|
 |
List of all Retention Council Agendas & Minutes
Agenda & Minutes for February 21, 2001
| |
Agenda of the Retention Council
Bartlett Room, Newhouse II 10:30 - 12:00
| I. |
Announcements |
|
| |
Welcome |
Horace Smith |
| |
Minutes from 2/7/01 meeting |
|
| |
Future Meeting Dates Confirmed |
|
| |
March 14, March 28, April 11 |
|
| II. |
Continued Discussion of Intervention Strategies |
Council Members |
| |
Revisions to targets/interventions identified 2/7/01 |
|
| |
New targets/Interventions |
|
| |
Timeline for Interventions/Prioritizing Action |
|
| Next Meeting: 10:30 - 12:00 Bartlett Room, Newhouse II |
Minutes of the Retention Council
In Attendance: Marlene Blumin, Ronald Cavanagh, Luvenia Cowart, Thomas Ellett, Bea Gonzalez, Rosanna Grassi, Judy Hamilton, David Kohr, William McPeak, Lena Rose Orlando, Judy O'Rourke, David Potter, Hanna Richardson, Barbara Settel, Horace Smith, Eric Spina, Seth Tucker, Anastasia Urtz, Barry Wells, Barbara Yonai
I. Announcements
Minutes from 2/7/01 meeting were approved.
Horace expressed the urgency in meeting on a regular basis so that the completed document can be submitted to the Vice Chancellor by April 15. Horace will submit a new report to the Vice Chancellor to request support through financial reallocation of resources to support these recommendations. The Vice Chancellor will present the final document the Board of Trustees and the Chancellor. The task before the committee is to prioritize the list of interventions over the five-year period of the strategic retention plan.
Future Council Dates Confirmed
March 14, March 28, April 11
II. Continued Discussion of Intervention Strategies
Bobbi distributed the Revisions to Targeted Interventions and Sub-populations Plan and asked the committee for additions, misrepresentations, or omissions of the seven populations. This document incorporates the previous retention council discussions and includes elements of the preliminary documents that will be included into the final document.
Ron asked if we have retention rates for undecided students. Are they more at risk?
Barry indicated that in the past undecided students were more prone to leave or be put on probation. For that reason, Arts and Sciences created the Office of Career Exploration Service. Do not know if current data exists?
Barb recommended that we look at the undecided students in the freshman year and again in the sophomore year.
Dave responded that students who come to A&S as undecided majors feel somewhat less than full students. He suggested that instructors be trained for the purpose of working with undecided and alternate offer students. The students should meet with the deans and possibly consider dual majors. He provided a scenario in which a student who comes to SU and wants "A" but gets "B." Is "B" adequate for that student? If not, then the student should be somewhere else.
Barry stated that it is unclear how we handle AO's. Most AO's are in A&S. The students need to be informed that they need to take certain courses before they are eligible to transfer. How does this get communicated to the student?
Hanna mentioned that there is a competing interest between the Office of Admissions and the Schools and Colleges.
Marlene advocated for a centralized advising center where the student could go to the Center for advising and not to the individual schools and colleges. There would be no vested interest on the part of the advisor.
Horace reinforced the notion that the Vice Chancellor will entertain any reasonable recommendations.
Tom is concerned that we don't have actual data. He asked whether there are data to support the facts that are presented? And, is there a central person who can find out about AO's, IUT's, etc. He advocated that we see the actual data.
Bobbi mentioned that not all of the needed information is available. IUT data are readily available; however, the AO data are not available from Admissions. Anne and Bobbi are working with Admissions to get the data for centralized retention purposes. Bobbi is in the process of finding a mechanism to collect that data. Bobbi also noted there are limitations of Peoplesoft because the information only goes back to 1997. Therefore, information retrieval it is cumbersome because the old mainframe system and Peoplesoft are needed.
Horace mentioned that the Center for Retention Students (CRS) was established under Anne Shelly's direction for that purpose. Horace asked how do we put CRS into the long-term plan.
Dave mentioned that when people have multiple tasks they get diverted from the task. He recommended that a person be dedicated to the task.
Horace proposed having a person dedicated to institutional research.
Bobbi asked if we need to add anything to the sub-populations?
Rosanna asked what are we doing with issues regarding financial need. What do we do if a student has a 2.0 but can't afford to stay because they have lost their scholarship money? Students between 2.0-2.49 lose financial aid although they are often academically students in good standing. Are there interventions we are currently using with this group to help them cope?
Rosanna also asked that we consider some social adjustments issues. What happens if a student attempts to join a sorority or fraternity and is unsuccessful?
Ron mentioned the need for a financial aid fund in which there should be a pot of money Chris Walsh can allocate to students on an as needed basis. Students who are doing very well without scholarship should have their package reviewed after four years. In addition, the university should look at financial aid for all academic opportunities (summer studies, DIPA, etc.). It would be more cost effective to allocate more financial aid than to loose the students.
Bea mentioned that the Bursar's office does creative funding and that is broader than the schools and colleges. The student success is based on the need for the different entities to communicate.
Horace mentioned that most departments do not have discretionary funds and some help students through their departmental operating account. The scholarship fund would alleviate that burden from various offices. Intervention strategies are identified on the preliminary document. How do you put in action this plan?
Vinne proposed that new partnerships be established through new programs to help the sub-populations to be more academically successful through the four year period. The expectation would be that the successful pilots to be used by the larger university.
Eric mentioned intervention strategies through high quality programs such as SummerStart, SAIP and Academic Excellence Workshops. Many students experience problems within the first few years and that the only way to succeed is to go elsewhere. He recommended that students be reminded that the promise they entered with is still there.
Horace agreed that there should be collaborative relationships with different entities. The schools and colleges can identify the stage of development.
Hanna stated that it is already done in the form of informal agreements with students who aren't yet qualified to transfer and recommended collectively agreeing on a formalized approach.
Judy Hamilton reported that 1/3 of the instruction is done by part-time faculty and adjuncts. Not only do student show up in administrator's offices, but they also see faculty for issues. Many times the faculty are not "in the know." Judy recommended: 1) the need to strengthen the communication network to include part-time and adjunct faculty; 2) to have a orientation and mentoring program for part-time faculty so they can be part of the referral process.
Marlene expressed an interest to see all syllabi on-line so students would know what courses look like before they register.
Tom mentioned the students who get lost and not heard. There is a place to have their voices heard. Sophomores get to go out to South Campus and there are no checks and balances before they are given permission to live there.
Lena Rose mentioned FAN and the Student Advocacy Network. Training specific people across campus and have a well organized plan to identify volunteers and refer students to an organized network.
Bobbi asked do we focus on the sub-populations and develop strategies. There are some interventions that cut across sub-populations. Some issues are specific to sub-populations.
Hanna suggested that if an advising center is the solution to five out of eight issues then that is what we should look at.
Bobbi suggested looking at the following interventions: Advising Center, SAN, HSHP. She also suggested a matrix intervention across sub-populations to identify where the pieces intersect/overlap and to identify priorities.
Ron distributed a 1st draft Retention Action Plan. He encouraged all members to write one as well so we will have as many opinions as possible.
Horace stated that the process of categorizing issues would take time. He asked everyone to think more thoughtfully about the action plan and the timeline for implementation.
The next meeting will be held on March 14, from 10:30 -12:00, in the Bartlett room, Newhouse II
|
| |
|
