Faculty Senate Minutes (9/26/12)

Tri-County Technical College

                   Faculty Senate Minutes

Date: September 26, 2012

Location: Fulp 400

Time: 1:30 PM

Members Present:  Amoena Norcross, Todd Crisp-Simons, Ashley Brady, Lisa Walton, Tony Logan, Chris McFarlin, Jason Poole, Cherlyn Brown, Marilyn Vickery

Members Absent: Corey Evans, Tom Lawrence, Steven Mathena, Tony Young, Penny Edwards, Marla Roberson

Guests: Galen Dehay, Tonia Faulling

Presider: Amoena Norcross

Approval of Minutes: A grammatical error was corrected under the Approval of Minutes section.  With this change noted, Chris motioned that the May minutes be approved.  Cherlyn seconded the motion.  The minutes were approved unanimously.

1. Issue discussed and major points of discussion: 

Update on Provost Search

Galen shared that the Provost search is ongoing and that the search committee has adopted a rolling, immediate process for reviewing applicants.  As new applications are submitted, they are reviewed and a decision on conducting a phone interview is made within days of receipt. There are many interested applicants, but the College desires a Provost with strong, visionary leadership.

  

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

None.

2.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Update on Curriculum Committee (CC)

Galen shared that curriculum changes are being processed by the CC as usual.  A new process, however, is currently being developed.  At present, WIDS to Web (a web-based version of WIDS) is slated to be used in the new curriculum approval process, and the CC Chair and others are working on identifying roles and responsibilities in this approval process.  Once the new process has been finalized, it will be presented for review to Faculty Senate and to the Provost’s Council. The effective date for implementation of the new process is Spring 2013.

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

None

3.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Faculty Senate and Student Success

Galen shared that he had served on Faculty Senate for several years and that Faculty Senate is a good example of shared governance.  He encouraged Faculty Senate to become a catalyst for improving student learning and success.  He also challenged the Faculty Senate to consider risks it would be willing to take to positively impact student success, i.e., becoming pro-active rather than waiting on directives. Issues should be resolved/decided upon at the level where accountability lies, not sent upward.

Galen also mentioned that the Academic Delivery Group has been re-designed into the Provost’s Council to reflect the integration of Student Affairs into Academic Affairs.  He encouraged the Senate to view the new committee charter for the Provost’s Council posted in eTC.

Galen also reminded the Senate of the student success newsletter which communicates efforts pertaining to student success initiatives.  He also emphasized that change needs to occur 1) to help students learn more effectively and 2) to empower those who impact student learning.

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

None.

4. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Faculty Senate Constitution and By Laws: Clarification of Officers’ Duties (Article III, Section 5)

The Senate reviewed a draft of the duties of the Faculty Senate President, Vice President, and Secretary.  Amoena stated that these were generally the duties of the officers from her experience serving on the Senate and having been President many years ago.  However, the Constitution and By Laws does not explicitly state the duties of these officers.  Penny had communicated via email that the Faculty Senate President should also communicate to the Faculty Senate concerns/issues that the administration seeks input on.  The Senate agreed that this duty should be included.  Amoena also noted that the Secretary should send minutes to Senate members within 7 business days following a Faculty Senate meeting rather than 7 calendar days.  No other changes were recommended for the draft.

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

Since 2/3 of the Senate was not present, the inclusion of the officers’ duties into the Constitution and By Laws could not be voted on at the meeting.  Amoena will incorporate changes into the draft and send the revised draft to the Senate for electronic voting.

5. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Election of Faculty Senate Vice President & Secretary

Amoena called for nominations for Faculty Senate Vice President.  Todd was nominated, and with no other nominations, was elected by acclamation.

Amoena called for nominations for Faculty Senate Secretary.  Marilyn was nominated, and with no other nominations, was elected by acclamation.

Todd will bring a pen recorder to meetings for Marilyn’s use in recording the minutes.

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

None.

6. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Professional Development Day

Amoena reported a concern regarding the timing of the Professional Development Day scheduled for Tues., Nov. 6 (Election Day).  Senators voiced concern that a break this late in the semester may negatively impact student success since there is a 2-month span since Labor Day with no break.  Furthermore, Thanksgiving follows this break quickly as does the end of the semester.  It was noted that Clemson University has scheduled a brief fall break in addition to another one coinciding with Election Day. 

Another concern with the date of the Nov. 6 Professional Development Day is that any pedagogical strategies learned would most likely not be implemented because the semester is nearing its end.  Offering the Professional Development Day at the beginning of a fall semester would allow easier integration of learned strategies into the upcoming semester.  The discussion concluded with Senators agreeing that they should serve as an example by attending the Professional Development Day and encouraging faculty in their areas to do the same. 

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

The scheduling of Professional Development Day will be revisited by the Senate after student deadlines have been posted for applying to the College for Fall 2013 and for registering for Fall 2013 classes.

7. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Multi-Campus Scheduling

Amoena reported a concern regarding class meeting patterns across all campuses.  The Pendleton Campus (PC) and Easley Campus (EC) have the same class meeting patterns, but the Anderson Campus (AC) does not.   Consequently, AC faculty members are unable to participate in meetings at other campuses via phone conferencing because AC classes are offered in the 1:15-2:30 pm time slot.  

Chris shared that he has been serving on a group examining the meeting patterns and course offerings on the satellite campuses.  His group discovered that the EC does not offer enough general education classes on different days and times.  The AC offers too many classes in the same time slot and is not utilizing Fridays at all for teaching. There appears to be a disconnect between implementing student success strategies and effective utilization of resources (classroom space, unfilled seats, faculty, etc.) 

Tony added that the Industrial Technology Center (ITC) is also working on class meeting patterns and course offerings and that Fridays may be free at the ITC as well.

Amoena shared that she is serving on the Board of the Scheduling Project Team and that this team is addressing the issues Chris and Tony mentioned as well as others pertaining to scheduling.  Amoena asked Senators to encourage faculty input to Scheduling Project Team members: Scott Harvey, Tim Bowen, Stan Compton, Emily Danuser, Stephanie Evans, Janet Fuller, Robin McFall, Phil Smith, Brian Swords, Della Vanhuss, and Julie Vernon.

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

Amoena will report to the Senate Scheduling Project Team recommendations.

Announcements/Concerns:

Because of time constraints, the Attendance Policy and Nepotism in the Classroom agenda items will be addressed at the next Senate meeting.

Tonia announced that the deadline to donate items to the time capsule has been extended to October 3 and that not many items had been donated yet.  It was suggested that a USB flash drive and a PC mouse be considered as possible items.  Tonia also encouraged Senators to advertise the ceremony for burying the time capsule on October 24.  The ceremony will be held during the activity hour outside of the Café.

Tony announced that a carpentry class is being offered in Spring 2013 as an elective. There is also a plumbing class being offered.  A discussion followed that faculty are generally unaware of new course offerings because of communication issues.  This unawareness has consequences on advising. 

Next meeting date, time, and location: Thursday, October 25, 2:30 pm, FP-400

Name of recorder: Amoena B. Norcross

Faculty Senate Minutes (5/29/12)

Tri-County Technical College

Faculty Senate Minutes

Date: May 29, 2012

Location: Fulp 400

Time: 12:00 PM

Members Present:  Donna Shannon, Amoena Norcross, Cherlyn Brown, Marla Roberson, Penny Edwards

Members Absent: Robert Newton, Mandy Orzechowski, Franklin Smith, Shannon Farr, Tonique Dennis, Marshall Franks, Elizabeth Bryan, John Price, Alberta Reed, Rhonda Harris

Guests: None

Presider: Donna Shannon

Approval of Minutes: Brenda Mattison and Sarah Shumpert need to be removed from the Members Present section.  With this change noted, Amoena motioned that the April minutes be approved.  Marla seconded the motion.

