MEET AND CONFER
November 20, 2003
Meeting Notes
Faculty Association: Theresia Fisher, Tony Akubue, Dale Buske, Fred Hill, Robert Johnson, Judy Kilborn, Andy Larkin, Tracy Ore, Annette Schoenberger, P. N. Subbanarasimha, Sandra Williams,
Donna West, Notetaker
Administration: Roy Saigo, Michael Spitzer, Diana Burlison, Larry Chambers, Nathan Church, Lin Holder, Steve Ludwig, Roland Specht-Jarvis, Richard Rothaus, Rex Veeder, Kristi Tornquist
FA: I will confer with the Executive Committee, and will report back with our revisions.
1. Civility and Academic Freedom Draft (Admin)
· Senate
FA: We put this subject on the Faculty Senate agenda for discussion – it is still on the Unfinished Business portion of the agenda, and it will come up again for review on December 2. We will keep you updated.
2. Desire2Learn (Admin)
FA: Yesterday, the TPR Committee had a special meeting to talk about Desire2Learn and the e-mail from Kang based on the present timeline. We are sending a recommendation to Faculty Senate supporting the switch. If something should happen, then they might change their opinion. Our concerns were availability and training. This still has to go through Faculty Senate.
Admin: We have not heard back from students for their feedback.
Admin: Will this be on the agenda for the 12/2 meeting?
FA: Yes.
3. First Year Experience Program (FA)
FA: The First Year Experience Committee asked for the recommendation to go to Faculty Senate on December 2 -- FA President Fisher will call as soon as possible afterwards so we can proceed.
Admin: Good -- thank you.
4. Student Credit Hour Generation Report (Admin)
Admin: We are still updating and correcting, and I hope we have a near final version.
FA: We want to see the next rendition, since we have questions. How much weight has this report been given for decisions made -- for new positions?
Admin: Those decisions are in the process, and the report is one of the elements and we don’t have an updated version. We’re depending upon data. Within the next week or so we should get a final version of the report to look at in conjunction with other factors regarding position allocations.
FA: How detailed is the report?
Admin: It is on an individual/department/college/university basis
FA: I have not seen an individual one. Has it been circulated?
Admin: No. It has gone to departments for review and changes but not to Meet and Confer or Faculty Senate.
FA: So, we’ll have to look at it.
FA: Could you give us an example of other parts affecting the decision making process?
Admin: Number of majors in a program, number of faculty in a major, and number of courses a department can offer are among the issues we need to work on. If a department is missing a faculty member with certain expertise, then that program couldn’t be offered. We need to look at the needs of our students so they can get the courses they need and move on.
FA: I was wondering -- to what extent would faculty planning in class represent what faculty is doing, if all decisions are going to be based on that. What kind of weight does this carry?
Admin: I think in terms of looking at positions to be filled, we need to be concerned with what the needs are of the students – what courses do they need to enroll in to make progress towards their degree.
FA: We had talked about making this publicly available on the Web. If it were to go on the Web, what level of data would be out there? Would it be on an individual basis? If this sort of data is available, I have concerns about how it is presented.
Admin: There hasn’t been a final determination. My understanding has been faculty wanted full transparency with these matters.
FA: The issue needs to be taken to Faculty Senate for a decision to be made and a recommendation brought back.
Admin: We’re not in a rush to do this – it has taken a long time to obtain the data. There will be a time when information will be available via MnSCU; and I’m not sure at what level, but I suspect with individual student credit hour generation.
FA: MnSCU has two individual selling features – 1) courses are taught by faculty and are small enough for students to have intimate interaction with faculty and 2) generation of credits.
Admin: What you want to do is strike a balance between credit hour generation and class size. We have had some courses with larger enrollments and smaller ones averaging out what you’re doing across the department/college. You can look at that kind of information from this credit load report as well. There will be discrepancies – predicated on very specific parameters. Not every faculty member is going to have credit hour generation equal to every other faculty member and no one expects this. One of the ways we can afford small classes is by having larger classes. In some departments, class size will average much higher, and that is the nature of colleges and universities.
