Preliminary Report to the Board of Regents
The committee began to discuss and evaluate the information for the first metric submitted so far.
The minutes were read and corrected. Team 1 has Institutional Advancement and Team 4 has Student Affairs (these were reversed in the original minutes). With this correction, the minutes were approved. The committee continued to discuss and modify the metric. As the four teams discussed questions that should be developed to gather information the decision was made to develop a universal template to mail to all programs. This assures consistency in that every program is asked the same questions. Each committee decided to identify two random programs from their list and conduct a pilot study. The premise was to gather the correct information the first time, and not have to go back later and possibly ask for additional data. The template has 51 categories. The committee is interested in knowing the average time it takes an individual to complete the form, how easy the questions were to answer, and the respondent’s name completing the questionnaire.
The committee read and approved the minutes of the last meeting. It was noted that people across the campus were starting to be Pro-Active and lobby for certain services and or voice concerns about programs. It was mentioned that President Dunn stated in a faculty senate meeting that there would be two open forums for university people to express concerns. The committee spent the majority of the morning going through programs and placing them in
the metric to determine the first and second level of criteria. The program list began with a total of 107 programs. The program list first round 17 yes(s) (meaning required by law, mandated, etc.). The second round left 41 programs with 2 No’s vote. These are the programs information will be obtained on first. Laura will contact Josh Jacobs to see if the following programs are to be evaluated by our committee: The Speech and Hearing Center, West KY Exp Center,Physiological Center, TV 11, Marching Band Stipends and Breathitt. The next meeting the BPRT – PSFP will develop the appropriate questions to mail to four designated groups: student affairs, President’s office, Provost, and Institutional Advancement. Since these were the main categories to canvass, there was a need for 4 committees instead of the original 3. New committees are: Team 1 – Dana Manley, Cassidy Palmer, Dwayne Driskill - Student Affairs,
Team 2 – Janeen Winters, Eric Fredrick, Kevin Binfield - President’s office/ HFA/?, Team 3 – Paula Waddill, Paul Lucko and Melanie McCallon - Provost, Team 4 - Meggie Goeke, S.G. Carthell, Laura Dziekonski – Institutional Advancement.
The committee developed a Master list of all programs and created a “Programs to Evaluate” Google spreadsheet. This list will go through the first round of our metric criteria. A discussion followed regarding using individual team’s versus the entire group. The consensus was to use the entire committee because of the expertise that is provided. The Sub committees can research any missing information that may be needed, but the whole committee will work together using the metric. Next Meeting Thursday, October 4, 2012.
The committee met briefly after Kick-Off Luncheon on August 30, 2012. Second meeting was held on August 7th. A Google Doc to share with committee members was started. Reviewed the Five Guiding Criteria, MSU Mission Statement, Timelines, Prioritization of Items (programs and services), and Flowchart. Discussion began with “What is a Metric”. Take into consideration Essentiality, Laws, SACS. The metric will be a work in progress until the committee is comfortable with the process. Third meeting on September 13, 2012 continued to develop the metric. A draft spreadsheet was created. Group should continue to review list of programs.