1. Issue discussed and major points of discussion: 

Faculty Choice Scholarship Recipient

Donna shared a thank you letter sent to her by David Howansky, Nursing major and this year’s Faculty Choice Scholarship recipient.  Senators agreed that the letter should be forwarded to Public Relations for possible publication in Connections so that Faculty Senate’s support of this particular scholarship is highlighted.

  

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

Donna will contact Rebecca Eidson.

2.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Faculty Senate Membership 2012-2013

Donna shared the 2012-13 Faculty Senate membership.

President—Amoena Norcross

AS Division Representatives: Todd Crisp-Simons, Corey Evans

BPS Division Representatives: Chris McFarlin, Tom Lawrence

EIT Division Representatives: Tony Logan, Tony Young

HE Division Representatives: Ashley Brady, Cheryln Brown

At-Large Representative:  Penny Edwards

Library Representative: Marla Roberson

The Vice President and Secretary for Faculty Senate will be elected at the first Senate meeting for 2012-2013.  Adjunct faculty representatives will be nominated and elected prior to Sept. 10, 2012.

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

Amoena will determine at the beginning of Fall 2012 possible meeting dates/times for Faculty Senate and establish a date/time for the initial 2012-13 meeting.  Amoena will also solicit nominations for adjunct faculty representatives from each division.  Elections for adjunct faculty representation will also take place electronically with assistance from Chris Marino. 

3.   Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Update to Faculty Credentialing of Distance Learning Instructors

Donna reported that the Faculty Credentialing of Distance Learning Instructor proposal that Sarah Shumpert and Brenda Mattison brought before the Senate’s April meeting was presented to Executive Staff.  The proposal included the recommendation made by the Senate regarding frequency of faculty logging into a course management system and responding to student inquiries (changed from once per business day to once every 2 business days) and student.  The Senate had also recommended eliminating evaluation by students regarding faculty log in frequency since students are unable to determine this frequency.  A final decision on this proposal and the implementation of this proposal are still pending.

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

None.

4. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Comments for VPAA/Provost Position

Donna shared that she was serving on this search committee.  She would like to include questions asked of the candidates that are rooted from a faculty perspective.  Senators in attendance suggested the following as possible interview questions:

·         What is your philosophy regarding learning resources (brick & mortar emphasis, electronic, etc.)?

·         What is your philosophy/stance on an attendance policy?

·         What does it mean to you to be a faculty member?  How do these experiences influence your decision-making on various policies, etc.?

·         Describe the ideal faculty or an ideal faculty member.

·         What avenues would you pursue to mold the faculty into your ideal?

·         What is your philosophy regarding faculty senate representation in a community college setting and your interaction with this body?

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

Donna will present these questions to the search committee for possible inclusion in  candidate interviews.

5. Issue discussed and major points of discussion:

Attendance Policy

Donna reported that the final version the Senate had revised was sent to Dr. Buckhiester.

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

None

Announcements/Concerns:

The Senate thanked Donna for her service and leadership this year.

Next meeting date, time, and location: TBD

Name of recorder: Amoena B. Norcross

Academic Delivery Group Minutes (7/26/12)

Academic Delivery Group Meeting

July 26, 2012

2:00 p.m.

Personnel Conference Room

(Revised August 14, 2012)

Members Present:     Doug Allen, Jackie Blakley, Tim Bowen, Scott Britten, Scott Harvey, Lynn Lewis, Amoena Norcross, Sarah Shumpert, Brian Swords

Members Absent:     

Others Present:         

           

Length of Meeting:   1.5 hours

Topics Discussed:

The minutes of June 26, 2012 meeting were approved. 

Scott Harvey discussed several procedures and began with the Standards of Academic Progress procedure.  He gave the definitions of “institutional” and “cumulative” GPA.  The institutional GPA excludes repeated courses.  A cumulative GPA includes repeated courses.  In the SAP procedure, the college is moving to an institutional GPA.  Under discussion the following was noted.

·         It could take quite a while for a student, moving from one program to another, to reach a 2.0.