5. Summer School Calendar (Admin)
FA: The Faculty Senate met on Tuesday and recommends to Administration that 2004 summer sessions 1 and 2 be implemented as they are. We have concerns about the intersession -- compressing an awful lot into 12 days, rather than 15 days, by closing on Fridays.
Admin: It was actually 14 days (taking into account the Memorial Day holiday).
Admin: What we have here is a compromise to resolve this (handout distributed) -- it would get us back to 14 days by backing up the beginning of intersession a grading day for spring semester. This way, it wouldn’t impact faculty’s 10th and 11th duty days. I think we’re on the same page. This is the direction we want to go. I kept the old proposal in the handout so you can compare them. This is my answer to the three questions Tracy’s committee asked us.
Admin: Let’s run through the compromise.
Admin: Regular duty days are grading days 10 and 11, the way it was originally scheduled; so if faculty are willing to move from duty day to duty day, they could start on the 12th. It wouldn’t be as compressed. I think it’s a good compromise if we can agree.
FA: So, May 11th is already a duty day. Monday and Tuesday are grading days. Could we just take the duty days and tack them on? We need those grading days – it’s good we have them in the schedule so faculty don’t kill themselves just to get grades in. This would regain 14 days and not overlap any duty days.
FA: There are two closings on Fridays proposed. I don’t think it’s worth the amount of stress. This is an academic institution. What comes first? Maybe we need to think about trying to teach a full course of material in 14 days.
Admin: It has always been 14 days.
FA: To try to put it on the back of finishing a session (grading) and then turn around and prepare for a new course, we’re creating problems – we need time in between.
Admin: Those two Fridays are only associated with intersession.
FA: I know. How much money do we save from those two Fridays? How does this compare to the stress?
Admin: You’re right -- it may be stressful.
Admin: I can’t answer the relative value on costs. In any case, it’s probably contingent on a person’s choice of leave without pay. On a given Friday during the summer, it’s on the order of $8,000 to $9,000 -- so $16,000 to $18,000.
FA: When do you need an answer?
Admin: We’ve heard your answer – Michael needs to make a decision.
FA: Can we agree on the definition that a ”light” duty day is a day we don’t kill ourselves. It would help me in establishing my behavior (laughter)!
Admin: I only meant light as in “seemingly” light!
FA: I have no window in my office! My comment from the Committee on the Institution is they would like the administration to offer data if tuition loss is there.
FA: Does Administration have any idea on the impact of Wednesday, May 12?
Admin: Intersession is always a “crapshoot.” Faculty has interesting ideas. These are very compressed courses for students. I don’t know if there’s a huge impact. It is a pretty small piece of what we do, but a nice offer for students.
Admin: It’s a half a dozen courses – we’re not talking about 100 plus.
FA: I was asking Michael if he wanted a decision or input -- he’s receiving input from us.
Admin: It would be helpful to have a compromise proposal rather than a comparison on what we have.
FA: There are too few contact days. That’s one thing we would appreciate in a compromise.
Admin: Does anybody know how many courses we have?
Admin: Under 10.
Admin: I would have said 6.
FA: It occurs to me, if one course includes field experience, they could meet on a Friday.
FA: Or they could finish before June – as we talked about.
FA: If two or three departments are offering classes, we should support them.
Admin: We’re not talking about not doing that.
FA: Maybe we should have a caucus.
FA held a caucus, then reconvened after approximately 15 minutes.
FA: What we have are three suggestions for you at this point. We appreciate the fact you have come up with a proposed compromise and you are considering the issue we originally brought – the number of hours in the intersession; so thank you. Our three suggestions are:
FA: First, is to cluster courses offered in the intersessions in one or two buildings, holding classes Monday through Friday but having a limited amount of resources.
FA: Second -- you want Fridays, essentially, so you really just want three days so you take Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday of that week after the 11th between grading days. What you want to do is close the university for some days – so close right after that week vs. Fridays.
