Foundations of Excellence Steering Committee
October 30, 2008 - 10:00 a.m.
SIAC Conference Room
Present: Gretta Berghammer, Jon Buse, April Chatham-Carpenter, Lyn Countryman, Bev Kopper, Lisa Kratz, Kristin Moser, Jean Neibauer, Melissa Payne, Shirley Uehle, Donna Vinton
Progress of Committees
-A representative from each dimension reported on the progress of their committee.
Student Survey
-Table tents will be out in Maucker Union next week and right before Thanksgiving break. Table tents will also be in the dining centers for three days next week.
-Kristin Moser created a Facebook account.
-Gretta, Jean and Lyn have lists of students we could use to get the word out about the Facebook page. Jon indicated there is a listserve for the NISG Freshman Council. Jon will also contact the President & Vice-President of NISG.
-Jon will deliver postcards to residence halls if we want to increase the response rate.
-A link will be placed in the student portal.
-Notices will be submitted for delivery via the televisions in Maucker Union and Schindler Education Center. Melissa will inquire as to whether we can submit a notice for display on the televisions in the ITTC.
High Impact Initiatives (CPI Table B-Inventory of First-Year Programs/Interventions)
-We should not assume that all first-year programs are listed.
-April stated that committee members may add to the CPI but should not delete anything.
-April asked chairs to poll their committees to determine which programs are missing and also for their input on which initiatives should be considered high impact.
Surveys – how to code open-ended comments
-There will be over 200 responses to most of the open ended questions.
-April spoke with Laura Terlip regarding the content analysis of responses. One of Dr. Terlip’s classes will be doing a two week unit on content analysis this semester. Her students could use our project for the unit and would do the coding and counting using themes that we develop. The other option is to use content analysis software. The committee decided to use Dr. Terlip’s students for the analysis.
-Assignments for reading the open-ended questions to pick out themes and examples to share at the Nov. 13 meeting:
Jean & Lyn – Q9
Gretta & April – Q10 & LA009
Lisa & Jon – greatest strengths
Melissa & Kristin Moser – greatest weaknesses
April reminded the committee of the next webinar on preparing dimension reports that will be offered on November 18 & 19. She recommended we look at the examples of dimension reports available in FoEtec.
April asked Donna if she could sort through NSSE data to identify items that relate to each dimension. Donna agree to do this before Thanksgiving.
-November 13 (Possibly another meeting Nov. 20 to discuss student data?)
-December 4
Foundations of Excellence Steering Committee
September 25, 2008
SIAC Conference Room
Present: Gretta Berghammer, Jon Buse, April Chatham-Carpenter, Lyn Countryman, Susan Hill, Lisa Kratz, Kristin Moser, Shirley Uehle, Donna Vinton
Administering student survey:
-Scheduled to be available November 1 (assuming IRB approval)
-Jean Neibauer provided April with some additional questions that could be included. If committee members have ideas for questions, send them to April.
-Will survey be administered via the web or on paper -- committee chose the web version even though the response rate will probably be lower.
-Should we provide incentives: one large prize or several smaller prizes?
-How will survey be marketed to students? April will develop a marketing plan and distribute it to committee for review.
-Some faculty are interested in data for transfer students. The survey asks students if they are first year, transfer, etc. so we will be able to determine their status. Jon stated there are no key performance indicators for transfer students in the dimensions but we would have the data. Kristin will find out if we can download raw data from survey.
Bev spoke to the history of the HLC self-study and the FoE project.
-She distributed a handout highlighting sections from the HLC and FoE website. Goals of the joint project between the HLC and the Policy Center on the First Year of College were articulated.
-Discussion about FoE was initiated by Terry Hogan originally for UNI. Ohio State participated in the FoE when he was there and he suggested it as a process for UNI. From there, UNI pursued being a part of the Foundations cohort for 2008-2009.
-Bev indicated we are conducting one customized HLC self-study with the focus on FoE.
-She has been talking with groups on campus to clear up the confusion regarding the connection between HLC and FoE.
-The end product will be meaningful for faculty, staff and students.
Next meeting: Thursday, October 16
10:00 a.m.
SIAC Conference Room
FoE Steering Committee Meeting
September 18, 2008, 10:00 a.m.
SIAC Conference Room
Present: Gretta Berghammer, Jon Buse, April Chatham-Carpenter, Lyn Countryman, Susan Hill, Lisa Kratz, Kristin Moser, Shirley Uehle, Donna Vinton, Kristin Woods
April encouraged all co-chairs to add their committee members to the FoEtec website.
April will email co-chairs a link to the “FoE Guidebook for Task Force Members” so committee members may print a copy if they wish. Let her know if you need this link.
HLC/FOE Kickoff October 7
April distributed two drafts of messages that will be emailed to faculty and student services lists. The first message, scheduled to be sent the week of September 22, will come from Jim Lubker and Terry Hogan, inviting staff to the kickoff meeting October 7. The second message, scheduled to be sent October 1, will come from April and Jon as a reminder to attend. After considerable discussion regarding the text of the messages, especially regarding burying FoE in HLC, where it may be perceived by faculty members to get lost and be meaningless, April agreed to email the drafts to the steering committee for review. Members were asked to respond with their suggestions by tomorrow (September 19).
Kristin Woods developed a printed invitation that will be mailed to a targeted group including faculty who taught first year students and/or advised first year students during fall 2007. Susan suggested we also include faculty from spring 2008 so that no one is overlooked. The UMPR office is refining the invitation for printing and distribution.
