2. FUNDAMENTACIÓN TEÓRICA
2.1. ANTECEDENTES REFERENTES
2.1.3 DOCTRINA: LA REVOLUCIÓN FRANCESA Y SU IMPACTO EN EL
Assurance of Learning Task Force
Meeting Debriefing for May 1, 2013 10am-12pm
Attendees: Dean’s Office, HIRE Center, Program Directors, Department Chairs, Assessment Faculty Attached Documents: PowerPoint Presentation
Meeting Agenda:
1. Discuss confusion between current college assessment terminology and AACSB terminology; acknowledging a need to use the same assessment language.
2. Review HIRE Center proposal to align current college terminology with AACSB terminology.
3. Agree upon a set of Learning Goals and Learning Objectives for BSBA and MBA programs to be pushed forward and presented to Curriculum Committee for review. (Learning Goals and Learning Objectives to be reviewed for BA Econ and MA Econ programs next. Once all statements have undergone initial review and revision, future reviews and revisions will only take place during its designated quarter in a normal assessment cycle. This will allow for a systematization of the review process).
4. Review with Task Force ongoing efforts between HIRE Center and faculty during Spring 2013 quarter. Review with Task Force efforts planned for Summer and Fall.
Meeting Outcomes:
1. Present Members of the AoL Task Force agreed to the HIRE Center proposal to modify existing Objectives to be in line with AACSB usage.
2. Present Members of the AoL Task Force agreed to move HIRE Center proposal forward to be evaluated by the Curriculum Committee on Friday, May 10, 2013.
3. Director Glen Taylor and Sandy Luong will attend the Curriculum Committee on Friday, May 10, 2013 to provide contextual information on the modified Objectives.
Meeting Summary:
Hour one of the meeting consisted of HIRE Center Director Glen Taylor (1) reviewing the meeting tasks, (2) providing background on the necessary actions to move the assessment redesign process along, and (3) clarifying the short term and long term goals to get assessment back on the right path. Hour two of the meeting consisted of deliberation between Program Directors and Department Chairs on the proposal presented by the HIRE Center clarifying the language of program Learning Goals and Learning Objectives as a key step in making concrete systematic changes to the assessment process. HIRE Center provided clarification throughout the discussions on the language of the Goals and Objectives. HIRE Center also provided clarification on the timeline between now and the October deadline for the 6th Year Report; identifying what needs to be done by the Fall deadline and what will continue to be worked on in the Fall quarter.
By the end of the meeting, the AoL Task Force responded positively to the proposal set forth by the HIRE Center. The AoL Task Force also came away with a much clearer understanding of AACSB terms and usages; recognizing that past confusion surrounding assessment was the result of using regional accreditation terms and AACSB accreditation terms interchangeably. By the end of the meeting, the AoL Task Force also held a much clearer understanding of the assessment process as a whole, both what is expected by AACSB in terms of faculty involvement and where the College of Business & Economics has been inadequate in the past.
WASC/AACSB Assessment Meetings
Debriefings for May 2 – 6, 2013
Meeting Date: May 2, 2013Dick Osborn, Vice President of WASC and CSU East Bay Liaison
Meeting Agenda: To clarify WASC terminology and discuss WASC-AACSB translations.
• Provided Sandy with documents to help clarify terms used in WASC assessment.
• Provided Sandy with updated documents on WASC guidelines.
• Introduced Sandy to Dr. Andy Allen at the University of San Diego (USD).
o Common among AACSB and assessment discussions has been a need for a glossary that identifies
how terms are used for (1) a regional accrediting body (ie WASC) and (2) a national accrediting body (ie AACSB) and how these terms can be replaced with its counterpart to satisfy both
accrediting bodies easily and effectively. Osborn identified USD as having performed work in the area of looking at WASC and AACSB together.
Meeting Date: May 3, 2013
Dr. Donna Wiley, Senior Director, Graduate Studies and Academic Programs Meeting Agenda: (1) To discuss WASC terminology and receive input on term usage.
(2) To discuss format of CAPR assessment document.