FA: The third possibility is to provide support to departments offering classes so they can do the work – consult with the faculty involved.
Admin: Okay. One of those Fridays is Memorial Day weekend where people will take a vacation day anyway. I think it’s important to talk about the support for these departments -- the savings that come about from closing Fridays going to fund faculty positions. If we lose this, we‘ll lose positions; and we don’t want to see this happen. We’re talking about six courses, and some don’t meet on campus.
Admin: Thank you, and I think we’ll have to go forward with the revised compromise schedule.
6. Academic Calendars (Admin)
FA: We took the calendar that was given to us at the last Meet and Confer to the Committee on the Institution who did some manipulating and changed a few things; and I gave copy to Lin. We made a revised calendar and brought it to Faculty Senate, and it was approved at the last Senate meeting (handout distributed). It was changed so classes wouldn’t start until Tuesday, August 30th, so move in day will be on the weekend, still starting before Labor Day. It will reduce the fall break from four to three days.
Admin: You backed exams up?
FA: We didn’t make a change to exams.
Admin: That was on the calendar I gave you that would have incorporated all faculty recommendations – not on the original template we proposed. We try not to back up exams to the 23rd.
FA: You said we need to have five exam days.
Admin: We do.
Admin: We’re seeing this for the first time – I’m not sure we can give a lot of response. We absolutely will take into account faculty’s recommendation to incorporate as many as we can but it’s also something affecting the whole campus. We will be sending this proposed revision to Student Government for their discussion and thoughts and to Student Life and Development to see what
impacts there are. We’ll probably be bringing this back one more time, but it needs to move quickly since we’re behind a year.
FA: The important thing is getting feedback from students, and an important issue faculty brought up is having equivalent instructional days between fall and spring break – close to 75.
Admin: I want to note that while it’s important to look at instructional days, it is also important to look at the number of days in the week since the number of days in a semester you may have a lot of Tuesday and Thursday classes but not Monday and Friday classes. We also need to get a response from Athletics.
Admin: I forgot that – thanks.
FA: We’re aware there are many people involved.
Admin: Great – thank you.
FA: Will you send us a copy of the document without typos?
Admin: Yes.
7. Consultant’s Recommendations for the Affirmative Action Office
Admin: As far as I know, a report was sent to the FA President
FA: I don’t recall getting the report – I will go through my mail.
FA: We should get it soon then?
Admin: You should have it already; if not, let us know, and we’ll get it to you.
FA: The draft for the Director of Affirmative Action and Social Equity position has already gone to MnSCU -- right?
Admin: It is in the process of being sent to MnSCU – it hasn’t gone yet, but perhaps tomorrow. It is being reviewed.
FA: Would we have an opportunity to provide you with some comments and suggestions we might have or is this done once MnSCU receives?
Admin: Timing will be a concern in terms of getting comments back to Administration.
FA: Do you think we could talk about how we can get comments to you in the future, when something like this is being developed?
Admin: I thought that was going to happen this time – something was sent with the expectation to get your comments back about 6 weeks ago.
FA: The issue came up, I think, in our 10/30 Meet and Confer when we brought up the subject of the hiring manual. I thought the intention was to just find out what was happening with the manual
because we had a committee working on it, and I think the job description just came up – accidentally.
Admin: Are you suggesting you want to provide comments before it goes in and that it could be real soon?
FA: Real soon – how soon? Would after our December 2 Faculty Senate meeting be soon enough?
Admin: It would be ideal if we did that.
FA: We found out about this accidentally because we brought up the hiring manual. In the process of answering questions, you told us about this position. I think at the next Meet and Confer we did get the position description. Now you’re saying you are sending it to MnSCU already, and you say we can make comments, but the timing is such that we can’t. If we didn’t accidentally find out about it, when would we have? What is the process so we can find out about positions sooner in order to give you our input? On the face of this, it looks like we wouldn’t have had the opportunity to comment.
