September 06, 2013 Meeting
Agenda
Strategic Planning Committee
Agenda for Regular Meeting
9:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m., Friday, September 6, 2013
Cafeteria Conference Room
To: Sam Aunai, Darcy Bogle, Brandy Cramer, Vicki Herder, David Layne, Mark Williams
From: Eric Berube, Chair
Date: September 1, 2013
Recorder: Debi Wooley
Timekeeper: TBD
Agenda:
1. Review and approval of minutes of the May 3, 2013 meeting – 5 minutes
2. Governance Council Update – Vicki – 5 minutes
3. Budget Committee Update – David – 5 minutes
4. Report on Action Items from the Previous Meeting
All three of the previous action items from the May 3 meeting are agenda items for this meeting.
5. Strategic Planning Survey Results – Eric – 20 minutes
Objective: Identify areas for improvement and make recommendations to the GC.
6. Annual Program Review Evaluations – Eric – 20 minutes
Objective: Identify areas for improvement and make recommendations to the GC.
7. Comprehensive Program Review – Eric – 15 minutes
Objective: (1) Determine content; (2) Determine process, including identifying which programs will undergo review; and (3) Determine a timeline.
8. Future of Strategic Planning Committee – Eric – 15 minutes
Objective: Discussion of dissolving the committee and reconstituting it as needed as a task force.
9. Other Items – 5 minutes
10. Adjournment
EB/dw
Minutes
Minutes of the Strategic Planning Committee
9:00 a.m., Friday, September 6, 2013
Cafeteria Conference Room
Members Present: Eric Bérubé, Darcy Bogle, Brandy Cramer, Vicki Herder, David Layne
Members Absent: Sam Aunai, Mark Williams
Timekeeper: Eric Bérubé
Agenda:
1. Review and approval of minutes of the May 3, 2013 meeting – 5 minutes
The minutes were approved by consensus.
2. Governance Council Update – Vicki/Brandy – 5 minutes
August 30, 2013 meeting:
Dena and Vicki have been working on a chart of committees and task forces. Dena is recommending that the Matriculation Committee become the Student Success Committee, and that the Enrollment Management Committee become the Student Access Committee. The members of the Council are taking the proposal to their constituents and the item will be revisited on the September 27 agenda. It was noted that all committees should have a charter, chairperson, agendas, and minutes. Shared governance committees should also operate under the Brown Act.
Brock gave an update on the final budget for 2013-14 and mentioned that it is a flat budget with no mid-year cuts anticipated.
The timeline for Annual Program Review was discussed. The group decided to keep the current timeline because it aligns with the budgeting process and the faculty selection process.
Regarding goal prioritization, the Council made the decision that unfunded items from the previous year’s goals should, if needed, be submitted by the program leads each year as new goals in order to keep them in the cue. It was also decided to keep the same ranking criteria for prioritization. There was discussion regarding restoration of funds versus current need. Members also discussed the need for feedback on funding at the end of the annual program review process.
3. Budget Committee Update – David – 5 minutes
No update at this time.
4. Report on Action Items from the Previous Meeting
All three of the previous action items from the May 3 meeting are agenda items for this meeting.
5. Strategic Planning Survey Results – Eric – 20 minutes
Objective: Identify areas for improvement and make recommendations to the GC.
Dena and Eric have discussed the need to review the Mission Statement, Strategic Plan, and Program Effectiveness Measures, including monitoring the measures at the Governance Council May 2014 Retreat. Dena will propose the preparation of a Taft College Educational Master Plan utilizing outside consultants at the September 13 Governance Council meeting. The consultants, College Brain Trust, will give a presentation to the Governance Council members on September 27. Eric also encouraged SPC members to view the Dashboard and Key Success Indicators on the IR website because this will be important to the strategic planning process in the future.
6. Annual Program Review Evaluations – Eric – 20 minutes
Objective: Identify areas for improvement and make recommendations to the GC.
