Strategic Enrollment Management Committee Meeting Minutes (11/21/11)

Strategic Enrollment Management Committee (SEMC)

Meeting Summary

Monday, November 21, 2011

Present: Gayle Arries, Amanda Blanton, Jackie Blakley, Gwen Owens, Lisa Robinson, Linda Driggers, Lynn Lewis

Absent: Eugene Grant and Lou Ann Martin

The following is a summary of the SEMC meeting which occurred on Monday, November 21, 2011.

Review/Approval of Minutes

·         The minutes of the September 27 and October 20 meetings were approved.

Spring Enrollment Update:

·         Amanda gave a brief update regarding spring enrollment figures compared to the same week last year.  As of November 21, there are 485 new students who have been admitted for spring term but who are not registered. 

·         Report 041 shows that 538 current students have their RANs set but have not registered.  Student Records contact these students via I-Contact.  The breakdown of the students is as follows:  232 in Arts and Sciences Division, 82 in the B&PS Division, 97 in the EIT Division, and 127 in the Health Education Division.  The Gateway to College program would account for some of the 538 students; some of the students who have not registered are transient students, and 29 of the 538 students attempted to register but failed.  Some of the students may not have met prerequisites, and Dr. Lewis stated that some of the students in the Health Education Division may not have been chosen for competitive entry.  It was decided that each Division would evaluate the students in their division who are listed in Report 041 and determine which students to contact. 

Enrollment Projections:

·         Amanda distributed a handout on Enrollment Projections for 2010-2015.  The report shows that a larger portion of our enrollment is coming from recent high school graduates. 

College Strategic Plan:

·         Amanda asked what the College Strategic Objectives imply for the SEMC as a whole regarding planning initiatives and the overall retention plan, and if the SEMC needed to submit an additional activity for the 3-year plan.  Lynn stated that the Executive Staff would like to see visible seeds of retention awareness in deliberate ways.  Examples would be workshops and articles in Connection.  In Connection, a retention corner titled “A Spotlight on Retention,” or a “Brag and Share” that mentions a member of the faculty who has helped a student were suggested.  Amanda said that she has spoken with Rebecca and the plan is to start highlighting retention in Connection in January.

·         Lisa agreed to take the lead on establishing a portal in eTC that faculty and staff would be encouraged to join to keep apprised of what the College is doing to improve retention.  The portal would be mentioned in Connection.

Withdrawal Survey:

·         Amanda distributed information from a meeting she had with Scott Harvey and Chris Marino.  Chris indicated that it is very hard to contact students after they have left the college.  Current college data show that the majority of students withdraw for personal reasons, which correlates to national data for why students withdraw.

·         Suggestions on what the Committee can do to collect more helpful data include the following:

o   Include the following question on the withdrawal form, “What would need to happen in order for you to return to Tri-County and complete the program?”

o   Require Exit Interviews:  If students schedule an exit or re-entry interview, could they receive a refund of the amount paid up front for graduation?

o   Instructors could include the following question on their final exams, “Do you plan to return next semester?”  If the student answers “no,” then ask why they do not plan to return.

o   Late in the semester, call the students with RANs set but who are not registered and ask them if they need assistance registering.  If they answer they are not planning to return to Tri-County, ask them why.

o   Break down “personal reasons” on the withdrawal form and see how the College could impact that.

·         The Committee decided that each division would call its respective students on REP041 to assist with registration or to investigate why students may not be returning next semester and gather the data for the Committee.

Retention Plan/Updates:

·         The committee postponed until the December meeting individual updates as not all committee members were present.

Next Meeting:

·         Tuesday, December 6, at 10:00 am.

Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes (10/19/11)

Tri-CountyTechnical College
Faculty Senate Minutes

Date: October 19, 2011

Location:Fulp 400

Time: 12:15 PM

Members Present:Donna Shannon, Elizabeth Bryan, John Price, Robert Newton, Mandy Orzechowski, Bert Reed, Penny Edwards, Tonique Dennis, Cheryln Brown, Franklin Smith, Shannon Farr, Amoena Norcross, Rhonda Harris

Members Absent: Marla Roberson, Mark Franks

Guests: None

Presided: Donna Shannon

Approval of Minutes:September Minutes Approved

1. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:  Attendance Policy

Donna talked with Dr. Buckhiester regarding the proposed changes in the attendance policy.  Do we need to talk about readmittance in the new policy?  Should we take the last two sentences from the old and make it an entirely new paragraph that includes readmittance? 

