Automotive Advisory Committee Meeting

Automotive Advisory Committee Meeting:

December 9th, 2009

In attendance:

Debbie Dawson

Larry Taylor

Doug Martin

Ron Hofman

Charlie Fuller

Martin Smith

Mark Baliff

Steve Kirk

Larry McCarty

Halli Borgfjord

Christine Jewel

Rich Beery

Julie Ford

11:10 a.m. Doug called meeting to order

- Doug did introduction explaining basic overview of meeting and where we are now and where we need to go.

- Larry gave basic program overview and how are currently structured. He used current program pathway and course catalog to show our current program.

- Doug went over community survey and gave an overview of results and explained need for internship revamp which Ron confirmed and explained open house plan. Debbie suggested a mailer to share survey results and an invitation to the internship open house.

- Doug mentioned the upcoming student survey and the plans for delivering the survey to the students. The plan was to have the survey available shortly after winter recess.

- Doug asked Ron to give a review of the current student interview results and gave the background information leading up to the student surveys and interviews.

It was mentioned that the most successful programs in the country have a contact person for each student and this was one of our goals for our program.

- The interviews helped set student minds at ease and helped point our student concerns about our classes and instructors.

- Julie Ford asked what we had used before this for advisement and recruitment and was surprised at the lack of counseling set up for technical programs.

- Ron discussed lack of student retention and the poor number of student transfers to second year. Charlie reiterated the poor transfer of first semester students.

- Most first year student concerns were related to speed and content of introductory 112 class and the depth of the intro to electrical class. Many students were overwhelmed with course contents and the lack of lecture time to adequately ask questions. Many 120 students were put off by the lack of lab time and the inability to see practical application of material.

- Many upper classmen also added comments on problems they were facing in their program. Most related to lack of available welding classes, the tasks required in welding would not directly relate to automotive, the instructor permission problems in getting needed classes (committee was shocked to find that KVCC does not enforce pre-recs), and the troubles finding internships.

- Charlie mentioned the funding formula being based on completers and how the 112 class was hurting our completion rates by having non-automotive students taking the class as exploratory. He mentioned the creation of an “Exploring Automotive Careers” class that was not a core automotive class and the committee thought it was a great idea. Steve Kirk, Halli Borgfjord, and Larry McCarty all motioned support for the DIY class.

Mark mentioned that the Saturday class was similar in format to the DIY class and Charlie said it would be used for a model.

- Larry asked committee what they expect for certifications from entry level technicians.

- Larry McCarty expects today’s technician to have an AAS degree to enter the field.

- Julie Ford said the tech should be state certified and if coming out of a degree program they should have all eight areas.

- The rest of the committee agreed that state certifications should be a minimum and the testing should be part of the program. There was much surprise that the state testing was not already done in the program classes and needed to be fixed. It was agreed that this should be a priority not only because it is the right time, but NATEF evaluations pointed out the same flaw. State testing needs to be done at the college level and KVCC should be a test site.

- Doug also added that state testing would be the best and easiest way to monitor student assessment as required by North Central since our national standards were not acceptable.

- Julie Ford asked about diesel training and it was agreed that it was a very needed skill that was not available in the area but space and money prohibited the addition of a diesel program at this tie.

- Larry asked for committee approval for the support of trying to get state testing done in the program, the vote was a unanimous yes.

- Ron explained the need for internship opportunities.

- Debbie explained the 50% of wages reimbursement offered by the foundation.

- Committee agreed that an internship night / open house is a good idea, however it was thought that it should be shops and employers only, no students.

- Larry asked for committee support and the vote was unanimous. The event was loosely scheduled for late February.

- A community survey follow up letter will be sent out showing the results of the previous survey and will also contain an invitation to the internship open house.

- Larry explained the proposed course changes and alterations to the current program degree and certificates. The committee was leery of support.

- A discussion started determining if an associated degree needed all eight areas of automotive. It was agreed that a two year degree needed all eight certification areas. The committee decided that they would support us exploring other options for delivery of our program and definitely saw the need for updating electrical and other areas of our program but would only give support for exploration at this time. They wanted to see a more definite plan for offering certificates and degrees.

- Charlie brought up the automotive ethics class and the committee thought it was a great idea.

- Larry asked for a vote for developing new courses and program pathways and the committee support was unanimous with the condition that they could see the new format at the next meeting and approve of then.

- Doug mentioned the need for 4 meetings a year to ease our transition into our new program. The committee agreed that two meetings a year was not enough and supported two meetings in the fall semester and two in the winter.

- Doug asked for a vote – all were in favor.

- Next advisory meeting scheduled for the 2nd week of February.

- Meeting adjourned 1:15 p.m.