    1 Agenda confirmation

    2 utes ofFeb 19 meeting 3 Finalire PRC Member

    4 PRC Statement of Purpose draft

    5 Continue Discussion and Development of Program Review Indicators Database

    6 Additional Items

    i

    ii

    111

    7 Next Meeting Time and Agenda refer to List of Ongoing Issues 8 Adjournment

    1

  • NAME PRESENT ABSENT

    Androsiuk Maryf o 1 Brooks Ian

    f

    Chambers Susan

    Cheema Chaumkaur j Davis Bob

    Dunbar Sophie

    Goedbloed Dana

    Hamilton Kevin

    MacNamara Deb

    McGillivray Judith Metzger Karen

    Mott Maxine

    Nanson Derek

    Penhorwood Jan

    Richard Paul 9

    Robertson Carolyn Schultz Dianne

    Tritchew Pant eli

    rS t

    GUESTS

    Kwantlen UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

    Program Review Committee

    Attendance Date

  • NAME PRESENT ABSENT

    Androsiuk Mary r

    Brooks Ian

    Chambers Susan

    Cheema Chaumkaur

    Davis Bob

    Dunbar Sophie

    GoedbloedDana Hamilton Kevin

    MacNamara Deb

    McGillivray Judith

    Metzger Karen

    Mott Maxine

    Nanson Derek

    Penhorwood Jan

    Richard Paul

    Robertson Carolyn Schultz Dianne

    Tritchew Panteli

    cWJJj 744Lccx fsSZ

    GUESTS

    Kwantlen UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

    Attendance Date 20

    Program Review Committee

  • Kwantlen UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

    Present

    Regrets MrAtithosluk c5ue Chambers

    Chaumkaur Cheema Deborah MacNamara

    Judith McGillivray Jan Penhorwood

    Guests Arthur Coren

    4 Business Arising from Minutes None

    PROGRAM REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING

    January 22 2003 215 pm Surrey Campus Boardroom

    MINUTES

    Ian Brooks

    Bob Davis

    Sophie Dunbar Dana Goedbloed

    Kevin Hamilton

    Sooz Klinkhamer altemate Maxine Molt

    Derek Nanson

    Paul Richard

    Carolyn Robertson Dianne Schultz

    Panteli Tritchew

    1 The Chair called the meeting to order and introduced the new members

    2 Agenda Confirmation Moved by Kevin Hamilton seconded by Derek Nanson to approve the agenda

    3 Approval of Minutes of Meeting Dec 10 2002 The minutes of the Dec 10 2002 meeting were approved with the following amendment Paul Richard had been in attendance

    5 ChairsReport ACTION Karen to send memo re location for upcoming meetings

    The Chair reported that he is in the process of establishing representation on the committee from Admissions from among program assistants or deans areas and labs

  • Program Review Committee Minutes of Meeting Jan 22 2003 Page 2

    The Chair announced that he has contacted students in a 3year psychology course on Program Evaluation PSYC 3960 to see if they may be interested in joining the committee

    a Education Council Update Education Council approved the terms of reference and purpose of the committee Membership for faculty representation from Library Counselling and Coop Education still needs clarification

    b Communication with Stakeholders

    The Chair met with chairs of social sciences departments this monthwho agreed to talk with their faculty members about program advisory committees they typically rely on articulation for external approval The Chair plans to meet with Trades and Community Health coordinators

    The committee explored the idea of setting an additional meeting during reading week There was general agreement to meet Thursday Feb 20 from 130430 pm

    Timelines We plan to identify sample indicators in February and March then finalize Kwantlensversion of indicators The next step is to identify core indicators for first and second level reviews