• WASC Terminology
o Clarification on major key terms used for WASC and how they might translate for AACSB and vice
versa.
• CAPR Document
o Clarification on which language, AACSB or WASC, to use to complete the document.
Meeting Date: May 6, 2013
Dr. Andy Allen, Associate Provost & Former Assessment Liaison for the College of Business at the University of San Diego
Meeting Agenda: Identifying key differences between WASC & AACSB.
• After contacting our WASC liaison to address questions regarding WASC-AACSB terminology, Sandy was connected to Andy Allen at USD.
• USD has been identified as one of the colleges that has attempted to understand differences between the two accrediting bodies, specifically WASC and AACSB.
• USD created what was called a “crosswalk” to identify key differences between the two accrediting bodies.
• The crosswalk did not develop a 1-1 correlation for terms used, but did identify the key differences for each accrediting body.
• Allen identified the focus on where to assess and how to assess being the main differences.
o For AACSB, the assessment is conducted at the degree/program level. o For WASC, the assessment is conducted within departments/majors.
• Sandy asked: Would expanding the mapping to include departments satisfy both objectives?
o Allen agreed that such an effort would satisfy WASC while also satisfying AACSB’s requests for
further maturation of assessment processes.
• Allen provided documents that may or may not be helpful in current efforts at CBE
o Documents are of program review under AACSB’s old standards.
• Given no known document, Sandy will attempt to develop a glossary showing 1-1 correlations for WASC/AACSB terms. Such a glossary will reduce confusion and be useful now and in the future.
CBE Curriculum Committee
May 10, 2013
Meeting Attendees: Curriculum Committee: Erick Fricke (Chair), Jiming Wu, Sandip Basu, James Ahiapor, Joanna Lee, Yi He
HIRE Center: Glen Taylor, Sandy Luong
Key Topics Discussed:
1. The chair reported that he had spoken to Jed DeVaro, Chair of Economics, about the committee’s
handling of the department’s request for new course approval and course modifications. DeVaro was okay with the committee’s work.
2. Outcome Assessment Director:
a. Glen Taylor, the outcome assessment director, introduced Sandy Luong, a member of the
College’s Assurance of Learning (AoL) task force. She explained the process of developing the College’s BSBA and MBA Learning Goals and Learning Objectives being presented for approval by the Curriculum Committee. She noted the need for the College to use language more consistent with that used by AACSB rather than language used by WASC. This is what has been achieved by the task force. Xinjian Lu and Glenn Taylor re-affirmed Ms Luong’s explanation. Lu added that whatever is found acceptable by AACSB would fit the needs of WASC. Taylor emphasized that a lot of effort went into drafting the documents and that the curriculum committee should focus on determining whether transmissions of language from the left-hand side to the right-hand side have been consistent. He, however, noted that he was not trying to prevent any major revisions by the curriculum committee.
b. Glenn Taylor also reported on work being done by 10-12 faculty members of the Management
department to identify measures and develop rubrics for Mgmt 4500 and Mgmt 4650 in the areas of ethics and oral communication; no course mappings have yet been developed.
3. Course Modification Request for Entr 2485. Joanna Lee, Chair of the Department of Marketing and
Entrepreneurship explained that the request was of a housekeeping kind, namely, to remove unnecessary prerequisites. M/S (Ahiakpor, He) to approve the request. Passed 5-0.
Curriculum Committee Meeting
May 17, 2013
Meeting Attendees: Curriculum Committee: Erick Fricke (Chair), Jiming Wu, Sandip Basu, James Ahiapor, Joanna Lee
HIRE Center: Glen Taylor, Sandy Luong
Prior to Meeting:
• Curriculum Committee reviewed HIRE Center Learning Goals & Learning Objectives presentation and
documents from previous Curriculum Committee meeting.
Key Topics Discussed:
1. Approve Agenda: James Ahiakpor motioned to approve the agenda, the motion was seconded by
Jiming Wu. MSP (3 to 0).
2. Minutes: The minutes from 4/26/13 will reviewed at a later meeting. Jiming Wu motioned to approve
the revised minutes from 5/10/2013, the motion was seconded by Eric Fricke. MSP (3 to 0).
