Charges/Projects for next year’s senate



Student Affairs CommitteeIndiana State UniversityAnnual Report to the Senate, 2016-2017The 2016-2017 Student Affairs Committee (SAC) had nine regularly scheduled meetings this year, beginning with the organizational meeting in August and one in each of the succeeding months. Membership:Nancy Nichols-Pethick, Chair Dan Coovert, Vice Chair Steve Hardin, SecretaryMary Howard-HamiltonSandra KohlerDella ThackerCommittee Charges for 2016-2017:Submit recommendations from the Advising Task Force – finalize report from last year; Review history of Student Success initiatives and assess effectiveness (with AAC);Identify a faculty member to serve as representative to SGA Senate meetings;Monitor international student enrollment;Review admission/scholarship standards and retention statistics; consider making recommendations regarding adjustment to admission and/or retention standards;Review and assess effectiveness of current student evaluation model (with FAC);Administer the Faculty Scholarship;Produce and submit an annual report in time for the final Senate meeting of 2016-17. SAC addressed the following charges:CHARGE 1: Submit recommendations from the Advising Task Force – finalize report from last year. The following was approved 6 – 0 – 0 on November 15, 2016:SAC acknowledges the importance of good advising with regard to student success, and appreciates the time and effort of the Advising Task Force to develop recommendations for improving the advising process for students across colleges and disciplines.SAC suggests that any attempt to establish consistent advising should include the development of a common, University-wide definition of advising, and that this definition would be of great value in providing a framework as departments and programs adjust their approachaes to advising to suit the particular needs of their students.SAC acknowledges that the siting of advising within the categories of teaching, service, or “other” for the purposes of review and evaluation is a matter of contention and is by no means consistently handled. SAC suggests, however, that commonly held strategies for reporting and evaluating advising efforts are crucial to ensuring that advising is of high quality.SAC suggests that any opportunity to streamline advising would be of benefit to students. Suggestions include: limiting the number of “handoffs” of advisees; assigning departmental advisors and UC advisors to incoming freshman, when possible, to establish an advising “team”; allowing students who have yet to declare a major, or who are changing majors, to remain with their UC advisor until such time as they can be confidently transitioned to a departmental advisor.CHARGE 2: Review history of Student Success initiatives and assess effectiveness. The following observations and recommendations were discussed on April 18, 2017. It should be understood that this charge was in not fully addressed, and all observations and recommendations below are preliminary. This is a significant charge that will need to be undertaken early in the year, with collaboration between standing committees as well as appropriate units and offices. Subcommittee: Nancy Nichols-PethickSteve Hardin Caleb HessJohn Pommier (Academic Affairs)Throughout the spring 2017 semester, a subcommittee composed of members of the Student Affairs Committee and the Administrative Affairs Committee has engaged in a number of discussions and meetings related to the charge above. Our observations and recommendations are summarized as follows:OBSERVATIONSSAC/AAC acknowledges that approaches to student success have changed over time, often in response to economic factors beyond the control of the university (such as the economic downturn nearly a decade ago). Early efforts focused largely on student experience (such as the development of learning communities and experiential learning opportunities). That focus shifted somewhat with the introduction of an enrollment management model, and current practices take a more holistic approach, encompassing nearly all aspects of a student’s academic, financial, and social wellbeing.Most recently, student success has been prioritized as a strategic goal for 2016 – 2021. As such, efforts and initiatives related to the successful enrollment, retention, and support of students are ongoing, and span diverse administrative and academic units. These initiatives include, most notably: 1) the transition from an honors program to an honors college; 2) enhancing the student experience with programs like Sycamores Care, Leadership at State, and ISucceed; 3) expanding degree completion through the Graduation Specialist Project and Financial Wellness counselor training; 4) strengthening connections between Academic Affairs and Residential Life through the Residential Peer Mentor (RPM) program and Living Learning Communities; and 5) evaluation and development of distance education offerings and programs. It is clear that these initiatives are targeted at high-performing students as well as those at risk, and take into consideration the changing needs of students, as well as the pressures they commonly face. Successful collaboration between academic and administrative units, clear and open communication, and the efficient gathering and sharing of data will be essential to the success of these initiatives as we move forward. In this regard, it is the opinion of the members of the subcommittee that the Office of Student Success (OSS) provides an invaluable service to the university, in that it is the?locus of thinking,?information,?and data related to student success. The information that is available through that office has?clear value for?any constituency seeking to establish particular goals and objectives. In addition, by providing ongoing support for faculty and academic advisors, assisting in departmental efforts to streamline curriculum and eliminate barriers to retention and degree completion, and offering support to first generation, low income, and minority populations, this office has a meaningful and wide-ranging impact on student success. RECOMMENDATIONSWhile recent efforts clearly recognize the importance of a more holistic approach to student success, there are areas in which the university seems to have taken a reactive, rather than proactive, approach. The Student Counseling Center is one example: the number of students seeking counseling, as well as the overall number of counseling appointments, has tripled over the last twenty-five years, while the number of full-time counselors has remained virtually the same, and the center remains unaccredited. SAC/AAC recommend that the university offer tangible and proactive support to those areas that nurture and sustain our students in their times of greatest need. The Sycamores Care initiative is certainly a step in the right