    6 PRC Terms of Reference Moved by Dana Goedbloed seconded by Derek Nanson to table item to the next meeting

    MOTION CARRIED

    7 Sample Program Review from Office of Institutional Review Office of Institution Research presented a sample or pilot Program Review using Business Management Diploma applicants for the 1999 year as a trial program

    a OIR used their internal Data Warehouse as a source of data and ran a sample Level One review using the following indicators i Number of Program Applicants

    ii Number of Accepted Applicants

    iii Number of Applicants Who Registered at KUC in any course

    iv Number of Applicants Who Registered in a program specific course

    v Number of Credentials awarded to the 1999 cohort to date

    b The OIR pilot review highlighted a number of challenges for KUC Theressteady attrition from of students who apply to of students who are accepted to of students who actually register We dont know how many students are accepted but dont register because they cant get seats

    The study showed that a very low percentage of students who entered the program graduated within two years but program attrition may not be an entirely useful indicator for openaccess nonlockstep programs at KUC

  • Program Review Committee Minutes of Meeting Jan 22 2003 Page 3

    It is difficult to assess how long it takes for program students to graduate because

    vi students do not need to declare their intended major when they register at KUC or each term that they register

    vii students do not receive a credential unless they apply for it and some students who finish their 60credit credential and go on to degree studies dont bother

    viii according to OIR Banner credential data is only activated ifwhen students apply so Banner might show an undercount if we tried to query how many students simply completed the credential and didnt apply to graduate

    ix students can take their studies part time and have a very successful Kwantlen experience but may take many semesters to complete their studies and

    x students can change the program or their major partway through the program and end up over achieving on the number of credits they earn for a particular credential

    c Challenges identified from OIR presentation to PRC i technical challenges with Banner both in terms of what kind of data is

    available and the extractability of the data PEC will be inviting someone from the registrarsoffice to discuss this once weve got a good idea of what we need

    ii cohort tracking challenges currently students dont need to declare their majors either upon registration or on a termbyterm basis

    iii Perception challenges in terms of attrition as an indicator since students may have an eminently successful experience at KUC but simply choose to study parttime and take several years to complete their degree

    Core indicator and benchmark challenges how to develop common indicators and benchmarks or if its possible to develop common indicators and benchmarks for both openaccess and selectiveentry programs

    Identify what information will be required and request changes to Banner to accommodate that or other software adjustments as required in order to accomplish the goals of meaningful program reviews May need to find new ways to collect the required data

    Identify what it means for students to have a successful experience and at the same time fulfill Ministry requirements and meet Kwantlensneeds

    Students may register in openaccess program courses not knowing what their final goals are and may switch to completely different area before graduating or leaving

    Question Can BANNER keep track of no of students included in the attrition pool who wanted to register but couldntbecause of lack of availability Activity reports can be run through Admissions to show the number of people who applied for a program and how many times they attempted it and who dropped the

  • Program Review Committee Minutes of Meeting Jan 22 2003 Page 4

    program For example 300 to 500 students may have attempted to register 1500 times among them Banner may be able to identify students who are eligible for a credential though they dont apply for the credential

    8 PEC Statement of Purpose Draft Tabled to next meeting

    9 Additional Items None

    10 Next Meeting Wed Feb 19 2003 Room B206 Additional Meeting Thurs Feb 20 130 430 pm Surrey Boardroom G 2110

    11 Motion to adjourn by Maxine Mott seconded by Sooz Klinkhamer at 415 pm

  • PT EDCO REPORTS 1 FOR FEBRUARY 03 MEETING OF EDCO

    1 Program Review Committee met on Jan 22 03

    2 Office of Institution Research presented a sample or pilot Program Review using Business Management Diploma applicants for the 1999 year as a trial program

    3 OIR used their internal Data Warehouse as a source of data and ran a sample Level One review using the following indicators 1 Number of Program Applicants 2 Number of Accepted Applicants 3 Number of Applicants Who Registered at KUC in any course 4 Number of Applicants Who Registered in a program specific course 5 Number of Credentials awarded to the 1999 cohort to date

    4 The OIR pilot review highlighted a number of challenges for KUC

    Theressteady attrition from of students who apply to of students who are accepted to of