OUS Home page OUS Index page OUS Contacts page
Top Navigation image map
OUS Logo

Joint Boards Articulation Commission

Meeting Summary Notes for November 25, 2003


Conference Call 

Members Present
Dave Phillips, Clatsop Community College, Chair
Jim Arnold, Oregon University System
Craig Kolins, Portland Community College
John Miller, Eastern Oregon University
Salam Noor, Oregon Department of Education
Glenda Tepper, Clackamas Community College
Ed Watson, Linn-Benton Community College
Elaine Yandle-Roth, Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development

Guest Present
Christine Tell, Oregon University System

After experiencing a delay due to technical difficulties with Jim Arnold's phone connection, Dave Phillips called the meeting to order at approximately 1:20 p.m.

1. Roll Call,  Announcements, and Reminders

Arnold called the roll to determine who was present for this conference call meeting. Arnold reminded everyone that the annual articulation and transfer conference will be held on Friday, December 5th at Portland State University. Also, based on comments regarding the draft at the last meeting, revisions to the JBAC annual report have been posted to the website and will stand as the "final version" unless anyone has an objection. Arnold was given permission to take the word "draft" off the current version.

2. Meeting Notes from October 9, 2003

The meeting notes from October 2003 were approved as submitted.

3. The "First-Year Study" and PASS Update

Christine Tell, of the OUS Proficiency-based Admission Standards System project, discussed two reports with the Commission. Referring first to the Executive Summary of the "First-Year Study", Tell indicated that this study was aimed at determining the relationship between students' performance on their 10th grade benchmarks and their resulting performance in the first year of college work. The sample size was large: 6,082 students from OUS and 12,519 community college students. The "remarkably consistent" findings included: performance at the 10th grade benchmark is closely aligned with freshman-year performance in college (for both university and community college students). These benchmarks are indicators of student success. Those below benchmarks performed at lower levels. Cautions include: this study examined only one year's worth of data and that benchmarks have changed somewhat since these students were in 10th grade. There are plans to repeat this study and to capture a larger group of students and their performance. In anticipating other studies, it may be desirable to track these students in the First-Year Study past the first year. It may be interesting to determine if 10th grade benchmarks are indicators of college completion, for example. A longitudinal study was suggested that would examine retention/completion rates; such a project would need to track students between the 2-year and 4-year sectors.

A "secure student ID" is now being implemented statewide which will allow sectors to track students all the way through their K-16 experience. ODE, CCWD and OUS have all greeted this initiative enthusiastically. It will be possible to transfer data for the Oregon Student Record to a central repository, which can then be retrieved by post-secondary campuses by utilizing the secure student ID. The information from the Oregon Student Record should be able to be incorporated into current student information systems. This can lead to improvements in such efforts as projecting student enrollments. In the report entitled "Aligning Public University Admission with K-12 Student Learning," an appendix describes: The College Admission Profile: Pilot and Prototype for an Electronic K-16 Integrated Data-Transfer System. All sectors are very interested in this information, and having data go to a central location that all can have access to is of great importance. Successful partnerships are in place, and we need to be able to obtain a students "secure student ID" when they enter postsecondary education.

Tell then elaborated on the "Aligning Public University Admission with K-12 Student Learning" report. The most salient information may appear on pages 8-9 of that document, which illustrates that proposed (for 2006) Board of Higher Education policy will call for the inclusion of evidence of proficiency along with the current admission requirements of (1) high school graduation, (2) subject-area requirements, (3) grade point average, and (4) SAT 1 or ACT. The "contents of the college admission profile" (p. 9) includes examples of acceptable proficiency evidence. Every student in K-12 will have an educational plan/profile and the OUS assumption is that student performance in this state will rise. So, in Fall 2006, it is proposed that every Oregon student will present their plan/profile information as well as submit their evidence of proficiency. With regard to evidence of proficiency for community college transfers? That is a topic that would be appropriately pursued by JBAC.

Action: None required at this time.

4. Report from the Student Transfer Committee Meeting of October 30, 2003

Glenda Tepper, newly-appointed chair of the Student Transfer Committee (STC),  reported on the activities of that group's October 30th meeting. She observed that the meeting was quite lively, and started off with an in-depth discussion of the transferability of RD115 courses and the unwrapping of an AA/OT degree by the University of Oregon. Maureen McGlynn of Chemeketa Community College was present at the STC meeting to describe a recent student case regarding these topics. Some points made in the discussion included:

A group of (community college as well as OUS) faculty will be convened by Yandle-Roth and Arnold in the near future to examine reading courses; some faculty have already been identified for inclusion in this discussion. This conversation will likely parallel the one undertaken a few years ago for WR 115, including an assessment of the level (college level or not) of the course(s) and its numbering (are the courses numbered 100 and above appropriate for transfer?). RD 115 should be embraced as a college-level course. In addition, we need to identify criteria for all courses that are college level and affirm that they apply to the AA/OT.

There was also a spirited discussion of the concept of a transferable general education core curriculum. The JBAC had charged the STC with drafting a proposal for a transferable general education core. One of the major areas addressed during the STC discussion was whether or not it is possible to use an outcomes approach to developing a general education core proposal. Phillips reported that he assigned homework to the members of the Council of Instructional Administrators (CIA) prior to their most recent meeting (on November 20-21), requesting that they provide, from their campuses, information regarding outcomes for various disciplinary areas. As it turned out, many campuses have done work on course outcomes, but not necessarily program outcomes. At the CIA meeting, Phillips indicated he distributed general education outcome statements downloaded from the Illinois Articulation Initiative website, including lists of courses that meet those outcomes. The broad disciplinary areas in the Illinois general education core parallel the areas of Oregon's AA/OT degree. Reactions from CIA members were varied, from "why would we want to do this?" to "this approach could be of great benefit to students." One suggestion for a starting point in the development of a proposal was to take the general education core of the AA/OT and come to some agreement on those various disciplinary areas. The consensus was that this is a discussion that needs to happen with both the community colleges and OUS institutions involved. This is a likely topic of discussion at the joint meeting of the academic officers of OUS and the community colleges to be held February 5, 2004, at Lane Community College.

Action: The Student Transfer Committee will continue its work on a proposal for a transferable general education curriculum, guided by the outcome of the academic officers joint meeting in February.

5. Adjourn and Meeting Dates Reminder

The meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m.

Here is the schedule for JBAC meetings during the remainder of the year:

Date Time Place
December 16, 2003 1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Conference Call
January 14, 2004 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. OIT Metro
February 17, 2004 1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Conference Call
March 16, 2004 1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Conference Call
April 14, 2004 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. OIT Metro
May 18, 2004 1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Conference Call
June 8, 2004 1:00 p.m. - 3:00 p.m. Conference Call

 

Prepared by Jim Arnold
OUS Academic Affairs
December 3, 2003
Revised: December 14, 2003
URL: http://www.ous.edu/aca/11-25-03.htm

Page Top


[ OUS HOME ]    [ ADVANCED SEARCH ]    [ OUS INDEX ]    [ CONTACTS ]