down arrowMenu

Higher Learning Commission Accreditation Review

May 6, 2009

HLC Steering Committee Meeting

Wednesday, May 6, 2009
3:15 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.

Presidential Room, Maucker Union
  1. Welcome - Bev
  2. April 22, 2009 meeting notes – Shirley
  3. FoE Roles and Purposes Dimension Report – Lisa Kratz/Alan Asher
  4. FoE Improvement Dimension Report – Gretta Berghammer/Bob Frederick
  5. Strategy for next steps
  6. Committee Updates - all
  7. For the good of the order
HLC Steering Committee

Meeting Notes
May 6, 2009
Presidential Room-Maucker Union

Present: Agee, Arthur, Buse, Chatham-Carpenter, Cutter, Hanish, Hays, Kaparthi, Kopper, Licari, Martin, Morgan, Murtha, Neibauer, Uehle, Upah, Vinton

Absent: O’Connor, Patton, Pease, Wilson

Guests: Gretta Berghammer, Bob Frederick, Karen Cunningham, Lisa Kratz

  1. Welcome – Bev
  2. April 22, 2009 meeting notes – Shirley
    The notes stand as distributed.
  3. FoE Roles & Purposes Dimension Report – Lisa Kratz
    • Lisa and Alan Asher served as co-chairs for the dimension.
    • An examination of many documents in the Evidence Library was conducted but no overarching purposes statement was found; therefore, one of their recommendations is to develop a university wide roles & purposes statement.
    • A few exemplary syllabi in the Evidence Library discussed roles & purposes but the majority did not.
    • The vocational aspects of a university education – preparing for future employment – is addressed most often.
    • Many students enter UNI with several college credits already completed so they don’t have to take some of the introductory courses.
    • Faculty rated UNI low on how well we address roles & purposes but students rated this dimension very high.
    • An eportfolio system could be utilized to communicate roles & purposes to students.
    • Jan asked if the Qualities of an Educated Person project was discussed. Lisa indicated the QEP report was one of the key historical documents that was analyzed for their chapter.
  4. FoE Improvement Dimension Report – Gretta Berghammer & Bob Frederick
    • Five initiatives identified by the FoE Steering Committee, based on four performance indicators, were analyzed.
    • The committee found substantial evidence of activities that occur across campus but not much is shared among offices.
    • Could not find a university wide definition on what is meant by a personalized and engaged education.
    • Even though assessment may be conducted, 65-70% of faculty aren’t using collected data to improve contact with first-year students.
    • Faculty do not have much incentive to be engaged with first-year students. In the faculty/staff survey, 77% indicated they do not participate in first-year workshops, events, etc.
    • Jan commented that if a new SIS system is implemented, it will provide a large data warehouse and be easier for staff to access information that is currently available only by contacting the Registrar’s or Institutional Research Office. Gretta suggested one of their recommendations could be the purchase and implementation of a new SIS system.
  5. Strategy for next steps
    Bev referred to the timeline for due dates.  Today at noon was the deadline for draft reports from all committees; however, since many reports are not ready, the deadline was extended to May 15.
    Bev suggested a small group of members block off several days to review the entire report.  The following members volunteered to serve on this ad hoc committee:  Bev, Barbara, Kate, Donna, and Shirley.  Jan indicated she would assist if need be.  Shirley will compile all the draft reports into one document so the group can read it from start to finish.  The committee may add/delete/rewrite sections, or ask for further information from co-chairs.  Ginny volunteered to read the report as a reviewer (checking for UNI jargon, acronyms, etc.) after a first draft is prepared.
    • Do we need to have photos in report before it’s vetted to campus? Not necessary but it would be fine to include them in the report. If committee members have suggestions for photos, they should be submitted with their chapter. Otherwise, photos in the UMPR office could be selected. We may need to have additional photos taken for specific sections of the report.
    • Cross cutting themes – Bev stated that our HLC liaison indicated we don’t have to include crossing themes – we decided in the beginning of the process to write the report chapter by chapter.
    • Will the FoE report be incorporated into the HLC chapters or will it be separate? In our initial table of contents we incorporated FoE and HLC chapters into one report.
  6. Committee Updates – all
    Each committee chair gave a report on the status of their chapter.
  7. For the good of the order
    • The committee will not meet next Wednesday
    • Bev recently updated the President and Provost on the status of the HLC self-study in case they needed information for budgeting purposes.
    • What is the status of the Board of Regents strategic planning process? The next BOR meeting is June 10-11. Does UNI have a committee designated to start the strategic planning process once the Board completes their plan? Bev will forward this question on to the appropriate administrators.