The meeting began at 3:03 pm on Zoom and in attendance were:

Jane Weiss

Elroy Esdaille

Monica Filimon

Frank Pacaccio

Enid Stubin

Rob Cowan

Assessments on learning Outcomes for English 40 was discussed.

–The reason why we are discussing two different assessments with two different outcomes is to be ready for Middle States in 2026.

–We want to have a lot of information regarding what we are assessing.

–We should look for patterns of what our outcomes indicate, and whether we want to stick with them or adjust.

–We should examine ways to evaluate what we are doing or what we want to do.

Marilyn and Jane are working on two different outcomes for English 40, that is each of them is working on a different one.

–The two different outcomes should satisfy the Gen Ed –Pathways- Creative expression and also the Major.

Marylynn is designing a pathways creative outcome. This is evaluated across courses. Marlynn is the liaison for assessment and Jane is responsible for our program assessment.

A question was asked if there are preexisting learning outcomes now and if they are available. The answer is that the outcomes need revamping , and the learning outcomes that Jane and Marlynn are working on were given.

Concentration Learning Outcomes

Concentration Learning Outcomes 1:

Upon successful completion of the Literary Studies concentration, students will:

• Know and apply the terminology of literary studies, recognize literary genres, devices, periods, and cultural contexts, and identify meaningful details in literary texts.
• Communicate individual interpretations precisely and persuasively in written work and/or in scholarly discussions of literary texts.
• To be able to communicate these interpretations.

Concentration Learning Outcomes 2:

Upon successful completion of the Literary Studies concentration, students will:

1)Know and apply the terminology of literary studies, recognize literary genres, devices, periods, and cultural contexts, and identify meaningful details in literary texts.

2) Communicate individual interpretations precisely and persuasively in written work and/or in scholarly discussions of literary texts.

                                 ……………….

–Also, it was said that we that we are currently creating a 5-year assessment plan, and it is forums like this that would help us decide.

There was the suggestion that the aspects of the learning outcome can be assessed in different ways. The response to this was that all of the courses incorporate more than one period (apart from the Shakespeare course).

–We are limited to multiple section courses.

–The difference between a sequential sequence of courses and how they are assessed depends on how we structure the course.

Another suggestion was that programs and course Mappings is something that we used to do in the past and if can find the course maps and outcomes and ways to assess them, we can use them to full effect.

–We need to show differences in the courses, even if there is overlap in the learning outcomes.

–English courses and Literature courses have discreet layouts, even if there is overlap.

The current learning outcomes were designed to be transferable to Brooklyn College and Other CUNY Colleges.

–We have to keep in mind how our courses are related to Brooklyn College BA.  We have checked our course map and how it relates to the Brooklyn College degree.

–Currently, as long as the students take English 30, and two other literature courses, it would suffice.

–English 30 transfers directly as a required literature course.

We should ask English 40 teachers to come up with their assessment instruments, as long as they are roughly addressing the same outcome. The response to this is that they all need to be normed before this can be carried out.

                …………….

There was a reiteration that the learning outcomes and the course map can pay dividends.

–We need to differentiate the learning outcomes for the program as opposed to the learning outcomes for English 40.

— With regards to Middle States and New York States Assessments, it was said that they only care about degree programs.

 It was brought up that we need to also map all of our transfer equivalents.

–The response was that Annie and Jane are working on how to fix weird transfer equivalents that are listed in other CUNY colleges.

— Also, some suggestions were given to help fix transfer equivalent issues. For example, we can have open negotiations with the other colleges, we can talk to our contacts at other CUNY campuses, and do the needed ground work like making appointments and visiting other departments to have a discussion about transfer equivalents.

It was also suggested that apart from the individual course outcomes that were teased out, and we will continue to tweak, we also need to examine our own purposefulness.

The question was asked about how we can do more work to promote our literature courses.

 Some suggestions:

 -Create Flyer and other promotion materials

-Communicate amongst ourselves and share course offering

-Offer less English 30 classes while having more teachers train for WRAC. WRAC teachers need to be certified. WRAC teachers can teach other literature courses, and they would more likely run, since students are often trying to fulfill the “Writing Intensive” requirement.

Overall, we need to generate excitement for our literature courses.

         …………….

The question was asked if we can put  English 76 on the list as well for fixing in terms of transferability. We need to get it transferable and get it recorded. It was suggested that we Contact Amada Kalin to find out more about the best way to do that.

–We need a table of transfer requirements

        …………….

Next Meeting:

It was suggested that the next meeting should be held on Thursday November 16, 2023, at 3:00 pm. This is a possible time period for the meeting, but a Doodle would still be sent out to gauge what works best for everyone.

–The meeting was called to a close at 3:15 pm.