Admin: In the President’s convocation speech, he said we were going to do this. We developed the job description, drafted it on September 30th, and sent it to you shortly afterwards in draft form. We didn’t have it available at that time to present it. We do want to send it to MnSCU; so as Larry said, we’re willing to hear your comments, but we would like them soon. I think after the December 2 meeting would be okay. The longer we wait, the more time it will be before we have a new hiring manual (laughter)!
FA: President Saigo has put a lot of emphasis on our Affirmative Action plan, and that’s appreciated by faculty because this area has been problematic for a long time. One of the recommendations from the anti-Semitism lawsuit agreement was having a consultant in the Affirmative Action office. At convocation, it was said we would be moving ahead, and I think that was very good. But, I think, something happened in the process; because for such an important thing, we did not have time to deliberate. How will we prevent this from happening again? Perhaps we can learn from this, and I would like to figure out how we could work together.
FA: Along the same lines -- when we talked in our earlier Meet and Confer retreats about the nature of Meet and Confer – it’s important to understand public pronouncements are not a substitute for Meet and Confer. What was said in the President’s statement is not the same as making a recommendation to the Faculty Association. It doesn’t substitute for the process of notifying us that indeed a position is being drafted. So, the timeline is really 10/30; and we really don’t have time to give you an appropriate response.
FA: I think it would be useful when time-sensitive matters are presented to be very specific about the dates. Then, if we were asked to give feedback by a certain time, it would be helpful for us to decide what goes first.
FA: Thank you for listening to our concerns.
FA: If it would be possible to delay this until Faculty Senate meets, I’ll make this a priority for our December 2 meeting.
Admin: I’ll say December 2 is not an unreasonable date to look at this in order to discuss and then forward to MnSCU. The comments made will be well taken.
Admin: I’d like to send this in sometime during the week of December 2 in order to have time to do a national search. We need to move on this so MnSCU can put this in a proper range.
FA: We can do this then.
Admin: I appreciate your expedience.
Admin: We’ll do better. We’ll get there.
FA: Thank you. I appreciate that.
8. Sponsored Programs – Policy for Sharing Indirect
Costs with Colleges, Departments and Principle Investigators
Admin: I have additional information on how the indirect return would be phased into action (handout distributed). Side 1 of the document went out last time, and side 2 shows the grid on how this would be done. There is a cash flow twist -- the procedure would be: this year for 2004, we would have to do what we did last year for a miniature return. We don’t have enough funds for the University Researchers Fund. Next year, it is almost a complete implementation of the plan. What is missing is colleges getting 5 percent instead of 10 percent – the University Research fund would be implemented. In 2006, we’re home free to go forward.
FA: We’ll take this to Faculty Senate. Is there a deadline for a response?
FA: I don’t think it will get done on December 2.
Admin: I don’t think there is a huge deadline unless the response is doing it in fiscal year 2004. – then it will be a problem.
FA: If we get it done in January at our Faculty Senate meeting on January 20, would it work?
Admin: Yes.
FA: Can you e-mail this document?
Admin: Yes.
FA: Thank you.
9. Assessment of UWR Courses (FA)
FA: We agreed last time we need to go forward with the requirement and take the issue of assessment to Faculty Senate because the General Ed Committee doesn’t feel assessment is in their purview. This needs to go on the Faculty Senate agenda, but we’ll get back to you on that.
Admin: Lin and I sent a memo to Steve Klepetar stating we are going to go forward and there are certain things we need to have in place: schedule, required UDW for students graduating in June – when do we want to start? Also, we do want further development for some of the standards for how
courses would be assessed -- criteria for courses to meet. I’m not sure if it’s assessing we’re talking about as much as setting criteria for assessment when the time comes.
Admin: We also said we understand you may choose other than the General Ed Committee’s recommendation for assessment, but we want to work with them so there is some framework to start from for whoever takes over.
Admin: Criteria, an upper division writing requirement – there are still some gaps.
FA: At this point, it wouldn’t be the General Ed Committee, but I’ll get back to you on who.
FA: What is the schedule for phasing in? When is the start, and what is the criteria for assessment and the process for new courses – the time frame?
