|
 |
List of all Retention Council Agendas & Minutes
Agenda & Minutes for April 12, 2000
| |
Agenda of the Retention Council
Penthouse, School of Management 11:00 - 12:30
| I. |
Announcements |
|
| |
Welcome |
Horace Smith |
| |
Review and Approval of 11/18/99 Minutes |
Anne Shelly
Barbara Yonai |
| II. |
Institutional Efforts to Improve Retention: Residence-based programming |
| |
An Overview of Theme Housing |
Adrea Jaehnig
Terra Peckskamp
|
| |
Women in Science and Engineering (WISE): New Partnerships and Next Steps
|
Lois Applegate |
| |
Learning Communities: Status and Next Steps |
Sandra Hurd |
Minutes of the Retention Council
In Attendance: Lois Applegate, Marlene Blumin, Ronald Cavanagh, Luvenia Cowart, Thomas Ellett, Rosanna Grassi, Sandra Hurd, Adrea Jaehnig, David Kohr, William McPeak, Lena Rose Orlando, Tara Pecskamp, David Potter, Barbara Settel, Anne Shelly, Corinne Smith, Horace Smith, Eric Spina, Stacy Tice, Seth Tucker, Anastasia Urtz, Hannah Waggonner, Barry Wells, Barbara Yonai,
I. Announcements
Associate Dean Grassi requested one revision to the November 1999 meeting minutes.
Barbara Yonai stated that All-university retention data would be available the following week but that school/college specific data were on hold pending the resolution of a Peoplesoft problem.
Barabara Yonai also reported that the first year drop out rate was up for the Fall 1998 entering cohort and the 4yr. graduation rate was down for the Fall 1995 entering cohort. However, the attrition rate for this cohort was not higher so the rate may improve in the 5th and 6th year. (Please refer to the All-University Attrition and Graduation Report for specific data).
Horace Smith welcomed Eric Spina to the Retention Council.
Horace Smith announced that a plan for writing a 5yr. institutional retention plan would be discussed at the next meeting and asked the Council to consider the Vice chancellor's retention agenda articulated at the November meeting.
II. Retention Research: Progress and Plans
Brabara Yonai reviewed the variables examined to date. These include: gender, school/college affiliation, GPA, GPA by credits earned, admission rating, financial need, ethnicity, SAT scores, credits earned, residence hall, high school class rank, and parents adjusted gross income (AGI).
Barbara Yonai announced that a study of students that have left the University has begun in partnership with Assistant Dean Irma Almirall-Padamsee.
Barbara Yonai and Anne Shelly stated the importance of the interaction between research and practice in the Council's work.
III. Institutional Efforts to Improve Retention: Residence-based programming
Adrea Jaehnig and Tara Peckskamp from the Office of Residential Life presented an overview of theme housing. They provided a booklet that provided the menu of theme hosuing options for students in fall 2000.
Eric Spina inquired about the cost of the project.
Tom Ellett responded that it varies depending on the program but is generally inexpensive depending on whether a GA is assigned to a particular theme.
Horace Smith asked who bears the cost?
Tom Ellett answered that presently the Vision Fund is supporting the project but the institution will have to decide soon how to continue funding the program.
Adrea Jehnig was concerned in particular about funding to support assessment.
Dave Potter advocated a shared expense between Academic Affairs, Student Affairs, and central administration.
Tom Ellett stated that material on Freshmen Interest Groups (FIGs) was available through Adrea and Tara at Residence Life.
Barry Wells indicated that the Multicultural floor is open to all students.
Ron Cavanagh stated that the Vice chancellor had challenged the schools and colleges to initiate at least 2 new theme floors. The Vice President indicated that they would need assistance to meet this challenge. He congratulated Residence Life on the new theme housing publication and felt we would see increasing numbers of student participating in this housing option.
Barbara Settel asked about the difference between theme housing and learning communities as titles?
Tom Ellett answered that Learning communities were a broader category that subsumed theme housing as well as other communal learning approaches.
Rosanna Grassi asked about the registration problems created by participation in learning communities.
Sandra Hurd agreed that extra attention should be devoted to the scheduling issue to insure that conflicts with other course needs do not occur.
Rosanne Grassi stated that students registering for learning communities that have course requirements were throwing off school and college requirements or were skewing expected course loads for students that participated.
Sandra Hurd agreed to coordinate the learning community project's efforts to communicate with the schools and colleges.
Anne Shelly suggested the schools and colleges examine their current practices to see to what extent they might already fit the learning community model.
Sandra Hurd concurred and indicated that she has seen many efforts that were already close to the model and should be pursued.
Dave Kohr stated that learning community initiatives would havee an impact upon space needs in the residence halls. The university should consider this as part of its space planning. We are at maximum capacity in the residence halls. Learning community growth and enrollment growth should be considered.
Eric Spina asked about professional mentorships of learning communities. Floors sponsored by companies that perhaps link to professional mentors.
Tom Ellett responded that some of this is underway. Residence Life is working with Shiu-Kai Chin to set up a community for next summer with the Davinchy group.
Dave Potter cautioned that business alliances should be prepared to establish these relationships without the expectation for creating a proprietary pipeline for future employees.
Dave Potter also expressed concern about school and college control over who participates and under what conditions.
|
| |
|
