UNIVERSITY LEADERSHIP COUNCIL (ULC)
Minutes
June 25, 2013
Attendance: Nivine Megahed, Holly Battaglia, Suzette Fromm-Reed, Bobbi Biringer, Tom Ehrhardt, Terry Smith, Josi Gines, Steve DiBenedetto, Brisbane Rouzan, Kathy Walsh, Christine Quinn, John LaNear, Marsha Watson, Seema Imam McCeil Johnson, Tim Collins, Carol Moulden, Judy Hultberg, Erin Haulotte, Lauren Heidbrink, Generosa Lopez-Molina, Deveda Francois
Agenda/Minutes: The agenda for the meeting was approved. The May minutes were approved by consensus.
What’s Happening:
Brisbane Rouzan stated that the summer term start is approaching and volunteers are being stationed at the five campuses. He also indicated that the graduations were great and very entertaining. The “red carpet” was a big hit! The event was very personalized.
Nivine Megahed stated that the board meeting went well, budget was approved and the compensation philosophy was approved. There were some good strategic discussions.
Bobbi Biringer shared the following numbers with respect to new students for the summer term indicating that new student enrollment is currently at 98% of budget:
CAS – budgeted 81/forecast 63/prior year of 62
CMB – budgeted 48/forecasted 57/prior year of 57
NCE – budgeted 213/forecasted 234/prior year of 226
AQIP Responsibilities Presentation – Marsha Watson:
Marsha Watson then provided a brief overview of the University’s responsibilities under AQIP. Some of the highlights are provided below:
NLU’s Academic Quality Improvement Program is a lot about outcomes, as well as process and systems. Annual activities include action plans which happen every year and commission reviews.
The following are the University’s current AQIP projects:
· Adjunct action plan (near completion)
· Online assessment action plan (recently built in D2L)
· Credit hour compliance (will be implemented in the fall term)
One other project to be done is a review of our Systems Portfolio. This will be good for assisting with grants research and will be made public. The model is broken down into nine categories including valuing people, helping students learn other distinctive activities, mission, and financial areas.
Other functions associated with AQIP include Quadrennial AQIP Activities which will be attended in February 2016 (four members of our team are mandated to attend – board member, President, Provost, accreditation liaison officer) and the Septennial AQIP Activities for which the next visit is due in 2018-2019.
In response to the AQIP discussion, Dr. Megahed stated the ULC needs to look at what we think, as an institution represents quality.
ULC Potential Areas of Future Focus
The topic of potential areas of future focus for ULC was then reviewed. The following were briefly discussed:
Retention
Student satisfaction
On-line capacity building
Submission of grades
Learning outcomes (additional suggestion)
Mary Jo asked can we can look at how our systems fit and work together. For example, her department did not get favorable feedback from Noel-Levitz and she has ideas on why that is. Suzette stated that her replacement (Tiffany) has experience in assessing systems. Perhaps she can serve on a committee?
The discussion then shifted to the composition of ULC. Tim shared that according to the charter, ULC is to be comprised of 35 members. Nivine added we need to be mindful of the group’s size.
Christine commented that maybe we should have quarterly working groups. We want to move towards a more engaged approach. We’re seeing success because we’re getting the right voices at the table.
Tim Collins asked might we consider a sub-committee approach for ULC. Perhaps we can start the next ULC meeting with the “correct” configuration and amended structure.
Discussion: AIM for Success (Access Innovation Model) – Nivine Megahed:
Nivine then led a discussion regarding the changing landscape in higher education. She stated that higher education is changing dramatically, including the level of the convenience that students want. The market is changing and within the next 10 years, the adult population will be growing significantly. People are starting to use distance learning more. She then discussed the following thoughts:
· We Are On the Verge of a Digital Revolution – technology revolution, increased access, openness to new learning platforms and wisdom from previous attempts
· Trends – People are Gaining Knowledge in a Variety of Ways –
o Online programming
o Open source market – low course courses
o Face to Face
o Inverted classrooms
o Emergence of coaching models and tools
o Peer to peer models
o Life experience/prior learning
· U.S, Higher-Ed has Adopted a Variety of Models
o For-profit online degree providers
o Not-for-profit digital degree grantors
o Digital supplements
o Open source providers (i.e. NY public library – with good supplements to online courses)
o Emergent elite institutions
Dr. Megahed then went on to discuss a proposed innovative model and framework potentially of benefit to NLU under which undergraduate degree attainment is re-engineered. Concept differentiation in this model would be achieved building on levels of support, NLU’s experience, credible credentialing and bringing assessment of learning expertise.
Through discussion with the Board on the topic, various questions that they have that need addressed are:
· What’s our goal?
· Who is our target market?
· How much should we build and how much do we partner?
· What is the risk-benefit to your brand?
· Single institutional strategy or multiple departmental strategies?
· Where do we see risks such as the ability to design something that is engaging and inviting and speed to market.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:58 a.m.
Next meeting: July 23, 2013 10:00 AM–12:00 PM (Chicago Campus–Boardroom).
Respectfully submitted,
Josi D. Gines
2