·         Consider aligning the financial aid process and the academic progress process.  Most of our students cannot attend without financial aid. The two may run hand-in-hand.

·         Look at the impact of raising the first tier GPA to 1.75.  Research using a tier or using a flat 2.0 GPA for standards of progress. 

·         Have Chris Marino cross-reference FASAP warning with the institutional GPA.  Are these students coming back?

This topic requires further discussion/review and will be on the agenda for the next meeting.

Scott led the discussion on the Graduation Application procedure.  He explained that the $10 increase is in the processing fee, which is a consideration for the man hours and work being done to have graduation.  He agreed that the certified mail fee is costly, but it is extremely beneficial because the student knows that he/she is not graduating.  Scott explained that if a student applies for an additional credential at the same time as the first application, the fee for that credential is only $10.  The group was concerned that a student who applied for and paid for graduation, but was not able to graduate, had to pay the fee again.  After discussion, the group agreed that in this case, the student would still have to reapply, but would not have to pay the graduation application fee again.  Scott will make the necessary changes to the procedure and forward to Galen.

The Academic Distinction recognition was discussed and the group focused on developmental courses.  After discussion, the group agreed to exclude developmental courses from the academic distinction calculation.  Also, after discussion, the group agreed that the distinction will not be listed on the student’s transcript.  There is no formal policy or procedure addressing academic distinction.  Anne and Galen will develop these and bring to the group for review at the next meeting. 

Sarah discussed the Online Teaching Credential process and distributed a handout for review. Funding is in place for 100 faculty to participate. Sarah noted that the college must determine how it wants the first cohort to move through the required program.  She also noted that

·         Ideally, all faculty will complete the course within a 10 month period.

·         The program is about 30 hours, and should take four to six months to complete. 

·         Do we want to split the cohort into two large groups, or several smaller groups?  By department/division or campus-wide?

·         Registration will funnel through Sarah’s office.  Staff at Wisconsin will contact our faculty.

Sarah will meet with the deans for further input on these issues.

Sarah discussed Course Studio in eTC.  This function is native to our system.  It is course-based, is not very robust, but it has an e-mail distribution list, which some faculty like to use. Sarah noted that now Blackboard and Banner have an e-mail function.  With that as background, she reported that IT would like to remove Course Studio at the beginning of fall.  The group agreed to this suggestion.  Sarah will ask the IT staff to immediately communicate to faculty about the removal of Course Studio and provide instructions for the Banner product. 

Amoena led the discussion on the Professional Development Day and asked the members of the group if they had any information about the day.  Galen reported that he had met with Sharon, and suggested that some of the workshops focus on initiatives in the strategic plan.  Topics could include

·         Retention strategies

·         Internal communication

·         Online faculty credentialing

·         Student success

·         College culture.

It was suggested that more of the sessions be in a discussion group format rather than lecture style.  Galen will take these ideas forward. 

Under Announcements, Scott H. reminded the group that grades are due by noon on July 31.  Graduation is on Friday, August 3.  He noted that as registration continues, he will wait until all courses are in, before his staff begins to work with them.

Amoena noted that Session C has three extra instructional days.  Scott is aware of this and it has been addressed in the summer 2013 calendar. 

Scott Britten noted that he is happy to be here and thanked the members of the group for their kindness as he transitions into his new position. 

Lynn reported that the Health Education Division had an internal workshop that was facilitated by Sarah.  The workshop addressed how to make the health education curricula more effective and efficient.  She noted that it was a very good exercise, with some great ideas and dynamic perspectives.  She thanked Sarah for her good work as the facilitator.

Galen reminded the group that work on the attendance policy continues.  In developing this policy, the college needs to be aware of two issues; taking attendance to be in compliance and considering the attendance policy based on student learning. 

With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 

Recorded by:             Anne Bryan

Next Meeting:            Tuesday, August 14, at 2:00 p.m., in the Personnel Conference Room,

                                    RH 102

Academic Delivery Group Minutes (6/26/12)

Academic Delivery Group Meeting

June 26, 2012

2:00 p.m.

