NEASC Steering Committee Meeting

May 22, 2007

MEETING MINUTES

Present:                       C. Lovitt, P. Lemma, A. Alling, T. Craine, M. Toston, R. Cernock, R. Bachoo,

                                    L. Wilder, C. Magnan, N. Pettinico, K. Kollar 

Standard Committee Progress Reports

• T. Craine (Standard 1):  Standard 1 met last week and reviewed each committee member’s responsibilities.  T. Craine said he would send the minutes of the meeting to C. Lovitt.  He has not yet gotten a consensus from his group as to what the survey questions will be.

• P. Lemma (Standard 2):  P. Lemma’s committee created a timeline in which they will try to get all research materials by the end of June so they can begin writing the draft of their section in July.  Their plan is to finish the draft by July 30^th.

• A. Alling (Standard 3):  A. Alling’s committee formulated the questions for the university-wide survey.  The committee has already gathered many of the documents they will use for their research.  She requested that Carol Austad be added to the summer stipend list for July.  A. Alling also mentioned that she is still in need of a student to join her committee.

• C. Lovitt (Standards 4 & 5):  C. Lovitt reported that he had received action plans for all seven of his committees.  His group will continue to progress criteria by criteria, and he is confident that they will reach their goals.

• M. Toston (Standard 6):  M. Toston reported that her committee has been communicating mostly through e-mail and smaller meetings, and they seem to be falling slightly behind schedule.  Focus groups have been developed for each substandard section.  M. Toston mentioned that she has not heard from the student on her committee.

• R. Cernock (Standard 7):  R. Cernock mentioned that the students on his committee haven’t shown up for committee meetings; faculty will be available again in the fall.  Standard 7 is in the process of preparing the information for the description section with plans to be finished by the end of August.
• R. Bachoo (Standard 8):  The committee is scheduled to meet every week to work on drafts; they have also been communicating online.  R. Bachoo commented that he is confident in the amount of data that his committee can retrieve from previous surveys and research pertaining to the standard. 
• L. Wilder (Standard 9):  L. Wilder reported that he is busy meeting with other committees concerning the university’s financial resources.  He wondered whether he would be meeting with a member of every committee.  It was suggested that he could have a meeting for which everyone who had questions could attend.
• N. Pettinico (Standard 10):  In the past two committee meetings, standard ten focused on their plans for the appraisal section, and the committee has already begun the drafts.  N. Pettinico would like to utilize the University-wide survey to capture the opinions of the internal community. He would like another survey to gain the perspective of the external community (example: new students).
• C. Magnan (Standard 11):  C. Magnan expressed a concern that faculty were unable to attend meetings, and that one faculty member resigned from the committee.  C. Magnan explained that her committee was still attempting to get the work done.
  

Summer Writing Plans—C. Lovitt

In order to standardize the summer stipend requests, C. Lovitt informed the committee that the job would consist of no more than forty hours per committee, paying $50 per hour. Each committee could therefore receive a maximum budget of $2,000, divided between June and July.  C. Lovitt suggested that the twelve-month employees assist in the completion of the summer work as well.

P. Lemma asked to receive confirmation from the steering committee chairs that everyone working in the summer has completed their designated tasks. She will need confirmation for the June workers by June 15^th, and for the July workers by the beginning of August to compensate faculty for their work.  P. Lemma also asked that she receive stipend requests from the remaining committees.  She also asked that R. Bachoo confirm that his stipend requests were correct.

University-wide Survey

P. Lemma provided a handout containing survey questions submitted by some of the committee members.  She mentioned that some questions will need to be rephrased to fit the survey’s format. 

Committee members voiced some concerns about the University-wide survey:

• How can the questions be aimed toward students, faculty, and administration?

• What about the questions that are of great concern to one group (for example faculty) but unknown to another (for example students)?  Won’t this affect the results?

• What should the actual format be?

C. Lovitt suggested that the survey take the form of the SSI, in which the questions ask, “How important is this to you?”

A. Alling pointed out that the questions on the Quality of Life survey are similar to the questions on the handout.  C. Lovitt suggested that the committee inquire about using the Quality of Life survey and possibly adding a few questions to it.  M. Toston responded that ten questions can be added to this survey.  A. Alling explained that the Quality of Life survey is administered to faculty, staff, and administration.  Students are not included in this survey, but the committee can use the two recent SSI surveys for students.  P. Lemma added that she would survey the graduate students since SSI only included undergraduates.  The committee agreed that, instead of doing a separate survey, they would try to incorporate the Quality of Life survey for the appraisal section.  It was also agreed that committees stop working on their specific survey questions until the appropriate approach to take was determined.

M. Toston passed out samples of previous SSI and NSSE surveys.  M. Toston mentioned that the NSSE will be given again in the spring, and she will also provide the recent CIRP data as well.

Data Needs and Documentation

P. Lemma passed out a data analysis that was contrived from the action plans of each committee.  She mentioned that every committee should inform her as to what kind of documentation they still need.  She asked that these requests be sent via e-mail.

C. Lovitt asked the committees to be sure that they are attending to their own data needs, compiling their data, and getting this data to P. Lemma and/or K. Kollar.  He said that, in order to document the claims being made in the report, it is important that the committees compile their information into electronic/paper exhibits in the document room for viewing.  This approach will also help other committees to see the kinds of information that have already been researched, and, in turn, might be used for their own committees.

A. Alling received a request for information from Tom King, and she asked if K. Kollar could assist her committee in gathering and sorting this information.  C. Lovitt said that K. Kollar can be available for nineteen hours per week to help with any NEASC needs.  

Action Items

• P. Lemma will provide copies of the Quality of Life survey.

• Determine whether or not the Quality of Life survey can be used by NEASC.

• C. Lovitt asked the committees to look at the Quality of Life survey and think about what other questions might be included.

• If there have been changes to your committee (members resigned, were replaced, etc.), e-mail these changes to P. Lemma so that she may update the distribution list.

• Give document/data needs and requests to P. Lemma via e-mail, and P. Lemma and K. Kollar will make sure no information is duplicated.

• A. Alling will send the information requested by Tom King to P. Lemma.

• All committees should hand in their summer stipend requests to P. Lemma.

• C. Lovitt reported that Louise Zak (NEASC) would be happy to read the report drafts.

The next NEASC Steering Committee Meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 19, 2007 at 11:00 a.m.  The location of the meeting is still to be determined.

/kk

Back to Main Page