Admin: We can move ahead with what we’ve got -- ASAP because of the catalog printing in December.
FA: You need this when?
Admin: December 2 (laughter!). We need a phase-in recommendation ASAP.
Admin: Maybe the University Curriculum Committee could take a quick look at this – it doesn’t seem this needs to go to the whole Faculty Senate.
Admin: When you’re referring to requirements, it begins with the catalog bulletin – I would assume it would begin with the next incoming freshmen class.
Admin: If you could get faculty input quickly, it would be appreciated.
FA: Thanks.
10. Special Meet & Confer for Contract Negotiations (FA)
Admin: Right -- and we’d get back. It’s our understanding parties authorized to negotiate are the IFO and MnSCU and not the Faculty Association and SCSU administration. Therefore, a special Meet and Confer could be misconstrued as a special negotiation.
FA: In follow up to information received from the IFO negotiating team to all F.A. Presidents, it is my understanding this may be a matter for discussion on the regular Meet and Confer agenda. Would you have issues with that?
Admin: No, if you were expressing concerns – but not negotiations.
FA: We would appreciate a conversation regarding our concerns without going into the negotiations area. Would that be alright?
Admin: Do you want to discuss some of the issues at this point or put this topic under New Business?
FA: Perhaps we could talk about it now for a bit. The negotiations are going to occur tomorrow with both MnSCU and the IFO team, looking like an impasse is highly likely. So would that be alright with you?
Admin: That an impasse is highly likely?
Admin: My response would be I think we could listen to your concerns and would have to talk about them among ourselves about how we would want to deal with them, or it would become negotiations.
FA: Okay, does anyone else want to talk or do you want to continue watching me fidget in my chair? (laughter)
Admin: One of the things I could say is I’ve heard the issue has to do with dependent care health coverage. My understanding is DOER has to sign off on this for MnSCU to agree. For the FA proposal, DOER would have to agree; and it didn’t happen. This is my understanding where the negotiations are.
FA: So, dependent health coverage is a big one; and if you go back far enough in time, all of the bargaining units had dependent health care paid by the employer. Through negotiations and deciding what to value more, other unions, for various reasons, decided to give dependent health coverage as a concession. The IFO has not, however; they’ve always valued this to the utmost, being sensitive to families and the financial burden on families. Therefore, we have let other things go – one being salaries. Salaries would be higher if we had given this up before. Part of the sense, then, is if this is the process of the negotiations and now DOER, legislature, or whoever is saying it is likely they’ll go to the Commissioner’s plan and impose the health care coverage on the IFO, it’s a new concern.
FA: Maybe of interest is what kind of action the local administration has taken in raising concerns to MnSCU about the possible impact if the IFO takes action which might include a strike and might not and what prolonged negotiations would be on faculty’s morale.
Admin: It might be a good idea to caucus.
Administration held a caucus, then reconvened.
Admin: We cannot respond to those concerns, and we should move on.
FA: Okay.
1. Proposed Policy for On-Line Courses (Admin)
Admin: This is in the nature of trying to present things to you in Meet and Confer (handouts distributed). We’d like to share this with you and get your input on this draft policy we’ve been working on. We’ve had some very informal faculty consultation, and we want to make sure you’ve
had a chance to respond. A formal policy exists. It doesn’t change very much, but it formalizes what faculty has questions on. This came about after hearing from faculty (departments) that sometimes individuals were going off and doing their own thing (turning courses into on-line courses) that the department and students didn’t know about this. This returns to the department the primary responsibility for discussing and recommending to the dean. It formalizes the informal definition of what we mean by on-line courses. It acknowledges faculty can post assignments and syllabi, but when they start presenting instruction on-line and requiring students to work on-line, there should be an indication to students that this will happen. Please take a good look at this; and if you see any concerns, please try to report back at the next few Meet and Confer sessions, since this is part of our fall planning.
Admin: I’d like to have this in place for when we publish fall semester courses, so we can indicate on-line courses.
FA: When is that?
Admin: The request for the fall schedule is soon after the break – in February.
