|
NEASC Steering Committee Meeting
September 11, 2007
MEETING MINUTES
Present: President Miller, C. Lovitt, P. Lemma, A. Alling,
T. Craine, M. Toston, R. Cernock, R. Bachoo, N. Pettinico, L.
Wilder, K. Kollar
First Impressions of Description Sections—C. Lovitt
The Description
sections have been reviewed by C. Lovitt and P. Lemma. C. Lovitt
reported that the overall impression of them was a positive
one. C. Lovitt and P. Lemma will compare notes on the
description sections on Thursday. Their comments and added
suggestions are expected to be shared by Monday of next week.
C. Lovitt and P. Lemma suggested that the committees wait to
receive their feedback before they begin editing the description
sections.
C. Lovitt stated
that, from an editorial standpoint, the descriptions were quite
clean. The real problem arose when some of the standards did not
answer the question as directly as was expected. In addition,
C. Lovitt noticed that there were sections where it was unclear
as to where the committee received the specific information.
This will be part of the feedback given to the committee chairs.
Lastly, C.
Lovitt stated that the description section as a whole needs to
be condensed into appropriate page length. To achieve this,
links will be added to each description section. P. Lemma
informed the committee that K. Kollar will be working on
creating links to reference materials for each standard’s
description section. K. Kollar will contact the committee
chairs individually with any questions relating to this topic.
Editing
the Description Section—C. Lovitt
C. Lovitt
briefly discussed the committee’s need for an editor for the
self-study report. He stated that a copy-editor was assigned to
read a sample description section in an attempt to transform it
into a narrative. The editor was able to transform the
description into a narrative form, but a problem arose
concerning the editor’s lack of University content knowledge and
context. C. Lovitt concluded that, being informed of the
University context, the committee members will need to take part
in the editing process. There will be further discussion before
a decision is made regarding the editing process.
Appraisal
Section:
R. Cernock asked
if it were possible to get access to a NEASC self-study that has
passed the accreditation to use as an example of structure and
content for the report. C. Lovitt asked P. Lemma to contact
Louise Zak for some examples of self-study reports from other
universities.
A. Alling stated
that Human Resources has received requests for a great deal of
information from various standard committees. She expressed
concern regarding the amount of information that was requested,
and she stated that there are not enough staff members to
fulfill these large requests. She added that most of the
information must be extracted manually from the Human Resource
records. C. Lovitt told A. Alling to send him the information
that was requested.
President Miller
suggested that HR modify its databases so information can be
easily obtained. President Miller also suggested that the
committees explore other ways to answer their questions for
NEASC, or, that the committees ask questions for which the
university has enough data to provide a thorough answer.
Plans for
Appraisal Sections:
C. Lovitt asked committee members to share any potential
plans for data collection and writing for the Appraisal section.
T. Craine
(Standard 1): T. Craine informed the committee that he
will be meeting with his group to discuss plans for the
Appraisal section within the next few weeks.
P. Lemma
(Standard 2): Standard 2 plans to start by analyzing
the website that contains measurements sent to President Miller
for the seven proposed goals of the Strategic Plan.
P. Lemma also asked T. Craine to attend a Standard 2
meeting to discuss relevant issues from his recent report for
the Senate Meeting. P. Lemma will ask Kathy Martin-Troy to
conduct a focus interview with the UPBC.
Other plans will be forthcoming once the committee
meets.
A. Alling
(Standard 3): Standard 3 will meet to discuss the
Appraisal section in October. A. Alling stated that most of
Standard 3’s information will be coming from the Noel Levitz
Survey. Standard 3 will also meet and conduct interviews with
the CSU System Office’s Chancellor and Board of Trustees.
C. Lovitt
(Standards 4 & 5): C. Lovitt reported that several of
his committees have made progress regarding their Appraisal
sections; a few committees have not yet begun this task. C.
Lovitt will meet with each of his standard chairs individually
to discuss Appraisal progress.
M. Toston
(Standard 6): The Standard 6 Appraisal Section is
almost complete. M. Toston mentioned that much of the
information for their standard came from the results of surveys
that were already conducted. Standard 6 is working on adding
links to their Description section.
President Miller
agreed with M. Toston’s approach, adding that taking advantage
of existing information is more effective than creating new
surveys. This, he said, would also demonstrate the University’s
ongoing interest in research and data collection.
R. Cernock
(Standard 7): R. Cernock asked the committee for
feedback concerning alternate forms of data collection. He
expressed concern to over-surveying the campus community. C.
Lovitt suggested that R. Cernock look to other university groups
for data; he added that not all surveys have to be administered
to the entire community.
R. Bachoo
(Standard 8): Standard 8 will need to clarify a few
details regarding the Appraisal section. R. Bachoo reported
that Standard 8 will be using a lot of existing information and,
therefore, avoiding administering new surveys.
L. Wilder
(Standard 9): Standard 9 reported that they will be
examining the UPBC’s ongoing activity to obtain data for the
Appraisal section.
N.
Pettinico (Standard 10): Standard 10 has received
approximately 1,000 responses from a survey that was
administered for their Appraisal section. There will be other
surveys conducted by this committee in order to determine
whether the university provides enough information to students
and parents so they can make an informed decision as to whether
or not they should attend the university. N. Pettinico reported
that Standard 10 will be focusing more on the students and
parents than the faculty when collecting data.
Update on
Noel Levitz Survey—A. Alling
A. Alling stated that the additional questions for the
Noel Levitz survey were being formatted today, September 11,
2007. A. Alling will e-mail the final additional questions to
the committee members. The survey will be sent to the campus
community via e-mail on October 1, 2007. Once the survey is
sent, there will be a two-week waiting period for campus
responses, as well as a two-week turnaround for the results.
Therefore, the committee should have the results by November 1st.
Final
Comments—C. Lovitt
C. Lovitt asked committee members to examine the Strategic Plan
and identify which of the seven objectives directly pertain to
their prospective standards. He advised the committees to go to
http://www.CCSU.edu/goals to find the Strategic Plan.
Action
Items:
·
P. Lemma will contact Louise Zak regarding sample
self-studies.
·
A. Alling will e-mail final additional questions
for Noel Levitz survey to committee members.
·
A. Alling will send NEASC requests for information
(from Standard 4) to C. Lovitt.
·
K. Kollar will contact committees if there are
questions concerning links for the descriptions.
*The next Steering Committee
Meeting will be held on Tuesday,
October 16, 2007, at
11:00 a.m. in the
President’s Conference Room.
|
