Academic Delivery Group Meeting
April 12, 2011
1:00 p.m.
Personnel Conference Room
Members Present: Susan Allen, Jackie Blakley, Tim Bowen, Katy Goforth, Eugene Grant, Scott Harvey, Gwen Owens
Members Absent: Lynn Lewis
Others Present: Croslena Johnson, Janet Fuller, Dan Holland
Length of Meeting: 2 hours
Topics Discussed:
Dr. Buckhiester welcomed Croslena, Janet, and Dan to the meeting.
Croslena distributed several student engagement forms. Dan explained that an incident prompted a group discussion on how to handle certain situations. He explained that as Croslena was working on the student engagement forms, Lynn Lewis was working on procedures to address misconduct in the Health Education Division. The document from the Health Education division, Disruptive Student Behavior, was also distributed. A work group was created to develop a plan to address situations and incidents.
Croslena discussed the Student Engagement Communication Form. She noted that it is a relatively simple form that provides basic information and is intended for multi-department use. The group suggested that this form be put on eTC so that it would be easily accessible to employees. The originator of the form would complete the information up to the Referral Information section. This process keeps the information confidential. Upon completion, the form will be housed in the office of the Vice President for Student Affairs. Scott cautioned that the information would become an educational record, and the form and any attachments would have to be provided if subpoenaed. We must be careful with what we attach to the form.
Other points were noted:
- By keeping records, we can address repeat offenders.
- Any action taken will be determined by the incident.
- Include information and training on these forms in new adjunct and full-time faculty orientations.
- Revise the form to add a line for the name of the originator.
- Add “possession of a firearm” to the offenses.
It was noted that the information developed by the Health Education Division could be adapted for all four divisions. Dr. Buckhiester will review the document with the deans at a deans’ meeting.
Croslena noted that the other forms in the packet were self-explanatory and were presented as information.
The Minutes of the March 31, 2011 meeting were approved.
In following up on the Minutes, Dr. Buckhiester reminded the group that he needed the names of the representatives for the Technology Standards group chaired by Lee Tennent and Sarah Shumpert. He noted that the Perkins amendment was approved, so areas can spend their money. He also reminded the group that only permanent committees/groups and their chairs would be in the Spring Convocation printed program. By the end of the week, he asked the group to let him know of any new permanent groups that need to be included in the program.
Scott briefly discussed registration windows. He confirmed that currently enrolled students would register first, followed by current students. The two registration windows would overlap. Different RANS would be assigned to differentiate the two groups. The system will close the registration periods. Advisors would be responsible for being aware of the status of the students. It was noted that these advising windows need to be convenient for day and evening students, and some members of the group mentioned concern about the new tuition model and its effect on enrollment.
Scott and Katy discussed class cancellations. Some issues include:
- The timing of the cancelled class.
- Cancelled classes impact multiple areas.
- Even more of a financial aid impact with the new tuition model.
- The purge is a factor in whether the class makes.
- Classes may be cancelled for practical reasons.
It was noted that all the divisions try to make a decision on cancelling a class by late registration. There are too many factors involved to set a firm, campus-wide deadline for cancellations, and most divisions do everything they can to run the class. After the purge, students tend to register/purge multiple times. It was suggested that we move the cancellation date to the Thursday before classes start. A longer window would allow more time to figure out financial aid, and to gather funds.
Eugene discussed recognizing achievement of evening students who cannot take 12 hours. Discussion took place on possible criteria to be used to determine which students to recognize. No decision was made, but the group agreed to pursue this initiative.
Katy distributed a handout on the proposed attendance policy, which if accepted, would replace the wording in the catalog. Several members of the group wanted the opportunity to review the policy. It will be an agenda item for the next meeting.
Tim discussed Anderson Campus promethean boards. He noted that the three classrooms shared by CCE and credit are not technologically equipped. Currently, he uses e-Beam and portable technology to meet any needs in these classrooms. He will wait for Sarah and Lee to develop the technology standards and then make purchases accordingly.
Dr. Buckhiester discussed the student awards dinner. In Dr. Booth’s absence, Jackie will handle the welcome and Lynn will make a few remarks. The deans and Dan will be included in the photographs of outstanding students.
Dr. Buckhiester discussed computer leases. Faye Allen explained that she gets an estimate from Lee for computer leases, and that a part of the tuition is captured to pay for the lease. If any of the divisions know of a non-standard need, make Lee aware of it so that he can include it in his estimate.
Under announcements, Dr. Buckhiester noted that the Clemson University Class of ’63 reunion project is the Bridge Program. He attended several functions about this project, and the feedback about the program is very positive. Our classes are challenging, our students are well prepared when they enter Clemson, and the students and families appreciate the opportunity to have a Clemson education. Dr. Buckhiester stated that the Class of ’63 was told that the Bridge student persistence rate is 95%, while the persistence rate for non-Bridge transfer students is 75%.
Eugene announced that BMW has created a Technical Scholars Program. Eight Tri-County students, three Greenville Tech students and four Spartanburg Community College students were invited to participate. Other industries are interested in this type of program, as well. He also announced that the robotics team placed second at the South Carolina competition, won the North Carolina competition and will be competing at the national competition in St. Louis.
Susan is in the process of establishing the Faculty Fellow selection committee and may ask the deans for input on committee members. She is also in the process of preparing for new faculty orientation. She was pleased to announce that we received an outstanding report from the Title III external site evaluator. Susan has filled several vacancies. Cheryl Enfinger is the new Title III administrative assistant; Katy Goforth has accepted the learning communities coordinator position, and Lou Ann Martin has accepted the ASNC coordinator position.
Katy reported that Faculty Senate division elections will take place soon. Currently, there is only one nominee for Faculty Senate president, so that person may win by default, with no election.
Tim noted that we are close to hiring a part-time director for the Oconee campus.
Scott noted that there are problems with many faculty grade books. The books are missing names, dates, last dates of attendance, and other important information. He will let the deans know of the problems and asked for their help in getting the grade books corrected.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Recorded by: Anne Bryan
Next Meeting: Friday, May 27, at 10:00, in the Personnel Conf. Room, RH 102