Admin: What is the date?
Admin: I can get you a date.
FA: Thank you for bringing this to Meet and Confer and marking this as a “draft.” One of the questions that strikes me is whether the curriculum process is involved in any way.
Admin: No, this is about how courses are scheduled.
Admin: This is just about how courses are scheduled -- approved courses in the regular curriculum. All of the Continuing Studies’ courses that go out are approved curriculum -- that’s why we’ve always counted those as regular credits. The mode of delivering them changes – but the mode of curriculum does not.
FA: I’m not so sure this is totally outside of the curriculum. We have courses in our department for computer exams in English classes; so I guess I’m wondering if we do need some curriculum review of this. I’m also just wondering how you see this being put in the bulletin? I teach two classes -- one on-line and one hybrid – how would that appear in the schedule?
Admin: We’ll find a way to do that – we have asterisks or daggers where we can add a statement for students.
FA: You’re saying that would have to go in as we put in our information for February.
Admin: Yes.
Admin: She could send you a “virtual” hard copy! (laughter)
Admin: We’ll appreciate hearing back from you.
2. American Democracy Project – Web based survey (Admin)
Admin: In the same spirit, I’d like to pass out this survey (handouts distributed) – this doesn’t say “draft” but it, too, should. This is a survey we’d like to conduct of faculty with regard to The American Democracy project to determine civic engagement with students in courses. This part of the document is adapted from an audit conducted by Metro State -- they’ve given us their permission. There are two versions – one to faculty asking what kind of engagements you’re pursuing in courses, conducted via the Web, and the second page goes to department chairs regarding department commitments to civic engagements. We’re asking for feedback on this before we proceed. The purpose is to determine the extent to which faculty are using civic engagement activities so we can recognize those activities -- so we can get a better sense of where to go.
FA: What is the timeline?
Admin: December 2! (laughter)
Admin: No, but the next meeting after that, if possible – January 20th.
FA: Do we know how this survey went at Metro?
Admin: As far as I know, there was no problem -- it’s voluntary and people can be anonymous.
Admin: Ultimately, we like to know who’s doing what so we can build on activities, but this provides an opportunity of what we view as positive.
FA: And this was free?
Admin: Not free to Metro. We need to acknowledge the person who did it.
Admin: We solicited similar kinds of audits from different institutions, and this seemed to be one to make the most sense since it was not so lengthy but one where people would be willing to respond.
FA: Could you send me a virtual copy?
Admin: If I can find it.
Admin: More universities are coming on board with this.
Admin: When we signed on, we were the 130th university, and it’s now up to 160 - 180 universities.
FA: How many other MnSCU universities are involved?
Admin: At least 6 – there is one that hasn’t signed up.
3. Federal Financial Aid – Reporting Requirements (Admin)
Admin: There is a nuance in the Federal Financial aid regulations that influences business office and financing for universities and students involving attendance. The federal government program states if a student withdraws from all classes before the 60 percent point of the term or if they fail all classes and turn out not to have attended or have a combinations of W’s and F’s and did not attend long
enough, then the university is bound to pay back half of the loan that the student has for that part of the term.
We’re having a difficult time picking some of these students out and identifying them. The standard withdrawals are recorded, and we can keep track of them. We looked at withdrawals so early in the semester for this fiscal year, and there are about 80 students who withdrew before the 60 percent point of the term (before 10 weeks). We have about 150 or so with all F’s, and we have 125 with a combination of W’s and F’s. We can manage the withdrawals because there is a date. The F’s and combinations bring up the issue of attendance, as to the concept of the “earned F” as opposed to the “default F.” This affects the student’s eligibility to financial aid. There is a chance we can get money back from the student. If we don’t comply, there are penalties – we don’t have an immediate solution.
We know we can handle withdrawals; but we need your help on the combinations of W’s and F’s and the F’s to find out whether the student attended, because if the student came back and claims they didn’t attend, then there are certain requirements on what we can and cannot do. In the long run, it affects their ability to borrow money and proceed with financial aid and regulations. Since we don’t have a policy on taking attendance and what the F means (different when student left course and got an F at the end), we are asking you to suggest something to us short of taking attendance every day.