direction, and will provide valuable data with regard to the impact of care services on retention and completion. Beyond departmental curricular efforts to create more effective?"pathways" for students as they progress toward their degrees,?SAC/AAC recommend a global review of curriculum, course sequencing, and numerical course designations. If we can identify curricular impediments to student persistence across departments and colleges and create a greater level of consistency, some of the “stumbling blocks” students encounter may be reduced to “bumps in the road”. This process might be initiated within Foundational Studies, in collaboration with the Faculty Center for Teaching Excellence, and with the participation of highly engaged faculty and staff.Finally, SAC/AAC recommend that the review of student success initiatives be a perennial charge of both these committees. That said, it is further recommended that the charge be limited to some subset of two to three of the ongoing strategic initiatives.CHARGE 3: Identify a faculty member to serve as representative to SGA Senate meetings.Dan Coovert volunteered to serve as representative and attended SGA meetings during AY 2016-2017. In addition to attending meetings, Professor Coovert helped to identify a student, Caleb Hess, to attend SAC monthly meetings. This student also served as a member of the subcommittee that worked on Charge 2. SAC recommends that a student representative of SGA be identified annually to serve in an ex-officio capacity.CHARGE 4: Monitor international student enrollment.The following was discussed on December 5, 2017, and subsequently submitted to the Faculty Senate:On October 17, 2016, the committee invited Chris McGrew to present data and information related to international student enrollment. The information presented was discussed during the following meeting on November 14. Our observations, concerns, and suggestions are summarized as follows:SAC acknowledges that a vibrant and engaged international student population benefits the university community as well as the larger Terre Haute community.SAC recognizes that there has been little coordinated, targeted effort to recruit international students, nor is there currently a budget for anything but online recruitment. SAC suggests that a long-term plan be developed for a more consistent approach to international recruitment and retention. SAC recognizes that the current resources devoted to international student retention may be insufficient to such a plan. SAC further suggests that a set of collectively held expectations and goals for international student enrollments be developed.SAC further suggests that recruitment efforts target complex and changing political climates that might afford opportunities for building meaningful long-term relationships.SAC recommends that, in the future, this charge be expanded to include Graduate, in addition to International, enrollment. CHARGE 5: Review admission/scholarship standards and retention statistics; consider making recommendations regarding adjustment to admission and/or retention standards. The following was approved 6 – 0 – 0 on March 21, 2017, and subsequently forwarded to the Faculty Senate: Subcommittee: Daniel CoovertRobert Guell (Executive Committee Liaison) Sandra KohlerNancy Nichols-PethickOn December 5, 2016, the committee invited Rich Toomey to present data and information related to admissions and retention standards. Subsequently, a subcommittee of SAC was formed to examine the issues in more depth. A follow-up meeting with Rich Toomey and Sarah Wurtz took place on February 15, 2017. Our observations and recommendations are summarized as follows:After careful consideration and discussion, SAC acknowledges the complexity of providing opportunity to students while also maintaining academic standards, and supports current admissions and retention standards. While no adjustments are suggested at this time, SAC recognizes and supports the ongoing assessment of the Laptop Scholarship and further recommends that this scholarship be regularly evaluated with regard to changing technologies and student use of, and need for, such devices. SAC recognizes that GPA, class rank, and standardized test scores are highly predictive of college success as expressed through retention data, but recommends consideration of non-cognitive variables in the admissions process. While it is not recommended that the measurement of such variables be used in the admissions decision per se, integrating analysis of non-cognitive variables could prove beneficial in more accurately targeting students for particular forms of student support and/or academic counseling.SAC recognizes that student financial security is a crucial factor in retention, and suggests the development and/or expansion of robust need-based aid programs.CHARGE 6: Review and assess effectiveness of current student evaluation model (with FAC). The following document was approved 6 – 0 – 0 on November 14, 2017, and subsequently included in a collaborative report with FAC and forwarded to the Faculty Senate:Faculty should engage in activities that improve response rates.Notification: While students are notified via email, faculty need to let students know that course evaluations are available, and that they should check their email. ?Faculty receive updates at the same time that students receive reminders, so it makes sense that in-class announcements could coincide with these notifications.Motivation: While it seems that response rates are rising as students are growing accustomed to the process, it would behoove faculty to provide “motive and opportunity” for students to complete the evaluation. ?Some strategies might include:?emphasizing where and how evaluation responses have caused the faculty member to make changes to their teaching;?scheduling a particular day/time to complete the evaluation in class;?providing points/bonus points/extra credit for those students who complete the evaluation (this can be done via a printed “receipt”).Anonymity: response rates for smaller sections and classes are low, perhaps due to concerns about anonymity. ?Students need to be reassured that a) all responses are completely confidential, and b) faculty cannot access the evaluations until the final grading period has closed.”?CHARGE 7: Administer the Faculty Scholarship. It was determined, in consultation with Sarah Wurtz, that there would be one recipient of the 2017 Faculty Scholarship. Applications were reviewed via The Branch in March; Chinonye Olumba was chosen as the recipient of the 2017 Faculty Scholarhsip. Ms. Olumba was present at the meeting of the Faculty Senate on April 20, 2017, to receive this award.CHARGE 8: Produce and submit an annual report in time for the final Senate meeting of 2016-17. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download