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

Ameona will make the corrections and submit changes in time for the next executive staff meeting. Donna will give the date to Ameona.  Amoena made a motion to accept these changes.  Bert and Tonique seconded the motion. The motion passed.

2.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: Election of Officers

Chris Marino and Donna discussed the plan for electronic voting.  Do we want the nominees to be generated in a uniform manner?  Nominees names will be submitted to Chris Marino and then he will add the names to a survey monkey electronic ballet. 

·        The President will solicit nominations from the Divisions. 

·        Once nominees are selected, the President will send the list to Chris with candidates by office. 

·        Chris will establish the SurveyMonkey

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

None

3.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: Cameras in the Classroom

Bert talked to Jerry Marshall about the placement of cameras in the math classroom.  Cameras were placed in the hallway outside the math classroom.  Ameona wanted to know why we would need security cameras in the classroom for security. Mandy stated that there is small equipment in some labs (laptops/netbooks) that could be concealed.  Franklin noted that the new campus in Sandy Springs will have cameras for real time security.

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

No further action.

4.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: College Divisions & Faculty Representation

Do some areas (small divisions) fell under represented in committees?  How are committees selected?  The example given to Dr. Buckhiester was SCTEA

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

Are there really? Donna will check with John for information concerning SCTEA voting and membership.

5.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Are faculty using Outlook calendars? Why are they not using them? Reasons were discussed concerning the use of calendars. Training could be a possible reason for not using the calendar. The importance of using outlook calendar was discussed with regard for scheduling meetings and campus activities.

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

No action at this time.

Next meeting date, time, and location:

November 16, 2011

12:15 – 1:15 pm

Cleveland Hall 142.

Name of recorder:Mandy Orzechowski



Strategic Enrollment Management Committee (SEMC) Minutes 10/20/11

Strategic Enrollment Management Committee (SEMC)

Meeting Summary

Thursday, October 20, 2011

Present: Gayle Arries, Amanda Blanton, Jackie Blakley, Lou Ann Martin, Gwen Owens, Lisa Robinson, Linda Driggers, Eugene Grant, Lynn Lewis

The following is a summary of the SEMC meeting which occurred on Thursday, October 20, 2011.

Fall Enrollment Calendar

·         Amanda gave a brief update regarding changes that will be made to the fall calendar regarding admissions and registration deadlines. 

Retention Plan:

·         The committee discussed the status of the retention plan that was presented to the Executive Staff and the next steps involved in finalizing details, such as developing a project charter and a roll-out strategy.  Amanda announced that she and Deborah Brock had presented the plan framework in a faculty development workshop and that another workshop is planned in November, in addition to Amanda’s meeting with faculty and staff at the Anderson Campus in December.  The committee agreed that we should move forward with visible activities that emphasize student success and retention.  Examples might be

o   Developing a retention column in Connection to highlight best practices (Amanda to talk to Rebecca)

o   Gathering best practices from department heads/faculty

o   Talking to Sharon about planning the next Professional Development Day (next November 2012) to focus on the different aspects of retention (perhaps call it Professional Development for Student Success)

o   Developing retention resources for faculty and staff

·         Credit divisions gave examples of retention activities they are currently doing, such as

o   Eugene talked about asking all his faculty to put 1 idea for improving retention in the classroom on a post-it to be compiled (Eugene will send the compiled list to Amanda when done or bring to next meeting) and creating T-shirts to create a sense of community among students

o   Gwen talked about how the collaborations we have with other colleges to create 4-year pathways improves retention

·         The committee brainstormed with Gayle on questions she can ask students when she works on a video that will provide us with information on why students stay at TCTC or what they like about TCTC

·         The committee also talked about the need to make sure we recognize our own processes that may not be student friendly or help students be successful.  One process mentioned was the College’s withdrawal process, which is slated in the retention plan to be reviewed and improved, and discussed that perhaps we need a workgroup to begin reviewing this process.

·         It was mentioned that Diana Walter has developed some great retention techniques and that perhaps the SEMC should invite her to talk to the committee about some things she has done with Gateway.

Format of meeting:

·         Amanda asked if there were additional agenda items that should be included as part of the format of the SEMC meetings.  It was suggested that we include on a regular basis as part of the meeting a retention best practice section.

Strategic Enrollment Management Committee (SEMC) Minutes 9/27/11

Strategic Enrollment Management Committee (SEMC)

Meeting Summary

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Present: Gayle Arries, Amanda Blanton, Lou Ann Martin, Lisa Robinson, Eugene Grant, Lynn Lewis

The following is a summary of the SEMC meeting which occurred on Tuesday, September 27, 2011.

