|
 |
List of all Retention Council Agendas & Minutes
Agenda & Minutes for December 5, 2001
| |
Agenda of the Retention Council
Bartlett Room, Newhouse II, 10:00am - Noon
| I. |
Report on Presentation to Deans' Cabinet, 11/13/2001 |
Horace Smith |
| II. |
Facilitated IUT Pilot Program |
Eric Spina, Anne Shelly |
| III. |
Seniors 114+ Project
AY 1999-2000 progress
AY 2000-2001 start-up |
Bobbi Yonai, Anne Shelly |
| IV. |
Fall 2000 Cohort formation |
Bobbi Yonai |
| IV. |
Project Schedule Documentation Plan
(Proposed format for reporting project/study progress) |
Anne Shelly, Bobbi Yonai |
| |
Spring 2002 meeting schedule
Proposed dates:
February 13, 2002
March 27, 2002
April 24, 2002
May 22, 2002
All dates are Wednesdays. Meeting time is 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon.
Next Meeting: TBA
|
|
|
| |
Minutes of the Retention Council
In Attendance: Charles Barletta, Marlene Blumin, Maureen Breed, Andrew Clark, Luvenia Cowart, James Duah-Agyeman, Rosanna Grassi, Sandra Hurd, Rosemary Kelly, JoAnn May, Helen Murray, Judy O'Rourke, Lena Rose Orlando, David Potter, Hanna Richardson, Steve St. Onge, Amie Redmond, Barbara Settel, Anne Shelly, Horace Smith, Eric Spina, Martha Sutter, Seth Tucker, Anastasia Urtz, Barry Wells, Barbara Yonai
I. Announcements
Horace Smith announced that he, Ron Cavanagh, and Vince Tinto were working to hire a consultant to review the retention plan.
Horace Smith introduced Andrew Clark and Helen Murray to the Council as new members. Andrew is the Chief Process Architect with Ben Ware's office and Helen runs the SU Internship Program and the new Venture Consortium project.
The Council without dissent approved the minutes from the 10/31/01 meeting.
Horace Smith reported on the presentation to the Dean's Council (11/13/01). Dean's Palmer, Rubin, Newton, Burman, and Brzozowski have been appointed to a sub-committee dealing with retention issues.
Anastasia Urtz asked how this new sub-committee would interface with the Council.
Horace Smith answered that the Center for Retention studies and CSTL will be providing the group with data when requested. He indicated that the Vice Chancellor has selected this group to be responsible for the elements of the Retention Plan that are the direct responsibility of the Vice Chancellor. Thus, interaction between the Council and the sub-committee will be on an issue specific basis.
Spring Meetings scheduled:
February 13 - School of Management Penthouse
March 27 - Bartlett Room
April 24 - Bartlett room
May 22 - School of Management Penthouse
II. Facilitated IUT Project - Eric Spina/Anne Shelly
Eric Spina presented 4,5, and 6 yr. graduation rates from the College of Engineering and Computer Science (ECS) and the institutional rates from the same period (1989 - 1996)
Eric Spina stated that the College specifically markets to students interested in double majors or minors outside of the college. In fact, the curriculum was revised to reflect this in the mid - 90s.
ECS in cooperation with SAIP is instituting the Facilitated IUT Project. The goal is to retain poor performing ECS students at the institution who have selected the wrong career path and would be better served in a different school or college.
In order to reclaim a poor GPA students typically transfer out of the institution. This program would provide another alternative.
Process:
Identification - Students would be identified by their expression of alternative interests to their advisors and their poor performance in core ECS courses.
Developing an IUT Contract - Students would commit to future performance goals, the selection of courses appropriate to target major, a set trial period with hard performance targets agreed to by ECS, SAIP, the student, and the target school.
The outcomes are - Acceptance by target school, extension and re-establishment of goals, redirection to UC, or suspension.
See attached program description
Concerns and Issues
The capacity of some schools or colleges to take students in the program. Is the pool small enough and upside positive enough so that any school or college can be a target.
Implications for non-program "IUT Wannabees"
What are the University's obligations to students?
Barbara Settel stated that IST pursues this model on an individual basis currently. She is concerned of the "word-of-mouth" leading non-project students to question why they are not participating.
Anne Shelly acknowledged that some schools/colleges might do this anyway. This program proposes to provide a structure for those that want it.
Hanna Richardson stated concern about the availability of target courses for project students.
Rosanna Grassi argued that Newhouse was presently over-enrolled and would be raising its admissions standard to 3.5. She is concerned that a consistent message about the possibilities for transfer be given to students.
David Potter asserted that present Arts and Sciences IUT procedures are good.
Eric Spina acknowledged the receptiveness of other schools and colleges to IUTs is an important factor. However, this program reaches out to the undecided and those needing additional support before they become likely to leave the institution.
III. Seniors 114+ Credits Projects - Barbara Yonai
Barbara Yonai distributed data to each school and college on the number of students presently with more than 114 credits from the Fall 1994 - Fall 1997 cohorts that have not graduated.
Each school and college was asked to review the list, their own records, and to make an effort to reach out to those from this year. A reviewed list was to be returned to CSTL by January 15.
Barbara Yonai stated that every 25 students retained within a cohort increased the graduation rate by 1%.
Eric Spina asked for a list of last years 114+ cohort whose status has changed.
David Potter stated that A&S sends out letters to all students who haven't graduated that are close in credits.
Rosanne Grassi pointed that a deceased student was on her list.
Barbara Yonai indicated that Tim Wasserman will pull these students out of the next list. Also, Judicial Affairs and the Office of the VP for Student Affairs will get a list to examine other reasons they might not have graduated.
IV. Fall 2000 Cohort Formation
Barbara Yonai stated that October 1 is the date each new cohort will be formed. She will be asking each S/C to confirm cohort membership.
Admissions, the Registrar's Office, and CSTL met and agreed to October 1 as the best date for all stakeholders.
V. Project Schedule Documentation Plan
Anne Shelly distributed the Project Schedule Documentation Plan. Members should review plan for further discussion.
|
