Academic Delivery Group
August 14, 2012
2:00 p.m.
Personnel Conference Room
(Revised August 28, 2012)
Members Present: Doug Allen, Jackie Blakley, Tim Bowen, Scott Britten, Scott Harvey, Lynn Lewis, Sarah Shumpert,
Members Absent: Amoena Norcross, Brian Swords
Others Present:
Length of Meeting: 1.5 hours
Topics Discussed:
The minutes of July 26, 2012 meeting were approved with revisions.
Scott Harvey discussed the Graduation Application procedure. Galen noted that an earlier version was discussed at length in a recent Executive Staff meeting. Based on that discussion, Scott slightly revised the procedure, and noted the graduation initiative, which focuses on the ability to participate in the ceremony. Beginning in the spring, the college will purchase honor cords for students, but regalia, including AZB regalia, will be purchased by the student. The group agreed with the changes to the procedure. Galen will take it back to Executive Staff for final approval.
Galen discussed the Recognition of Academic Achievement policy and procedure. The policy was revised to include the Academic Distinction recognition. The procedure was revised to include all recognitions, including the requirements for the newly created Academic Distinction recognition, into one procedure. Scott H. noted one change needed for the Dean’s List requirements. The group agreed to the changes. Galen will take these forward to Executive Staff for approval.
Scott H. discussed the Standards of Academic Progress procedure and noted that he had met with Sarah Dowd to discuss the possibility of aligning the SAP procedure with the Financial Aid satisfactory progress procedure. Sarah agreed that aligning the two could be helpful, but cautioned that some of the Financial Aid requirements may be lower than the SAP would require. The group agreed that a review of the data that Chris Marino is collecting will be very helpful and will wait for this review before making a decision. It was noted that if we decide to align the two procedures, to avoid a detrimental impact on students, we may want to consider placing all students on good standing the semester before it is implemented.
Galen discussed the constitution and focus of the Academic Delivery Group, and asked the group to consider and give input on what a highly functioning Academic Delivery Group does. Much discussion provided the following.
· A highly functioning ADG would set the direction of instruction, and address/consider strategic issues that deal with delivery of instruction. It could decide what to address and request needed resources.
· The Academic Affairs and Student Affairs divisions merged several months ago, but Student Affairs is not represented on the ADG. Student Affairs needs to be included as part of the delivery. It was noted that the deans work in an oversight capacity. We may want to consider adding a department head representative to the group. Corporate and Community Education may need to be included, as well.
· A monthly meeting of direct reports would be beneficial. This group may be able to handle some of the tasks/duties of the current ADG.
· After review of the committee charter, the group agreed that the committee purpose is reactive. We may need to figure out what the group wants to do and repurpose the membership. It was noted that the charter for ADG was most likely created after being in existence for years, as a directive from Executive Staff. Based on the current charter, the group is fulfilling its purpose.
· Changes and initiatives are taking place so quickly, that it would be easy for things to become disjointed. We need a group to pull things together and to unify efforts.
To accomplish this review of the ADG, Galen suggested that Sarah facilitate a consensus workshop, with a refined focus question. Galen and Sarah will work together to create the question. This exercise would generate a list of elements and components to be considered by the group. Prior to the workshop, Sarah will review information on the definition of a committee, its make-up, purpose, etc. We will use the next ADG meeting for this workshop.
Sarah briefly discussed the Online Teaching Credential process. She reported that she had asked for input from Margaret Burdette and Sharon Cololough, and has been working with Courtney Tillett to create a mechanism to handle the approvals/sign offs electronically. It will take a while to create this mechanism, so Sarah will begin the process with paper. Sarah noted that she will take care of most of the approvals/sign offs, but will need the supervisor to sign off on e-learning tools that faculty are already using. Sarah confirmed that the first cohort will be limited to full-time faculty, and will be on a first-come, first-served basis. Each cohort will have 40 spaces, and Sarah will close the cohort once it reaches that number. She will contact any faculty on the wait list with information about the start date for the next cohort. The group agreed that a “coming attractions” type e-mail would be beneficial as we begin this process. Sarah will prepare and distribute this e-mail.
Galen noted that he has been working with Rebecca Eidson to develop a student success communications strategy. This strategy will be rolled out at Convocation. The Student Success Plan will include the following.
· Activities and events that focus on student success
· Informational e-newsletter will be distributed twice a month
· Website with plans and directions
· The focus of Connection will be to integrate activities and information into a consistent monthly message that shows how everything is working together
· Executive Staff Talking Points – will be delivered out. The Provost will discuss with his direct reports, who will disseminate appropriately. The mechanism can be used to funnel information back up the chain, as well.
Galen noted the following Executive Staff talking points.
1. A SACS team will visit in the spring. Its focus is on the high schools that we service, and whether or not we have the same outcomes for high school students that we have for our traditional students. Arts & Sciences will undergo program review to be sure we are in compliance.
2. The EIT dean declined the position, and Doug has agreed to continue as interim EIT dean.
3. The group was asked to encourage employees to attend Convocation. This year’s message will have a different tone.
4. Work on the entrance to the campus will be disruptive for a few weeks, but the goal is to provide safer conditions for employees and students. It was noted that it would be nice for faculty and staff to be aware of the schematic for the traffic flow. Galen will ask for maps to be available at Convocation. It was noted that there is very little employee parking on the front drive. We have not added any parking spaces, but we continue to take spaces away.
5. Enrollment – It was noted that with the recent enrollment push, the registration deadline was the only deadline that was changed. During that registration extension, we did not admit any new students, but worked only with students already in the pipeline. This strategy helped to even out the enrollment numbers.
6. The plan for recording educational goals was approved. This plan allows us to capture a student’s goals, the student’s commitment to those goals, and the factors that may have influenced attaining those goals. Galen noted that we are using the CCSSE standard goals, and allow students to record a primary and secondary goal. This is a short term plan, and we want to automate this process later. Lou Ann Martin and Rob Massey plan to use this information for intensive advising.
Galen reported that Gregg is organizing a repository for cross-functional project charters. These will have public access via a portal.
Under Announcements, Scott noted the following:
· On August 16, student RANS will be deleted.
· He will address the fact that faculty are required to take attendance in his Fall semester instructional e-mail to faculty.
· He reminded the group that class rosters will not be printed. Faculty are responsible for their rosters. Rosters will be printed for classes that do not have a faculty member assigned to them. The division secretaries can pick these up from Student Records.
· He stressed the importance of administrative drops, and the assigning of 0s and 1s.
· He reminded the group about the initiatives the were implemented this Summer:
The new FA grade
LDAs are required for a student withdrawal as well as a faculty withdrawal
The continuous enrollment deadlines (B/A/C).
Jackie reported that Janis Cox had some recommendations for the adjunct faculty observation form. The deans will address these recommendations at their next meeting.
With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.
Recorded by: Anne Bryan
Next Meeting: Tuesday, August 28, at 2:00 p.m., in RH 248
