GSS Full Senate Meeting
October 19th, 2011
John Dewey Lounge
- Call to Order - 12:02
- Approval of Minutes – approved! (from 10/5/11)
a. 36 Senators showed up
- Lizzy Pope (GSS rep. for Presidential Search)
a. Just starting to review apps.
b. Working with hired search firm
c. One more meeting, then reviewing applications. 8-10 semifinals, then invite 3-4 finalists to campus.
d. Questions?
i. Jude – “Backgrounds of candidates?”
Lizzy – “Deans, Provosts, etc”, “also a few non-traditional candidates”, “Want some background in education”
ii. “Do they have to live in the President’s House?”
Lizzy – “Perhaps. More about being part of the community. Seen, and expected to be seen.”
iii. “How the decision actually made?”
Lizzy – “After all candidates attend, then have a meeting and present the choices to BOT, then they make the choice”
iv. “How did public forums go?”
Lizzy – “Disappointing. Not enough people. Only Rubenstein School well represented. Faculty/students want accessibility”
v. Beth - “Maybe we should try to find someone not like ourselves. Break out of our comfort zone”
IV. Brian – Student Trustee
a. “I was an undergrad, now a graduate student”
b. “Originally on BOT, looking at financial statements, etc. Very positive experience so far”
c. “BFI tuition discussed a lot. Lots of idea sharing”
d. “Another meeting this Fri/Sat. Please attend if interested. I am the only grad on BOT, so highly encourage a replacement (only 5 months left).”
e. Questions?
i. “What is the time commitment like?”
Brian – “Not too bad. Get materials a week in advance to read. Good to have student rep. on BOT to remind about student issues.”
ii. Edu – “On Friday, also have 2 student presentations, so people should check it out”
iii. Jude – “How do you feel like you represent the student body in the committee?”
Brian – “Increased communication between GSS/SGA and BOT. Important that both bodies know they have a voice.”
iv. Edu – “If anyone wants to follow up, or has anymore questions, feel free to email us.”
V. Provost – Jane Knodell
a. Strategic initiatives on Provost website.
b. Strategic Plan 2012-2013
i. Product of a very participatory process
ii. Broad Goals – Building Excellence at UVM
iii. Totally disconnected from budget process
iv. Now we want to take goals and resource them
v. Funding from General Fund (rearrange). Cost savings (want more efficiency)
c. Considering introducing a Professional Master’s Degree online. Then could use revenue as part of funding for these initiatives
d. Also want to take more advantage of Summer Programs
e. Finally, want to explore increasing Internationalization. Growing some graduate programs to promote this. Also want to encourage undergrad internationals as well.
f. Five Teams
i. 2 working on revenue generating
ii. 3 working on investments
a. General Education Goals
b. Career Advising
c. Keeping Undergrads after the first year (14% loss at the moment. Want to reduce to 8% or less)
i. “How many transfer in?”
Jane – “Not sure”
“Why do we lose them?”
Jane – “We have lots of data, some self-reported and some not”. “Academic rigor is the biggest issue. Have to figure out how to improve this”
g. Important Areas of Interest
i. General Education – “Writing to learn, clear writing”
ii. TRI research opportunities
iii. Diversity and Internationalization
iv. Distinctive Academic Programs
h. Academic Program Review
i. Every program goes through review process. Self-evaluation as well as external evaluations
ii. SIP – looking at entire array of academic programs, also monetary review as well. Are they doing well? If not, what can we do?
iii. Criteria & Metrics - Agree philosophically what are goals are. The numbers won’t tell us what to do, but it will tell us where to start
Edu – “The grad student needs/goals are much different than those of undergraduates”
Jane – “We have different evaluations for different departments”
iv. Also timing program review with accreditation review
v. “Any thought of reaching out for corporate/business sponsorship?
Jane – “No, not considered”
vi. “What happens if a program does not meet criteria?”
Jane – “Different scenarios:
-You need more revenue
- You need more investment
-You were good 40 years ago, but now maybe need to combine with others, or phase out program
v. Beth – “Are these issues about grad students?”
Jane – “Retention more about undergrads. We do want to increase grad student enrollment outside of the Medical School. That’s why we are trying to be represented as Higher Graduate Education Research”
vi. Narine – “How will you increase Internationalization in graduate/undergrad student body?”
Jane – “If we self-promoted, we would have to spend a lot of money, and it would take time. Instead, we may hire an outside firm for partnership in order to help. We could have a group come talk to GSS about Internationalization.
“International Alumni Association might be a good way to recruit people”
i. Capital Campaign Submissions
Jude – “What would you like to see from us?”
Jane – “Undergrad retention is important
- Could also propose something to increase stipends or increase grad quality of life (i.e. Grad Student Fellowships, similar to undergrad stipends, they could help a lot)
- In order to be a ‘Research University’ need to focus on Grad research and improving research programs
j. “Any opposition to the online degrees?”
Jane – “Some faculty against it. Right now just ideas, no real program”
“Saw a speaker who talked about how online classes can help remove the “in-class identity”, online fewer border put up
Edu – “Talk to me about ideas/comments because I see all of these people every week”