There were basically two areas of concern in the evaluation results: SLOs and Program Review timeline. Regarding the SLOs, continuity from year to year and a simplified process were the high priorities. In response to that, several responses were implemented: (1) eLumen data were provided in an Excel format this year; (2) the “SLO How To Guide” was updated; (3) summary of Institutional Level SLOs was eliminated; and (4) Summary of Course SLOs was changed to Summary of Section SLOs. On the program review areas of concern, several responses were also implemented: (1) The student achievement data also included a “bonus” file of items to streamline data analysis, including section counts, FTES by program, and enrollments; (2) all data files were also included in an Excel format, which was the number one request. All of this news was well received by the faculty during the August in-service informational meeting for annual program review.
It was suggested in the evaluation that the timeline for Annual Program Review be changed to reflect an earlier deadline because there was confusion regarding the timeframe for data analysis and SLOs. This item was discussed in the Governance Council on August 30 as noted above.
The committee discussed “gray areas” in the program review process especially in regards to requests for resources and prioritization of goals. The list so far:
- Do existing goals stay in the cue?
- Textbook budget What is an appropriate goal?
- Reinstatement of funds vs. current need
- Student workers
- Travel
- Replacement schedules for equipment, software, and library resources
- Categorizing goals
Discussion will continue in the future regarding these “gray areas.” For now it was decided that Eric will revise the “How To Guide for Annual Program Review” to change the wording from an “existing” goal to something clearer, and add information regarding including unfunded goals from the previous year. The word “existing” will also be removed from the web form. The ranking criteria rubric for goals will be added to the “How To Guide for Annual Program Review 2014-15” and will also be sent out to program leads for the current cycle of program review. The rubric used by the Academic Senate will also be sent out so that program leads can see the criteria used for prioritizing requests as they work on their annual program reviews.
Current Action Item: Eric will revise the “How To Guide for Annual Program Review for 2014-15 and will make corresponding changes to the web form prior to fall 2014. Eric will send to the program leads the rubrics used by the Governance Council and the Academic Senate to prioritize non-personnel and personnel requests.
7. Comprehensive Program Review – Eric – 15 minutes
Objective: (1) Determine content; (2) Determine process, including identifying which programs will undergo review; and (3) Determine a timeline.
Eric distributed a handout, “Comprehensive Program Review Notes—Fall 2013.” Due to time constraints he did not want to determine content at this meeting. Instead, he requested that members take the handout with them to review and make notes regarding suggested changes, additions, and deletions to bring back for discussion at the next meeting on October 4.
Vicki was charged with developing a Five Year Master Plan Schedule for Comprehensive Program Review to determine which programs will undergo comprehensive program review at what time. She will bring a draft of the plan to the next meeting.
The committee also discussed programs that are required to complete an independent comprehensive program review report by regulatory agencies unique to their program. A partial list would be: Dental Hygiene, CTE, Matriculation, Child Care Center, Grants, TIL, and Athletics. It was suggested that we survey all programs to see if there are any others. The independent CPR’s should be examined to determine to what extent the information contained in them overlaps with the Taft College Comprehensive Program Review requirements for accreditation. The independent CPR and TC CPR’s should be coordinated to eliminate duplication of effort for program review.
Darcy mentioned that she has been looking at educational master plans from other colleges. Some schools provide a 1-2 page summary of program highlights to offer the reader a brief overview that is helpful if you don’t have the time to read every full program review. She will bring a couple of examples to the next meeting. Eric mentioned that this is a common practice which Taft College should adopt especially now that the program review documents are getting too large to comprehend at a glance.
Current Action Item: Members will bring their notes for CPR content to the next meeting. Vicki will bring a draft of a proposed CPR schedule, and Darcy will bring some examples of master plans from other colleges for review.
8. Future of Strategic Planning Committee – Eric – 15 minutes
Objective: Discussion of dissolving the committee and reconstituting it as needed as a task force.
Eric brought up the idea of dissolving the committee but it was agreed that due to planning required to implement Comprehensive Program Review by fall 2014, review and revision of the Mission Statement and Strategic Plan, development of an Educational Master Plan, and discussions regarding institutional effectiveness, student access and student success, that it is not advisable to discontinue the monthly meetings at this time. The committee agreed that it should continue for at least another year and the topic of dissolving the committee can be revisited at that time.
9. Other Items – 5 minutes
The committee decided to change the meeting time to 8:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., keeping it on the first Friday of the month.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 a.m.
Debra Wooley
Secretary