FA: Of the 150, those are who?
Admin: Those are the number of students that have the particular loan and also had all W’s before the 60 percent point of the term, all F’s, or a combination.
FA: Is it possible for you to tell me if I have one of these students in my class?
Admin: No, not until after the fact.
Admin: We’ll ask faculty in a period of time to submit names of students who stopped attending class and when their last date of class was. Sometimes you can’t do this without taking attendance.
FA: I’m trying to find out any information you can give us since you’re asking us for a recommendation. How much information can you give us about these students?
Admin: We don’t know who they are.
Admin: The issue of attendance is a problem for many other financial aid issues. If they don’t attend -- any student – that is of interest as well as the differentiation of how they got an F.
FA: Records used to send us a sheet about that asking who was coming to class or not
FA: They still do, but it is on the10th day.
FA: Are you asking us from now onwards what we can do?
Admin: We’re going to have to go back for some of these students and talk to faculty, and it may not make any difference unless we can prove they attended, because we may have to pay back a portion of this loan; but we need this for the future so it works to accomplish our task to catch this in the future.
FA: We need something to report when was the last day the student attended class.
Admin: Students for whom we need information are students who don’t go to any of their classes – we don’t know who these students are who don’t go to any of their classes.
FA: So, you’re asking me to tell you.
Admin: We’re trying to avoid the “phantom students.” The federal regulation says a student registered who gets financial aid of a particular type alone has to be going to class. One of the ways we have to do that is to count on faculty to provide us with this information; and that’s why we’ve put this on the agenda. As faculty, you know better what the practices are and what steps might be better to take.
FA: We’re told who the students are who need special services.
Admin: The number of students who withdraw and fail is a pretty large number, and their loan is guaranteed by the federal government. The guarantee is so good, they require the university to pay half of the loan back.
FA: What are the parameters?
Admin: $150,000 -- that’s the worst case.
Admin: That comes out of the General Fund, so it’s important to us we not be contributing to the federal government; and we don’t know how to get at that information without the help of the faculty.
FA: It’s not just attendance – it’s also certain source of withdrawals, correct?
Admin: If a student withdraws, we find out. If they withdraw before the 60 percent point of the course, we’re liable. If a student leaves sooner, we’d like to know. If a student gets all F’s, we’d like to know. This is directed to students who are not attending, and they generally get all W’s and F’s.
FA: I don’t think I’d want to know what students are on financial aid. It seems reasonable to know when the student’s last day was. I know the four students who “disappeared” from my class!
Admin: Don’t use the word “disappear” (laughter!)
FA: If you could send faculty a note in October….
Admin: It needs to be pretty universal.
Admin: I’m not sure it’s entirely correct. If you get information from one faculty member, it may not mean they dropped out of all of their classes; but we would be in better shape than not.
FA: If we could point and click on the class list, it would be easy.
Admin: Should we establish a little task force to establish a procedure to address this?
FA: We could take this to Faculty Senate -- but I don’t know when they’ve stopped coming because I’ve had students gone, and then they show up for a final.
Admin: They ask “what do I need to do to pass”? (laughter)
Admin: Those students would end up getting a passing grade or an F grade you could demonstrate was earned.
FA: Is it possible for you to give me a memo regarding the task force that I could present to Faculty Senate?
Admin: Yes.
FA: So this is a federal government requirement?
Admin: Historically, there are certain institutions that enroll students, get financial aid for them, and the students don’t show up, and it’s a rip off. They’re painting with an extremely broad brush. They pay someone $20 to come in to register for a loan, get it, and keep the money.
Admin: I am going back to Josh, the boy from St. John’s who disappeared -- it worries me about people who disappear. How do we get on track, Nathan?
Admin: When we have had students we’re concerned about, then we, on occasion, have gone and tracked them down (referrals from faculty have been helpful).
Admin: We can’t usually tell the parents, and this is a frustration.