NOTE: At times, issues of confidentiality may require that some items discussed in meetings be excluded from these minutes.

PRESENT: Bill Barnes, Alan Gabrielli, Steve Hamrick, Joyce Mills, Mike Murphy, Dawn Ramsey, Zvi Szafran

ABSENT: Wayne Unsell

GUESTS: Keith Hopper, Center for Teaching Excellence

Item 1: CTE

Keith Hopper visited today’s meeting to talk about the Center for Teaching Excellence (CTE). He is encouraging all faculty (full and part-time) to take advantage of the opportunities available in the Center. Dr. Hopper offered that participation in the CTE, as a presenter or an observer, be included in the annual evaluation process or perhaps incorporated into a policy and procedure. He also suggested that part-time faculty need to be included and recommended one or two visits to the CTE each semester as a condition of re-employment. Objections were made regarding requiring part-time participation due to the schedules they have, particularly part-time night faculty. It was suggested that perhaps the Center could have materials available for check-out for these faculty or schedule special evening or Saturday sessions. The Deans also encouraged Dr. Hopper to contact the department chairs for suggestions of topics to offer and to ask their help in encouraging their adjunct faculty to participate in the CTE.

Item 2: Budget

VPAA Szafran spoke briefly on the state of next year’s budget and stated that the University may have to cut approximately $900,000 from the budget, due to reductions in the formula funding. Academic Affairs’ share of the cut would be approximately $500,000. Some of this could be offset with equipment funds and by canceling some faculty searches. Szafran asked the Council’s help to identify alternative ways to cut the budget.

VPAA Szafran also presented an idea to encourage admission and retention of General Studies students as a way to increase enrollment and thereby increase revenue. Szafran noted that about 360 potential general studies students were rejected this semester because they did not meet our admissions entrance criteria, although they did meet the Board of Regents minimum. Another 300 students started the application process but failed to complete it. Szafran also talked with the director of Georgia Highlands and was told that some of their students are also interested in attending SPSU.

Dr. Szafran proposes that we consider a “provisional acceptance” for students who do not meet our entrance requirements. Up to 20% of our student population can be accepted into this type of category and would allow those students with lower SAT scores to enter SPSU as a General Studies student and work toward an Associate of Science or perhaps transfer into one of our baccalaureate programs after completing a certain number of hours and making satisfactory progress. These students would start out by taking core classes and receive learning support to help them build skills. The VPAA asked the council for feedback. Some questions included:

How will these students be tracked or identified so that faculty will be aware that they may need extra help or support?
How would this program be promoted and marketed?
Will these students be required to take learning support courses and if so how would we accomplish this without creating new classes and requiring Board of Regents approval?
Will we be providing false hope to these students that they could eventually transfer into one of our baccalaureate programs and be successful?

Dr. Szafran stated that such a program would be an opportunity for us to increase revenue for the university and prepare these students for science or technology degrees. He agreed that learning support courses are difficult, but if done right they should provide positive results. Joyce Mills suggested that if a real library course could be required in this program, she would be enthusiastically in favor of it, and that she has the faculty ready and willing to teach such a course.

The VPAA received approval of this proposal from the Council and agreed that their concerns, specifically about learning support must be carefully thought out. For this to be successful we also need faculty support and input. Dr. Szafran will move forward on this idea.

Item 3: Equipment Proposals

The equipment proposal process is complete and the Deans and Chairs should go forward with ordering equipment. Equipment funds will be distributed directly to the Deans and Chairs.

Item 4: Strategic Planning

The member of the Deans Council, as well as others that were suggested, will serve on the Strategic Planning Committee. Mark Stevens will also identify two faculty from each school as well as two staff from Extended University to serve on the committee.

Item 5: Faculty Presence on Campus

VPAA Szafran received many emails regarding faculty presence on campus. He moved the discussion to WIKI, modified the wording of the proposal, and is receiving more positive feedback. Dr. Szafran would like to expand the next Deans Council meeting to include Department Chairs. This meeting will allow open and frank discussion on the issue of faculty expectations – what they are and how we uphold them. The meeting will be in the Library Rotunda on Wednesday, October 26 at 2:00 p.m.

Item 6: Summer Session

The VPAA asked about the feasibility of going to a 4-day academic schedule during the summer semester to conserve energy. Extended University would have the most difficult time scheduling their classes because they currently offer classes six days per week. Extended University explored this option in the past and determined that they would stand to lose approximately 25% of their revenue or approximately $250,000-$300,000. Space to accommodate more classes on a 4-day schedule also might be a problem. It may be possible to close other academic areas and leave Extended University open. Other areas such as opens labs would need to remain open and available for students. The Library is open 7 days a week and would need to remain open. There are significant issues against a 4-day schedule. Another suggestion to conserve energy might be to close the entire university on Friday afternoons. These ideas would need to be looked at more closely.

Item 6: Advising

In an effort to build a better advising program, Dr. Szafran introduced an advising model to the Council. Working with the freshman composition instructors, he proposes that all first year writing courses incorporate a portfolio into their classes. Students would use this portfolio to enter information about themselves and can be used by their advisors and as a way to help students “chart their path” through the University, and ultimately, market the students as they reach graduation and begin seeking employment. The portfolio would showcase the students’ work and be a place for them to reflect on their path to becoming working professionals. The format could be electronic and would contain a shell to guide the students through the process. This could be beneficial in helping the students focus on their goals and would be a way to identify potential weaknesses.

Other suggestions/ideas/questions from the Council included:

Meeting with students face to face is the best way to advise.
Students must see the benefit of a portfolio for them to want to participate.
Advising should be part of faculty expectations and all faculty should advise.
How do you measure the success of advising? Use of a student evaluation of their advisor might be one way.
Try this proposed model with new General Studies students and see how it works.
Maybe exempt some students – such as non-traditional or junior or senior students.

All agreed that a more intensive advising program is needed and will be beneficial. Alan Gabrielli and Dr. Szafran will work with the writing faculty to create a model for the portfolio project.

The meeting adjourned at 4:30 p.m.