·         SEMC reviewed notes from prior week’s Executive Staff meeting and discussed next steps for meeting with Executive Staff on Wednesday, September 28.  Next steps include the following:

o   Refine retention plan by developing an executive summary of the plan that shows in a succinct format accomplishments in year 1 (foundation year) and how we plan to proceed;

o   SEMC discussed developing “quick wins” to add to the plan which contains more strategic and long-term activities. 

·         Gayle volunteered to develop the executive summary (Thank you Gayle!)

Strategic Enrollment Management Committee (SEMC) Minutes 9/27/11

Strategic Enrollment Management Committee (SEMC)

Meeting Summary

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Present: Gayle Arries, Amanda Blanton, Lou Ann Martin, Lisa Robinson, Eugene Grant, Lynn Lewis

The following is a summary of the SEMC meeting which occurred on Tuesday, September 27, 2011.

·         SEMC reviewed notes from prior week’s Executive Staff meeting and discussed next steps for meeting with Executive Staff on Wednesday, September 28.  Next steps include the following:

o   Refine retention plan by developing an executive summary of the plan that shows in a succinct format accomplishments in year 1 (foundation year) and how we plan to proceed;

o   SEMC discussed developing “quick wins” to add to the plan which contains more strategic and long-term activities. 

·         Gayle volunteered to develop the executive summary (Thank you Gayle!)

Faculty Senate Minutes (9/27/11)

Tri-CountyTechnicalCollege
Faculty Senate Minutes

Date: September 27, 2011

Location: CD 142

Time: 12:00 PM

Members Present:Donna Shannon, Elizabeth Bryan, John Price, Robert Newton, Mark Franks, Mandy Orzechowski, Bert Reed, Penny Edwards, Tonique Dennis, Cheryln Brown

Members Absent: Franklin Smith, Rhonda Harris, Marla Roberson, Amoena Norcross, Shannon Farr

Guests: Phil Buckhiester

Presided: Donna Shannon

Approval of Minutes:

1. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:  Purpose of Senate

Dr. Buckhiester spoke to members regarding the vision and purpose of the Faculty Senate.

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

None

2.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: Election of Officers

Donna introduced herself discussed her role as President.  The Senate needs to elect a vice-president and secretary.  Penny agreed to serve as vice president.  Mandy agreed to serve as secretary.

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

None

3.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: Senate Meetings

Donna asked what the best meeting time is for the members.  The Senate agreed to schedule regular meetings on the third Wednesday of the month at 12:15 PM.  Meetings will generally be held in CD 142.

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

Donna will schedule future meetings accordingly.

4.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: Student Attendance Policy

Donna and Penny explained the history of the change in the student attendance policy as it appears in the catalog.  Dr. Buckhiester had reviewed the changes and questioned the removal of the first and last section.  The members of the Senate believe that the statement “Class attendance is crucial success” is implied in the new attendance policy.  The Senate also believes the final statement from the old policy is implied.  There are concerns regarding student awareness of the attendance policy.  How do we make sure that students get this information?  The Senate believes this information is covered in orientation.

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

Donna will ask Scott about the new attendance policy relative to new regulations.  Donna will ensure that the attendance policy is covered in orientation.

5.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: Cameras in the Classroom

Donna asked that we consider how we feel about cameras in the classroom.  This conversation started because the math department wants to place cameras in a traditional classroom that has expensive, specialized equipment for distance classes with Clemson.  These are some of the concerns:

Do we want to record sound?

Will cameras be “by request” or campus wide?

What are the legal ramifications/constitutional issues of adding cameras to the classroom?

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

We need to have answers to these questions before members present their questions to individual divisions.

6.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion: Electronic Voting for Senate

Now that we are a multisite campus, should we have electronic voting for senators?  After discussion, the senate is sure electronic voting in the constitution.  Can Chris Marino show us how to do this with Survey Monkey?

Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:

Check with Chris about the use of Survey Monkey.

Announcements/Concerns:

Contact Donna with items to go on the agenda at the next meeting.

Next meeting date, time, and location:

October 19, 2011

12:15 – 1:15 pm

Fulp 400

Name of recorder:Mandy Orzechowski

Academic Delivery Group Minutes (9/27/11)

Academic Delivery Group Meeting

September 27, 2011

1:00 p.m.

