April 9, 2013
2:00 p.m.
Ruby Hicks Hall, Room 245
(Revised April 23, 2013)
Members Present: Doug
Allen, Jackie Blakley, Tim Bowen, Scott Harvey, Dan Holland, Lynn Lewis, Robin
McFall, Amoena Norcross, Sarah Shumpert
Members Absent: Amanda Blanton, Brian Swords
Others Present:
Length of Meeting: 1.75 hours
Topics Discussed:
The minutes of the March 26 meeting were approved as
presented.
The revised Presidential
Medallion for Instructional Excellence procedure was briefly discussed, and
was approved as written.
Galen discussed Academic Program Review and distributed a
handout. He noted Lynn’s work with
Institutional Effectiveness to develop levels of review assessment and noted
that Provost’s Council was supposed to review the process. In reviewing the
handout, the group noted the following:
·
The group agreed that the process addresses
levels that are appropriate for the Provost’s Council. The rubric does not have to be
well-developed.
·
Program review informs what infrastructure is
needed.
·
The dean/department head will review the quality
of responses contained in the APR components.
·
Provost’s Council will use teams to review
programs so that the process is not too burdensome.
·
Is there the possibility of external input or
student input?
·
It was noted that once institutional trends have
been identified, how are they acted on?
We need to identify next steps and action points.
·
The end result is to identify real improvements
to achieve institutional goals over which we have control.
·
Next steps will be to develop out the reflective
process and the rubric for the Provost’s Council, which should include time for
review.
The Curriculum Committee Charter group will meet on
Thursday, 4/11/13 and will report after that meeting. John Woodson will join the group.
Under Announcements, Amoena noted that a Faculty Senate work
group is trying to address issues with the Financial Aid SAP letter to
students. The workgroup is trying to
coordinate communication and to flesh out what advisors are expected to know
and to do. Amoena is gathering
information from various areas of the college to try to collaborate
efforts.
Sarah reported that Early Alert is moving forward with the
pilot, and Lou Ann Martin is gathering information about the courses to be used
in the pilot. In addition to all developmental
education courses, she is considering the gatekeeper courses. Sarah asked the group to send Lou Ann any
ideas about possible courses to include.
It was noted that the pilot may need to have some focus on our part-time
students, since they seem to have a harder time progressing.
Sarah noted that the online teaching credential work group
is reconvening. They are trying to
get an estimate of the numbers for next
year, which will have budget implications and may impact how we proceed. After a brief discussion, it was decided that
Sarah will send an e-mail asking faculty to apply, and will use the replies to
determine numbers. It was suggested that
we look in-house for someone with the expertise to develop this training. It was also noted that, while a faculty
workgroup made the decisions about online teaching credential, it was not well
communicated.
Scott noted that May term classes and the spring semester
exams are overlapping. Christy Lawless
was reviewing room conflicts and will move the May term class. She will notify the division secretaries
about any location changes.
Scott is reviewing fall 2013 section projections and current
offerings and will send out this information for review and evaluation.
Scott reported that the catalog is ready. In addition to hard copies, the catalog is
online and has a mobile app.
Scott will pull the deans together to discuss the fall
implementation of mid-term grades for all students.
Dan asked the group for input about withdrawing a student
from the college at exam time. The group
agreed that timing is not a mitigating factor.
Dan mentioned the 20/20 mentoring program for at-risk students and noted the challenge in identifying the right population. He asked the group for suggestions. The group noted the following:
·
Use a cross-section of students, not only
at-risk students
·
Use the Early Alert system
·
Use part-time, first year students
·
Invite students to apply
·
Have faculty nominate a student to apply
·
How do we identify in-coming students?
·
May want to consider something other than COL
103 and 105, since those already have a type of intervention.
Dan asked the group to send any more ideas to him.