Personnel Conference Room

Members Present:     Doug Allen, Jackie Blakley, Tim Bowen, Lynn Lewis, Amoena Norcross, Gwen Owens, Sarah Shumpert

Members Absent:      Scott Harvey, Brian Swords

Others Present:          Galen DeHay

           

Length of Meeting:   2 hours

Topics Discussed:

Dr. Buckhiester welcomed Amoena Norcross to the group.  Amoena is the new Faculty Senate President.

The minutes of May 22, 2012 meeting were approved.  In following up on those minutes, Dr. Buckhiester noted that very few Tri-County employees plan to attend the “Plugged-in” conference sponsored by the System Office.  He noted that it should be a good conference, and information has been posted on eTC.

The Session C topic was briefly discussed.  It was noted that Session C can be a second opportunity for our students.  It can also be used to allow combination classes.  Cancelling a Session C class can impact our students.  It was noted that we may want to have something in place so that, if a Session C class is cancelled, our students are not blindsided at the last minute.

The following policies and procedures were discussed.

3-2-1011 – Student Classification – Approved

This policy will be presented at the next Executive Staff meeting.

3-2-1013.1 – Graduation Application – Not approved by ADG – Back to Scott /ADG

·         Increase in fee – Currently pay $40, increase $10.00 for all.  The group was in agreement with the increase.

·         Second to last paragraph- does it have to be a certified letter?  Very costly.

·         Last paragraph – if you pay the fee, but are ineligible to graduate, you have to pay the fee again.  Seems unfair, and students may not apply again.

·         Same topic – what about students with multiple credentials.  Separate graduation application fee for each credential?

3-2-1050.5 – Standards of Academic Progress – Not approved by ADG – Back to Scott/ADG

A student could do poorly for several semesters, and then have one good term that puts them back in good standing.  The college is trying to move away from that scenario.

·         Remove VPAA reference and use Provost throughout.

·         Page 1, under Requirements, “cumulative GPA” should be “institutional GPA”

·         Page 2, first paragraph, “Cumulative GPA Hours” should be “Institutional GPA Hours”

·         Page 2, 1.5 is a fairly low GPA for the first tier.  Should we increase that a little?  It was noted that a student may have done poorly in one division, but do well in another.  Will this hold it against them?

·         Page 2, under Academic Standing, remove the word “term” throughout.

·         Page 4, students in Category C are notified “by letter” (rather than in writing).

·         Page 4, #2 – second sentence, “If the student should enroll….”  Isn’t this true of every student?

3-2-1053.1 – Attendance for Credit Students – Tabled - Needs more faculty input.  Perhaps through an open meeting or project charter.

·         Paragraph 4, leave the first sentence for financial aid regulations. 

·         Paragraph 4, the second sentence is more about attendance verification.  Should it be in

3-2-1050-2?

·         Paragraph 4, third sentence – nothing about drop/add for face to face classes. 

·         Two issues that we are confusing –

o   Mandatorily taking attendance for compliance issues

o   How is attendance related to learning?  Student with a B misses 4 classes and we drop them.  Do we help learning if we drop them? How does this impact learning?

·         Why would we not take attendance?

·         Too much variation in dropping a student.  Either we drop or we do not drop.

·         Let each division /department develop its own attendance policy and follow it. Hold faculty accountable to the policy he/she created.

Under Announcements:

Jackie noted that the Paralegal and Culinary Arts certificates have been postponed until Fall 2013.   She also noted that Deb Nodine has resigned and Harriette Dudley will assume the ECD Program Coordinator position.  Currently, we are trying to fill the ECD instructor position.

Tim reported that everything is stable at the Anderson Campus and Oconee is showing good growth.  He noted that the YMCA is closing its child development center at the Westside Community Center, which is a loss for the community.

Gwen reported that she is getting ready for a smooth transition, and noted that she has enjoyed working with the Academic Delivery Group.

Sarah asked the group for guidance on the learning communities.  With the concern about enrollment, she noted that we seem to be jumping to cancel learning community classes.  Are we allowing enough time for them to grow?  It was noted that department heads are being very conservative and very careful with empty seats and small classes.  It was suggested that we remove these classes from the enrollment calculations, treat them as pilots, and allow them to run with small numbers.  Galen will work with Sarah to craft an informational message about the learning communities. 

Dr. Buckhiester noted that with the re-crafted University Studies Certificate, the number of students receiving the certificate is much higher.  He also reported that dual enrollment students can stay under that initial college catalog. 

With no further business, the meeting was adjourned. 

Recorded by:             Anne Bryan

Next Meeting:            Thursday, July 26, at 2:00 p.m., in the Personnel Conference Room,

                                    RH 102

Academic Delivery Group Minutes (5/22/12)

Academic Delivery Group Meeting

May 22, 2012

2:00 p.m.

Personnel Conference Room

Members Present:     Doug Allen, Jackie Blakley, Scott Harvey, Lynn Lewis, Donna Shannon, Sarah Shumpert, Brian Swords

Members Absent:       Tim Bowen, Gwen Owens

Others Present:          Robin McFall

Length of Meeting:  .50 hours

Topics Discussed:

Dr. Buckhiester welcomed Robin McFall to the meeting. Robin attended in Gwen’s absence.   

The minutes of the April 23 meeting were approved with a minor change.

The Academic Calendar topic was removed from the agenda, so the group discussed the Library hours.  The group reviewed Marla’s updated information.  Lynn noted that the Health Education Division did not have any issues with the earlier closing time.   Robin reported that she had polled the English department faculty, and since evening students had until 8:00 to use the Library, the faculty did not have any concerns about the closing time.  Dr. Buckhiester stated that he and Marla will meet with Dr. Booth to present the proposal.  Dr. Buckhiester asked the group to let him know of any concerns.

Under Announcements, Scott discussed requests for registrations after the deadline.  Scott asked the group to try to have the justification be at the level of a life event, rather than just because the student did not pay or did not show up.  He noted that if the dean signs off on the justification, Student Records puts the student in the class.  It was noted that Blackboard links to Banner can cause confusion.  If the student is in Banner, but not in Blackboard, when the extract is run the student is put back into Banner.  Then the student can re-enter the class, and complete the work. 

Scott also discussed course substitutions.  Marilyn Angoli is completing the substitution sheets and will send them to the deans for review.  He wants to be certain the information is correct.  Scott stressed that course substitutions need to be universal, and need to be accepted all the time.

Lynn congratulated Donna Shannon on receiving the Presidential Medallion. 

Doug noted Pendleton High School is phasing out its Automotive Technology program and phasing in a Mechatronics Program, and has contacted us about picking up some of their students.  He also mentioned the Itron layoff.  Prior to the registration deadline, the EIT faculty and staff will contact these employees to see if they are interested in returning to school. 

Brian reported that the Easley Campus summer enrollment has increased 50%.  He also noted that he is working with the Pickens YMCA on the campus’ signature event, a bike ride. 

Sarah reported that she is pleased with the number of registrants for the Mark Taylor workshops.  Dr. Buckhiester stressed how good Dr. Taylor is and mentioned that he would hate for anyone to miss the opportunity to hear him.

Sarah also thanked the group for the work with the testing and training of DegreeWorks.  She also noted Lou Ann Martin’s good work and thanked her for her efforts. 

Donna announced that Amoena Norcross is the new Faculty Senate President.  For the most part next year’s Senate will be a new group.  The results will be announced next week.

Dr. Buckhiester noted that the Online Faculty Credentialing process has been revised to allow a faculty member two business days to respond appropriately, as requested by Faculty Senate.  If it is fully funded next year, it will go forward with that one change. 

Dr. Buckhiester mentioned two workshops that should be good and which faculty may be interested in attending. 

• The Midlands Tech Assessment Institute in July

• The System Office’s “Plugged In” conference in September

With no further business, the meeting was adjourned.

Recorded by:             Anne Bryan

Next Meeting:            Tuesday, June 26, at 2:00 p.m., in the Personnel Conference Room,

                                    RH 102

Staff Advisory Board Minutes (7/12/12)

Staff Advisory Board Meeting

Minutes of the Meeting

July 12, 2012

8:30 a.m.

Ruby Hicks Conference Room, RH-102

Members Present:                  Kelli Harrison, Tina Burton, Evette Moss, Alydia Sims, Bob White

Members Absent:                   Tonia McClain, Emily Danuser, Rachel Joye

Length of Meeting: 25 minutes

1.      ISSUE DISCUSSED:       Call to Order

Kelli opened meeting and notified members that new officers should be elected. Kelli made a motion for Tonia McClain to be President and Alydia Sims made a second on that motion. Kelli volunteered to be Vice President. Evette Moss made a second on that motion. Kelli nominated Alydia Sims to be Secretary. Evette Moss made a second on that motion.

2.      ISSUE DISCUSSED:       Approve Minutes from June 20, 2012

Kelli made a motion to approve. Alydia Sims made a second on that motion.

3.      ISSUE DISCUSSED:       Will discuss the rotation of members at the August meeting

The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 a.m.

Placement Committee Minutes (06-21-12)

Tri-County Technical College – Placement Committee Meeting

Thursday, June 21, 2012 – Oconee - 305

Faculty/Staff Present

Andrea Barnett, Jennifer Beattie, Galen DeHay, Stephanie Evans (for Danny Stovall),  Renae Frazier, Scott Harvey, Joan Kalley, Dr. Jerry Marshall,  and Carol Watts

Faculty/Staff Absent

K.C. Bryson, Shelly Burgins, Linda Crowe, Tonia Faulling, George Fiori, Tracy Kilgore, Dr. Gwen Owens, and Danny Stovall

Opening Remarks

This meeting has been “called” due to information brought to Jennifer Beattie’s attention regarding SAT/ACT Scores in Comparison to COMPASS scores.

SAT/ACT Scores in Comparison to COMPASS Scores for Students Entering TCTC

Ø  Using SAT/ACT criteria for the cut scores per Scott Harvey

Ø  COMPASS used as an admission requirement

Ø  Admission requirement SAT/ACT can be used as initial placement -- otherwise where and what?  Problem to solve?

Ø  Clemson Math Placement Test (CMPT) was higher than needed to be – only 45% success rate. Tri-County Technical College has a higher success rate based on our Math Placement Test

Ø  COMPASS – 102 prime  - what entry-level would you place requirement for admission

Ø  Ability to Benefit is impacted by admissions.   Exposure to Comprehensive Studies will logically show Ability to Benefit.

Ø  5-year timeframe – SAT/ACT for admissions requirement (480/SAT, 19/ACT)

Ø  Trident Technical College requirements for admissions are: application, fee, and placement assessment.

Ø  COMPASS accurate placement tool

Ø  Acceptance for placement on SAT/ACT admissions – 37/RDG

Ø  Test information on public network – samples – videos on eTC (videos can be moved to public side)

Ø  SAT/ACT/COMPASS have to take anyway

Ø  Bridge – can we admit them to the College based on SAT/ACT

Ø  Grab SAT/ACT/COMPASS – correlation.  Does ACT know COMPASS correlation? Yes    W/69 = 18 ACT; R/83 = 21 ACT; M/65 = 22 ACT

Ø  Whether using minimal ACT/SAT scores as admissions? Will the “or” be 200 minimum?

Ø   Horry – SAT/300 Critical Reading for admitting.  MOA? Admission to college with SAT

Ø  Jennifer Beattie will call Adult Education.

Ø  Andrea Barnett will call Frank Potter at ACT.

With no other business to discuss, the meeting adjourned at 10:50 a.m.

Recorded by Joan Kalley               Typed by Linda Crowe