April distributed a handout drafted by Bev Kopper that will be available at the kickoff meeting. The handout provides an overview of the HLC Criteria for Accreditation and the FoE Foundational Dimensions. Several suggestions were made for revising the handout (having two handouts-one for HLC and one for FoE, putting FoE on the front and HLC on the back, etc.) Additional suggestions may be sent to April.
Several members expressed concern that faculty and staff do not understand the connection between the HLC Accreditation process and the FoE project. It was suggested that a paragraph explaining why and how the two are linked be developed and included in the handout.
Next meeting:
Thursday, September 25, 10:00 a.m.
SIAC Conference Room
[April’s notes from meeting, captured here, in order to have a written record which we all can use to help promote FoE. If you have things to add, please feel free to do so.]
Here are some of the suggestions given for how we can better articulate the relationship between FoE and HLC, presented in no particular order.
· We are in a unique position in this reaccreditation to both look back on what we’ve been doing as a university (HLC & FoE) and to put into place plans for improving our future for beginning students (FoE).
· This is a parallel process to help us look at students and reflect on what we are doing and have a concrete plan for the future.
· FoE helps us create a vision for moving forward.
· We need to know which HLC criteria are most related to FoE and the first-year experience, so as to emphasize these when promoting the FoE – HLC connection.
· HLC has changed – it is no longer a “given” that an institution will be reaccredited, so it is very important for us to be doing something meaningful and intellectually driven this time. FoE provides us the impetus to do so.
· FoE is an exciting new opportunity to help us better explore the new HLC criteria.
· We have to look at everything the university has and is doing for reaccreditation, and FoE helps provide us a focus in looking at one of these things (i.e., the beginning student experience) much more closely.
· FoE allows us to bring together, in a collaborative format, student services and academic affairs, in a way not done before.
· Our participation in FoE will help guide our institutional vision for the future. Its conjunction with HLC will make this reaccreditation report be more useful than previous reports have been.
Comments from John Gardner’s 9/19/08 e-mail, which could be used:
The whole design here is to make it impossible for this to sit on the shelf. This is because the U has decided to enter voluntarily into a strategic planning process to focus on improving the "foundational" new student experience. That planning process is going to lead to a highly public action plan. In turn, that plan is going to be embedded in a "special emphasis" self study which will mean that eventually an HLC review team will visit the campus to determine how well you have implemented the FoE plan--and hence how you have not at all left it sitting on the shelf. I think the idea here is to explain that HLC is a unique accreditor in that it now allows campuses to choose an area for special emphasis for assessment and improvement activities and then rewards the campus with reaffirmation. What this means is that they are giving you a choice, and an opportunity, to make the accreditation exercise a meaningful intellectual activity, faculty driven, that leads to sound educational improvement action steps. This is not rocket science. The idea is to give campuses more flexibility in the reaffirmation process and to make the mandatory assessment now called for more intellectually meaningful and more likely to actually result in measureable change and educational improvement.
You are really doing two things here: 1) you are undertaking a voluntary planning process to improve the new student experience; 2) you are linking this with something that is NOT voluntary-e.g., HLC reaccreditation. And you are using something which the University needs to do for its own intrinsic motivations and goals, to something which is an externally imposed requirement on the University, that is if it wishes to be able to continue to receive Title IV federal funds, i.e., to operate!
These two processes are highly complementary. One is optional though, the FoE; and one is mandatory (HLC). The former will make you more successful at the latter. Both HLC and the Policy Center are both trying to get campuses to do the same thing which is why we have this partnership: that is to use assessment to make decisions to bring about educational improvement in student learning and success.
Comments from Betsy Griffin’s (our Policy Center liaison) 9/22/08 e-mail, which could be used:
I feel one of the major advantages of connecting FoE to the HLC self study is that it assures that the self study process will lead to action instead of a report put on the shelf.Having been the co-chair of the previous NCA (HLC) self study at MSSU, I was probably one of the most concerned about the work and valuable recommendations that had been ignored after our 1998 visit. The MOU thatUNI will develop with HLC to do the special emphasis on the first year of college obligates you to 1) carry out the FoE self study,2) develop and implement an actionplan, and 3) to provide a follow-up report toHLC two years after your visit.
Your HLC CE team will havepeople with background in the first year who will be looking at howthe plan you have developed, how you are implementing it, and what mechanisms you have in place to assure its continuance. There is no on the shelfopportunity here. With the two year follow-up you can assure that changes have to continue. One of the concernsamong our faculty was that many initiatives that had been undertaken to improve FoE in the past had little assessment or continued support and disappeared after a year or two. The HLC/FoE connection helped to eliminate that faculty concern about puttingenergy into something that would come to naught.
Foundations of Excellence Steering Committee Meeting
September 11, 2008 10:00 a.m.
April Chatham-Carpenter, Bev Kopper, Shirley Uehle, Jean Neibauer, Susan Hill, Gretta Berghammer, Lisa Kratz, Kristin Woods, Kristin Moser, Lyn Countryman, David Schmid
Bullet points
· April talked with Anita Kleppe about IRB application; Susan Etscheidt is reviewing application
· April has placed timeline goals in FoEtec
· Kristin Moser ordered 2136 faculty/staff surveys today
· Faculty/staff survey is scheduled to be sent Oct. 9; April asked if we could change the date to Oct. 8 – Kristin will find out
· Two reminders are sent after initial survey is mailed; these will be signed by Lubker & Hogan
· Typical response rate for faculty/staff survey is 80-90%
Marketing ideas for launch meeting