Middle States Steering Committee
Minutes of Meeting of August September 8, 2014
Meeting called to order at 2:00
Attending: Denise Murphy, Mike Flinn, Sudhir Singh, Wray Blair, Linda Steele, Scott Fritz, Amy Armiento, Randall Rhodes, Jay, Hegeman, Karen Keller, Colleen Stump, Robert Smith,Sara Beth James, Kelly Hall, Sydney Duncan, Doris Santamaria-Makang
Absent: Beth Hoffman, Hank Bullamore
Agenda: Discussion of the work groups’ progress; Common concerns; Folder on U Drive.
Rob began with an introduction to the reorganized Middle States 2016 folder on the U Drive. Consistencies were created in naming conventions as well as the organization of documents within subfolders.
Work Group 1: Kelly and Sudhir
Rob and Sydney attended their first meeting of the semester and reviewed the document inventory. The work group will review the PRR of 2011 and associated documents. Since there are 8 members tackling four identified questions, teams of two are charged with investigating those questions. Logistical issues to be addressed include: the development and implementation of surveys, work flow, and resource persons to be engaged as well as the format of this engagement. By the end of the semester, a draft outline will be submitted.
Work Group 2: Amy and Scott
This work group believes that existing data sets are sufficient to meet their research needs; no additional surveys need to be implemented. Smaller teams will be assigned fundamental elements for analysis. Emphasis will be on the efficient and effective use of resources to deliver academic programming.
Question was raised as to the format to be used for the writing of the final document. Following the model from Edinboro University, an introductory narrative will focus on the FSU Strategic Goal and principal themes/initiatives to be analyzed. Then the following discussion will be organized by the assigned Standards and Fundamental Elements with focus on policies, procedures, outputs/outcomes, assessments, and improvements/adjustments to the initiative based on this cycle of assessment (in respect to achieving greater efficiencies and effectiveness).
Work Group 4: Wray and Mike
The work group is identifying resource persons for information gathering. There appears to be no need for additional documents. Mike raised an issue over the membership’s attendance at work group meetings. Work group 1 offered their policy of “two absences and you’re out.”
Question was raised as to access to data sets, narratives, and other documents compiled during 2013-2014 as part of FSU’s consultation with Noel-Levitz. As several of these are internal administrative documents, they may not be shared. If the detail present in the documents is deemed of little value to the work groups, then an executive summary or outline may shed light on the topics discussed, methods of analysis, and their impact on institutional decision making. Jay, Colleen, and Wray believed that the writing and distribution of summaries of the proceedings would be appropriate. Since the institution identified the need to contract with an outside consulting firm,reassessed policies and procedures in light of those discussions, and implemented tactics as a result, it is clear that the investment in this dialog was seminal during 2013-2014.
Work Group 3: Denise
This work group felt there was little need for new data sets. It will contribute a few questions to a survey. The group will meet later in the month.
Work Group 5: Karen
Identified subgroups will be assigned Standards for analysis.
Work Group 6: Linda and Doris
An action plan will be distributed to work group members. There is a need to identify resources as well as persons to facilitate information gathering.
The Steering Committee will meet the second Monday of each month at 2:00pm.
Meeting adjourned at 3:10.