3. Reports:
a. Chair- No Report
b. Graduate Director- No Report
c. Undergraduate Director- No Report
d. Outcome Assessment Director- No Report
4. Old Business:
a. HIRE center proposal to modify BSBA and MBA program and student learning objectives. The
committee made edits to the current proposal modifying the BSBA Learning Goals and Objectives, Goal 1, Objective 1B, Objective 2A, Objective 2B, Objective 4. The committee also modified the MBA Program Learning Goals and Objectives, Goal 1, Objective 1A, Objective 2A, Goal 3, Goal 4, and Objective 4A.
Jiming Wu motioned to approve the revised HIRE center proposal, the motion was seconded by James Ahiakpor. MSP (4 to 0).
5. The Next Meeting is scheduled for May 31, 2013 from 12-2 pm in VBT 411.
Assessment Meeting Summary
HIRE Center (Sandy Luong) & CAPSIM (Ron Duran)
May 17 & 21, 2013
Meeting Attendees: Sandy Luong and Ron Duran
Prior to Meeting: Sandy Luong emailed Ron Duran documents regarding Program Learning Goals and Learning Objectives for BSBA.
Key Topics Discussed:
(2) How to use data gathered from CAPSIM simulation and Comp-XM exam for assessment. Key Points Discussed:
Process for Translating Raw Simulation/Exam Data into Assessment Data
1. Each learning goal is analyzed via the simulation and/or Comp-XM exam (see minutes Table 1) 2. Download raw scores into a csv file and export file
3. Identify random sample of students assessed (i.e. 4 students from each section of MGMT 4650) 4. From the selected students’ data, pull questions identified as part of group of questions measuring
particular objective (see minutes Table 1)
5. Calculate raw percentage scores and overall percentage scores
6. Translate calculations into four categories for assessment (0 = Not Meeting Expectations, 1 = Needs Improvement, 2 = Meets Expectations, 3 = Exceeds Expectations)
7. Set college benchmark for students, i.e. 3 based on assessment scoring, or 70% or higher on raw percentage score.
8. Discussed different ways of calculating raw data.
a. Walk through of various analyses conducted from exported raw data files. 9. Discussed different ways of presenting data.
Table 1
BSBA Learning Goal Capsim Module Simulation Comp-XM Questions
1A. Foundation Knowledge Effective Business Mgmt Total Balanced Scorecard
H-319, F-347, O-351, M- 354, F279, A362, F-115, F- 290, H-323, H-329, F-358, A- 364, F-41, A-94, F-301, H- 324, P-258, F-260, A-286, M- 308, A-320, H-326
1B. Business Integration Critical Thinking Total Balanced Scorecard
A-362, H-319, M-334, M- 346, F-347, M-349, O-351, M-354, M-355, S-74, F-267, F-274, F-279, S-73, S-363, A- 389, S-75, F-115, F-290, P- 309, O-322, H-329, F-358, A- 364, A-16, F-41, S-76, A-94, F-301, O-322, H-324, P-328, P-258, F-260, F-261, A-286, M-308, A-320, H-326, P-373 2A. Quantitative Methods & Tools Quantitative Learning Skills
Financial, Internal Business Process and Customer
Service
N/A
2B. Technology for Data Driven Decisions Innovation & Technology Total Balanced Scorecard
M-349, O-351, M-355, S-74, S-363, F-115, P-309, H-323, H-329, F-358, A-364, A-16,
S-76
3A. Oral Communication -- Stockholder Debriefing Presentations N/A
3B. Written Communication Course - Embedded Assignment N/A N/A
3C. Teamwork -- Peer Evaluations N/A
4A. Ethics Course - Embedded Assignment N/A (Available module in the future embedded in simulation upon request)
AoL Task Force Mapping Meeting – Summer Quarter – July 24th, 2013
Attendees: Dean’s Office, HIRE Center, Program Directors, Department Chairs and Assessment Representatives Topic: Curriculum Mapping
Agenda: