FINAL COPY APPROVED 9-8-05
MEET AND CONFER NOTES
April 28, 2005
Admin: Roy Saigo, Michael Spitzer, Lin Holder, Anne Zemek de Dominguez, Diana Burlison, Larry Chambers, Roland Specht-Jarvis, Kristi Tornquist, Rex Veeder
Faculty: Annette Schoenberger, Theresia Fisher, Judy Kilborn, Tony Akubue, Frankie Condon, JoAnn Gasparino, Susan Motin, Steve Hornstein, P. N. SubbaNarasimha, Donna West - Notetaker
Meet and Confer Notes of March 31, 2005 – Not ready to accept.
Meet and Confer Notes of April 14, 2005 – Not ready to accept.
FA: There are Meet and Confer notes from March 31 and April 1. We use these notes in order to know what it is we promise to do and what it is you promise to do. When it takes so long….they need to be a priority. The person who actually does the notes is not responsible for deciding whether it is a priority -- I’m scolding someone. I’m looking at things I need to do…..
Admin: How come you haven’t done them? (laughter)
Admin: Ok.
FA: After the Meet and Confer notes are accepted, they are posted on the Faculty Association website.
Admin: When the notes don’t go up fairly quickly, that’s when people tend to get nervous.
Admin: We had Andy’s notes to prevent that!
FA: One more comment about the minutes. I heard our Dean had never seen them. We keep hearing they haven’t been submitted.
Admin: That’s probably correct – they will get distributed when they are completed. Some times, frankly, not to put blame on anybody, we don’t get them when the FA keeps them for a while. I think both groups need to be more efficient.
Unfinished Business
1. Internal Audit (FA) (4/22/04)
Admin: I somehow thought you were going to arrange a meeting….
FA: A meeting has been arranged, and I can let Donna know when it is.
Revision of Curriculum Process: Assessment (Admin) (11/4/04)
FA: At the last Faculty Senate, we were told from now on, any curriculum program proposal with new changes to the existing curriculum program should be accompanied by an assessment plan. Is this the case?
Admin: We want to have a statement of learning outcomes on courses and programs, and they will become a basis for an assessment plan.
FA: Therefore, the program proposal and course proposal should have a statement of learning outcomes?
Admin: If it is a program proposal, then it would be a statement of learning outcomes for the program; and if it is a course proposal, then it would be a statement of learning outcomes for the course.
FA: Isn’t that the case? I know some are on the course proposal form.
Admin: I have been asking departments to do that. Remember, we’re trying to revise all forms so they’re more user friendly. This is one of the things we’re doing informally -- not for anything else. Not for a change of pre-requisites – that is different. New courses and new programs really do need an assessment component.
FA: There is not an assessment component?
Admin: Not for measuring learning outcomes so we can develop assessment plans – we need to have those so that we don’t have to ramp up every ten years to get stuff in place.
FA: Right now, assessment isn’t part of the charge for the UCC, and I’m not sure that should be their place; and I think we need to take this back to look at the process charged for curriculum but not assessment.
Admin: I didn’t say assessment.
FA: This is assuming the UCC knows what measurable outcomes are. I’m thinking about the UCC’s piles and whether this would be the best place to do this. Currently, it is not their charge.
Admin: What they’re looking at now are objectives -- objectives can be modified without very much difficulty. This is the learning outcome we want to be addressed in this course – I think this is the appropriate place to have it.
FA: I think you covered some of what I was going to ask. I guess I think it’s not simply a change in language. We probably need to have some kind of campus conversations about what learning outcomes are.
Admin: I think we should.
FA: This seems like the job of CETL.
Admin: I’ll write that down! (laughter!)
FA: I really have to support what Frankie is saying. I’d like to use a different term other than measurable. At UCC, the term is already being strained – if we say assessing, then it’s better.
Admin: I have no problem with assessable learning outcomes.
FA: But, there is a difference between saying you have to have assessable outcomes and you have to have an assessment plan. The UCC said they heard nothing would be approved without an assessment plan. Now, we understand what was meant was we want to have assessable learning outcomes -- is that correct?
Admin: In context, it might help. First of all, a general comment is we’ve been working on trying to improve communication. If they didn’t know what I meant, they should have called.
FA: They thought they understood what you meant.
Admin: The specific issue discussed was all of the different curriculum forms, streamlining the forms, having them on line, getting rid of the color coding, and using the block letter system. We had an excellent discussion. Near the end, we talked about new program forms and course forms and about how it’s going to take work; and a faculty member on the UCC said “that’s a lot of work.” My answer to him was yes, but it’s part of our work…I would be remiss in my responsibility to the university if a recommendation came in on those two forms – the new program form and the new course form -- without an assessment component. I don’t know if I used work plan, component or objective. Whatever you recommend has to include assessment.
FA: I just realized -- in Senate, they said you were talking about course proposals that went out by “x” date, and you were talking about as you develop new forms. What we heard in Senate was you must have this on your form, and they thought it was any proposal had to have an assessment.
Admin: Absolutely not. In context, this referred specifically to forms. At least everyone knows what we want to do with the forms. In response to the faculty member who said it’s a lot of work, if you sent me forms without the assessment piece, I could not be doing my work if I let this go. I agree with Michael -- if we could start (an assessment component) with each new course and new program, it would be great -- let’s do it. Out of the 300 or 400 (courses and programs) this year, not one was turned away for assessment. I’m sorry for the misunderstanding.
FA: You’re not asking for assessment plans -- you’re asking for assessable learning outcomes.
Admin: That’s where we need to start -- if they make a revision down the road, we will have started with assessable learning outcomes.
FA: We’ll take this back to see what they think.
2. Student Program Completion (Admin) (1/20/05)
Admin: This is about assessable completion outcomes (laughter)! We sent a charge as President Saigo requested at the last Meet and Confer to Judy; but this charge was written up by Roland, and I think we’re working with the faculty committee who is going to develop their own charge. Judy, do you want to expand on this? I would like departments to get involved with this process so we have people within each department who are thinking about retention all of the time.
FA: This wouldn’t be faculty committee. The following motion was read from the FA Executive Committee’s minutes: The FA Executive Committee recommends that working with the Administration, a taskforce is created on student program completion. The taskforce would be made up of the Dean of Undergraduate Studies, the Provost or designee, and faculty representatives from the General Ed Committee, Strategic Planning Committee, FYE Advisory Committee, Admissions and Retention Committee and CARE who wish to look at the broad picture of student program completion. The taskforce would be charged to create a mission statement, principles, and plan for improving student program completion rates at SCSU.
Roland and I were exchanging e-mail, and what the FA is looking at is a broader task force -- broader in the sense that we look at causes and find solutions. Roland was looking at solutions. I think we need a broad-based look at where we are and we need to get a lot of input from the university community and look deeply at the whole notion of student program completion. If we had a task force in place by fall convocation, we could set up a meeting with Vincent Tinto when he’s here as a point of information gathering.
Admin: When do you expect to be completed?
FA: In January, we would make a recommendation.
Admin: That’s largely correct to have the task force do two things – develop strategies on what to do and also support the efforts through each of the colleges and departments to improve retention.
FA: I’m assuming the task force would focus on its members talking with departments and units – it would have a limited life and a specific charge to gather information and then do some analysis.
Admin: The underlying notion is that improving student program completion is a task for the entire university, and what we’re looking for is a commitment to this issue. We need to have all of us address this will require a commitment by faculty, administration, and staff across the board. All offices and programs will have to participate if this will be successful; so we’re asking faculty to support this initiative through Faculty Senate. I think what has happened is a process of developing a task force that would try to identify issues and strategize to address those issues.
FA: We don’t have specifics, so I can’t go to Senate to ask for support. That’s why we thought the task force would tell us.
Admin: The current four-year graduation rate is 11 percent, and that is dismal; and we need to come up with a series of initiatives to improve that significantly. We’ve talked with the Academic Advisory Council and the deans about the effort to raise the rate to 35 percent and in six years to 55 percent. From about
FA: I’m not sure how that would be in conflict with what we’re suggesting.
Admin: It’s not.
FA: If you’re wanting initiatives…..
Admin: Exactly correct.
FA: Are you disagreeing with how we’re conceptualizing?
Admin: No -- I want to do this.
FA: So, what are we going to do – six faculty…. The Next one is for the Dean of Undergrad studies. Is there a problem with that?
Admin: I don’t have a problem with any of that.
FA: There would be a member from Gen Ed, Strategic Planning, First Year Experience, CARE (Annette: Would you please confirm this “list” is complete).
FA: You could include Student Life and Development and Multicultural Student Services. Maybe we need someone from Residential Life.
Admin: I think we need someone from Student Affairs.
FA: Are Student Life and Development and Multicultural Student Services different?
Admin: Yes.
FA: So, we’re going to find people to do this.
FA: I wasn’t going to volunteer! (laughter)
FA: What I want to understand is the mandate of this committee listening to everyone who has talked….. you know, my understanding is that everybody is going to be involved, in addition to whatever the task force will come up with. One thing I’m not hearing is what students think the reason for such a low retention rate is.
FA: Does it mean the students of today have different needs? If a task force is to be put together, then the task force should be charged to listen to constituencies on campus; i.e., setting dates to hear from the different constituencies, and then individuals won’t go off on different tangents to come up with things.
Admin: In follow up to the first part of what you said having to do with students today, you can look at our graduation rates and compare them to other institutions like us; but, they also have a much higher graduation rate, so there is something amiss here. I’m not sure if we want to set the agenda of the task force now. I think your suggestion we talk to students is a good one; and I’d go beyond that to say we should add students to the task force and ask Student Government to recommend one or two students to serve. That’s a great suggestion, and I thank you.
FA: I was going to ask if you think it is a good idea to target the formation of the task force in time for fall convocation so they could meet with Vincent Tinto.
Admin: Yes. I think as we talk about it, we’re looking at certain things to be done on the department and college level; but some things university-wide -- apart from what the departments are doing in this -- is part of the role to be served by this task force.
FA: I will go off to get the faculty.
Admin: Are you going to follow the guidelines Judy recommended?
Admin: Yes.
FA: This says January; so, do you want to change this to the end of fall?
Admin: I would recommend the month before the end of the semester.
FA: Do you think we can do that by November 15th?
Admin: I think that would be perfect.
Admin: Don’t wink at me when you say that!
FA: Who winked at you? (laughter!)
3. Weekly Schedule: 2 hours free for committee work (FA) (12/16/04)
FA: We’re skipping over this topic.
4. Update of the Affirmative Action Manual (FA) (2/24/05)
FA: I think we handed you some materials at the last Meet and Confer.
Admin: I haven’t had a chance to review them yet. I’ll spend a good deal of time once the semester ends.
FA: Is there a report date?
Admin: July 1. (laughter!)
5. How do we deal with issues before they become issues (Admin) (2/24/05)
FA: There are two things: 1) We are interested in doing this, and we’d like you to tell us how you imagine us doing this; and 2) It seemed like at the last Meet and Confer, this agenda item got tangled up with the Ad hoc Committee on Academic Freedom -- that committee is formed, and I’m convening our first meeting. CETL is happy to organize a series of campus-wide discussions on this topic.
Admin: That’s fine. I didn’t know when we put this on the agenda that faculty had talked about setting up a committee. I was talking about the same issues on academic freedom and academic responsibility, and I didn’t want the two to be separated.
FA: So, CETL will do series of discussions on academic freedom and academic responsibility, and the ad hoc committee will do what it was charged to do by Senate.
Admin: Sure.
FA: This issue of academic freedom when it first came an issue for discussion was kind of getting acrimonious somehow…..
Admin: In which context?
A 15-minute caucus was held.
FA: We’re going to agenda item #7 now.
6. International Studies Committee motions re: Budgets Economic Viability (FA) (3/31/05)
FA: Those (the International Studies Committee motions) I gave you, too. They’re from the International Studies Committee, and we have a member here -- Tom Hergert. I may ask him to confirm or change what I say. The problems with working with the Center for International studies for short-term and long-term studies abroad center around what constitutes economic viability and who decides. We’ve received complaints from students and faculty regarding the Center for International Studies. They are supposed to be a “cash cow” without any indication of how it is to be used -- no budgets are being shown, and this has caused a lot of problems. One example given was a faculty member who received a quote for airline tickets of $800; yet the Center for International Studies waited, and the tickets cost $1,000. Then, when they arrived in the foreign country, the money they were supposed to receive didn’t arrive, so the faculty members had to find money elsewhere. So, now how are they supposed to pay for the program? In one particular program, there was no money available, so the faculty member was reduced to borrowing money from students.
FA: My understanding was they used rent money.
Admin: I think the issues we raise are legitimate issues; but I don’t think Meet and Confer is the most effective place to discuss them. I think we should have a meeting where the faculty who have the concerns can interact with the individuals responsible. Then if they’re not resolvable, we can bring them to Meet and Confer. I recommend we have a meeting with the Center for International Studies, because I can’t respond here, now.
FA: Someone from the Center for International Studies has been met with since 2002.
Admin: I’ll be glad to meet with you and members of the committee and Chunsheng Zhang.
FA: One of the issues that happens is that because of the way the program is set up, many programs operate independent of International Studies. We get reports of problems that we can’t specifically deal with. Many study abroad programs want to stay separate. So, we have pockets of reports of difficulties; and there is a certain concern about those who report the loudest have a harder time when they want to do something in the study abroad program.
Admin: I think Michael’s recommendation should be taken up. You know, the white and grey hair you see has told me we can’t deal with reports second or third hand; so let’s get to the essence of the problem, since we can’t solve it here.
FA: Actually, those are first hand.
FA: I request the first meeting be held with the Provost and the President Elect and members of the International Studies Committee.
FA: We can do that.
FA: Given what I’ve heard here, it would be effective if the Center for International Studies were there for the first meeting.
FA: You see, from the faculty side, many of us are feeling so many people can’t be that wrong.
Admin: We can only listen in that environment.
FA: Maybe this is a good application for mediation.
Admin: Let’s hear what the issues are.
FA: In a given situation, you can only listen; and it limits what the parties can do. Maybe the committee would feel better with mediation.
FA: I can take this back.
FA: There are two stages – 1) meet with the Administration, the FA President and FA President Elect and members from the International Studies Committee for information sharing; and that could prepare for holding 2) a meeting with the Center for International Studies.
Admin: That would be fine.
FA: We could have a plan for what we’d want the Center for International Studies to bring to the next meeting.
FA: I think the Center for International Studies should be involved from here on in the first scheduled meeting.
FA: So, are you going to arrange that meting?
FA: I know there are Faculty from the Center for International Studies who will not come to the meeting.
Admin: Let’s have a preliminary meeting and then have a follow-up meeting.
FA: Are you going to arrange that?
Admin: As soon as I get the minutes.
FA: May I take this to the International Studies Committee tomorrow?
FA: Sure.
FA: Okay.
7. Strategic Planning Positions (Admin) (4/15/05)
Admin: Larry has given you a draft position description.
FA: I’d like to have an explanation.
Admin: The interest in these two new positions is because we have a definite need for additional help in the area of institutional effectiveness. Some universities are creating a new position at a significant level, and I found, through research at some universities, they have an Associate VP of Institutional Effectiveness. I tried to come up with a draft job description for this particular position. I came up with a draft and attached the reporting relationships. It seems we need people really focused on the big picture and to work with the entire university to pull these things together, and that is what this intends to do. I’ll try to send you an electronic version of this. I think there is an urgency to get this created, and we’d like to get feedback soon.
FA: If I get an electronic copy, I’ll try to get feedback by the next Senate meeting.
Admin: Will they get comments to you and then you can send them to me?
FA: Hopefully.
Admin: Some of this was built on the Infrastructure Committee, your conversation, and what Larry has been able to find. In the old days, we called it the Office of Institutional Research; and now we’re looking at the Office of Institutional Assessment, and then they said assessment and efficiency. Then, we did a survey, and we are way ahead of the curve of any of the four-year institutions. We have this NCA report due before 2007, and we need to start collecting information; and we’re two years behind. We talked with MnSCU to get the data, and they dropped the ball -- they said we didn’t pay them.
Admin: Being “ahead of the curve” -- the curve we need to get to -- and what is becoming a very strong and common theme in NCA is we are required to provide evidence we’re institutionally effective. The President is exactly right. Many sessions at the NCA conference are about institutional effectiveness.
FA: It looks like you’d be reconfiguring Institutional Research – with the new unit being called Institutional Effectiveness with a new position recommended by Strategic Planning.
Admin: We haven’t signed papers yet.
FA: One thing is if you could get this to me in electronic form, we can get a response much quicker --after our Executive Committee meeting…..
A 15-minute caucus was held.
FA: We’re going to have to get back to you on this. I’d like to point out you’re less likely to get a response if you only bring us one copy.
Admin: I’ll e-mail you an electronic version.
Admin: Everything takes time -- I understand, and we’ll bring you more copies next time. Judy sent me a letter I shared with Larry, and he canvassed cohort groups. I talked with Bill Tschida, and we’re going to do a totally new organizational format. I spoke with Moorhead, and the VP there is supposed be an expert in institutional effectiveness. Bemidgi has one person, Mankato has one person in Student Affairs and two borrowed from faculty. We’re had such a turnover, so we’re putting this together without any model and trying to meet the needs of NCA, so we’re trying to push this ASAP. Whatever you can do, we’d appreciate It.
FA: I’d like to thank the Administration for putting forth the recommendation from Strategic Planning on this.
Admin: Is it possible for Larry to send this into MnSCU for them to begin the process?
FA: What happens if there are changes?
Admin: Then MnSCU makes them.
FA: I can’t make a comment about something I haven’t read.
Admin: What about the morning of the 4th?
FA: We’ll do as much as we can do in our power.
8. Interim Dean in the COSS timeline (Admin) (4/28/05)
FA: Senate has agreed to 6 IFO. We can’t agree to anything from other unions.
Admin: Of course not -- if they don’t submit names, they won’t have any recommendations.
FA: We’ll send out ballots on Monday -- maybe Tuesday the 10th is the earliest….
Admin: That’s perfect. I’ve requested applications and nominations by that date.
9. Approval of Learning Communities (Admin) (4/28/05)
FA: Mark Nook attended Faculty Senate, and Senate supports a one-year trial.
10. Program Reform: Twigg et.al.(FA) (4/28/05)
FA: Senate’s position on that is that we need to know that if you want to do reforms, then somehow there has to be a clearer need for that. The Faculty Assoc will consider participating in proposed reforms. I think the point here is that we don’t want to get railroaded into doing the next thing without having some information on how useful it will be.
FA: There is a sense from Senate that many things Twigg is advocating we’re already doing on campus; so if we participate in reforms, we want to know the needs on our campus have been identified.
Admin: The information on Carol Twigg’s work was distributed for people to see in case there were ideas that could be adopted and learned from, and that’s it.
FA: I thought the pressure was from MnSCU. We had our Academic Affairs person attend the seminar in Arizona, and MnSCU paid for this. So, it’s a matter of not responding to pressures that aren’t there, really.
Admin: Yes.
FA: We need to know there is a need for making changes.
Admin: I knew Carol Twigg in New York. These were programs that were developed and proved to be successful in applications in which they occurred. When I saw the information, I distributed it to see if there was anything you could get from it. Generally speaking, once I read about most results being positive and assessable learning outcomes being positive, I thought “well, gee, I’m not sure what MnSCU has said.” I know Carol Twigg put pressure on MnSCU, and I don’t think there was any pressure put on anybody to adopt anything, but simply to look at it to see if there was anything we could benefit from.
FA: It seems like the company who organized the presentation in Arizona is interested in making money by providing consultation to higher ed institutions. The conversation in Senate, I think, centered around the conviction there are people here on campus who are doing or are experts in elements of pieces being advocated by the consultant. We don’t want MnSCU or SCSU spending money if there are people here.
Admin: And that’s perfectly legitimate.
FA: I think we should take it in the context the way the Provost has said.
11. Strategic Planning Draft Document on General Education (FA) (4/28/05)
FA: The Faculty Senate supports this and accepts the document and would like to begin a dialogue. The question now becomes how do we do this?
Admin: I think the Senate should talk with the Strategic Planning and the General Ed committees.
FA: The convocation committee is working on a tentative schedule for fall, and we proceeded with the assumption some of the work of that week would be jump starting the General Ed conversation and transformation; so I e-mailed Patty a draft schedule with opening comments, and I asked if I could present at Academic Affairs Council on Tuesday. Built into that schedule is time to continue this work now that Senate has accepted this.
Admin: Great.
FA: You were talking about having those groups meet with Vince Tinto as part of that?
FA: Yes. Right now, the schedule has them meeting with him.
Admin: I think those are terrific developments, and I’m pleased to hear about them.
FA: Anything else?
FA: Actually, the next piece coming to Senate is an academic distinction piece from Strategic Planning, that might be part of rolling it out. I think it would be useful to have as many conversations as we possibly can. Senate made it clear they want to talk about things -- what the curriculum looks like – and it would be useful if the Administration helped by thinking about how they can help make people feel comfortable about the process. People have fears about what this will mean.
Admin: I don’t see any departments going away from General Ed.
FA: That’s easy to say.
Admin: No, that wasn’t easy to say. I think there will be changes, and those would be addressed over time; but I don’t see us eliminating any departments or doing anything drastic.
FA: Whenever I listen to Dr. Saigo, he is so assuring and presidential.
Admin: There are lots of departments who say they can’t manage the General Eds upon them.
FA: It is also important to realize and recognize that Gen Ed or General Education courses are what distinguishes us from technical colleges and two-year colleges.
Admin: Absolutely.