Personnel Conference Room

(Revised October 6, 2011)

Members Present:   Jackie Blakley, Tim Bowen, Eugene Grant, Scott Harvey, Lynn Lewis, Gwen Owens, Donna Shannon, Sarah Shumpert, Brian Swords

Members Absent:       

Others Present:          Richard Smith

Length of Meeting:  1.75 hours

Topics Discussed:

Dr. Buckhiester noted his pleasure that Brian Swords has accepted the Easley Campus Director position, and welcomed him to the Academic Delivery Group.  Dr. Buckhiester also welcomed Richard Smith and thanked him for his willingness to provide information and answer questions about Blackboard. 

Sarah reminded the group that the recent change in Blackboard was a major upgrade, and we are still filtering out the issues and trying to determine if they are problems with Blackboard, or just adjustments to the new product. 

Richard discussed several issues with Blackboard.

• Until the upgrade, Blackboard was located on one server.  With the upgrade, Blackboard was placed on a three-server system, which requires a balanced load.  This imbalance was the cause of some of the recent problems. 

• The problem with quizzes is another issue that they continue to work on.  At completely random times, quiz screens freeze.  Since it is random, it is incredibly difficult to track, and for the most part, we only know about it because a student calls for help.  If the student is only allowed one attempt at a quiz, he/she cannot start over and return to try to complete the quiz.  Blackboard technical support has made several suggestions, and provided patches to the system.  The first two patches were not successful.  Our IT staff is applying the third patch, but only time will tell if it is successful.  Richard noted that we are monitoring tickets.  Once they diminish, we will assume the problem is resolved.  Everyone involved understands the frustration.  He asked the deans to let the instructors know that we continue to work on this problem. 

Dr. Buckhiester stated that we need to err on the side of the student.  If a student reports that he/she was shut out of a test, that student needs to be allowed to re-take the test.   It was noted that students need to self-identify.  We cannot help them, if we do not know who they are.

• Richard also addressed the PowerPoint issue.  This is a MicroSoft issue and is caused by the new version of PowerPoint.   

At the next meeting, Sarah will update the group on financial aid audit reporting.

The minutes of the August 23, 2011 meeting were approved as written.  In following up on the minutes, Dr. Buckhiester met with Dan Holland about the international student attendance/withdrawal issue.  Renae Frazier will meet with the four deans to address this issue.

The ADG meeting pattern has been changed to the first and third Thursday of each month at 1:00.  The change will begin on October 6.

Gainful employment/tracking for advising purposes was discussed.  If a student is enrolled in a program that is not considered a gainful employment program, he/she will be moved into the gainful employment program nearest to the original program.  Scott reported that those students have been moved, except for students who do not have a high school diploma. 

Scott announced that the waitlist function is ready.  He distributed a Waitlist Introduction for Students and a Waitlist Primer for Faculty/Advisors.  He reminded the group that the 16 hour window of time for a student to accept a seat starts as soon as the seat opens and the e-mail is sent.  Scott also pointed out the Waitlist Considerations on the back of the Primer.

Scott discussed SC TRAC institutional reports.  A handout with the available reports was distributed.  He noted that a lot of information is available through SC TRAC and recommended that the members of the ADG request access.  Dr. Buckhiester asked the members of the group to e-mail him by October 7, if they would like to be an authorized viewer for SC TRAC. 

Jackie, Tim, and Gwen gave an overview of the Achieving the Dream workshop.  Key points that they mentioned were:

• Good focus on retention with a lot of good ideas
• Colleges spend 90% of funds to recruit students; spend only 10% of funds to retain students
• Possible shift from an academic to a cost-effective perspective
• Need someone for the student to connect with immediately
• Is the branding message cost effective?

Dr. Buckhiester discussed registration restrictions/student criteria. Dr. Booth would like to explore options to restrict registration for certain subsets of students.  During discussion, it was noted that, philosophically, we do not want student success to become student irresponsibility.  Advising is a shared responsibility, and the student needs to be involved in the process.  If we take all the responsibility, we take all the liability too.  Logistically, if we set criteria to restrict registration, how difficult would it be to implement? Scott noted that students on warning and probation, and students in online courses could be coded and identified fairly simply. He also noted that the RAN would drive the implementation and success of this initiative and it could be heavily dependent on the advisor.  It may make the faculty member too responsible for student success.  Dr. Buckhiester noted that the initial input was very valuable as he works with Dr. Booth on this issue.

With agenda items remaining, the meeting was adjourned.

Recorded by:             Anne Bryan

Next Meeting:            Thursday, October 6, at 1:00 p.m., in the Personnel Conf. Room, RH 102