1. Home
  2. Board Operations
  3. Minutes
  4. Minutes 10/10/2000

Minutes 10/10/2000




GOVERNING BOARD
October 10, 2000
MINUTES



A work session of the Maricopa County Community College District Governing Board was scheduled to be held at 6:30 p.m. at the District Support Services Center, 2411 West 14th Street, Tempe, Arizona, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice having been duly given.

PRESENT
GOVERNING BOARD
Gene Eastin, President, Donald R. Campbell, Secretary, Linda B. Rosenthal, Member, ADMINISTRATION Fred Gaskin, Raul Cardenas, Phil Randolph, Anna Solley, Rufus Glasper, Ron Bleed Pete Kushibab,Gina Kranitz, Larry Christiansen, John Cordova, Art DeCabooter, Stan Grossman, Homero Lopez, J. Marie Pepicello, Fred Gaudet, Linda Thor, Joyce Elsner for Tessa Martinez Pollack, Arnette Ward

ABSENT

GOVERNING BOARD
Nancy Stein, Member
Ed Contreras, Member

STATE BOARD
Nick Balich

CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by President Gene Eastin.

WORK SESSION
Review of the Annual Monitoring Report of Governing Board Goals

Mr. Eastin welcomed the group and noted the importance of the oversight and monitoring of Governing Board goals, which now have been directed to be monitored on a yearly basis. Teresa Toney provided information regarding the Board’s calendar per their policy which calls for this process. She noted that the report which came out in September was the first of annual reports that would be prepared for monitoring of board goals. Margaret Hogan provided highlights of the monitoring report, noting that it is baseline information for future reporting and information gathering. Discussion followed. The participants broke into small groups to address four questions.

STUDENT SERVICES

Goals:
Students will be provided programs and services that support their learning, educational and employment/career goals.
Students will be provided programs and services that support their personal growth and citizenship development.

1. What did you find was most valuable about the information in this section of the report?

  • Overall positive responses
  • Students don’t have a good definition of what student services is, i.e. confusion with academic support services
  • Like instruction, but not enough variety in course offerings (gap between importance and satisfaction)
  • Students feel safe on our campuses, safety most important to them
  • Academic Advising/Counseling still a concern
  • Need for assistance with goal setting, career planning
  • Not getting early alert if not doing well

2. How do you think these data can be best utilized?

  • Look at safety/security elements to do in next bond
  • Provide more technology for advisement – for advisors, on the web for students, more student involvement, i.e. degree system
  • Examine effectiveness of advisement, don’t assume data accurate for all students/all colleges; follow up questions on advisement
  • Ability for advisors to put notes on students’ records
  • Recruitment and Marketing
  • Follow-up on student dissatisfaction on when classes are offered
  • How to alert students at risk – coordination between Students Services and Academic Services
  • Determine when goal setting should take place, work with clubs, etc. to have impact during first semester

3. Based upon how you think these data can best be put to best use, what do you think needs to happen next?

  • Need college data to identify specifics and/or obtain data for all colleges
  • Move forward to improve what we offer on the web; technology for degree audit, share ideas and resources – best practices
  • Clarify issues/concerns within data, i.e. focus groups
  • District-wide support for research – build standard databases: $!
  • Improve websites for use as marketing tools
  • Look at our process – from beginning to end, encourage students to take responsibility for completing processes, provide information to students
  • Different full-time and part-time students – what mandatory processes are required for each?

4. Who should be involved in the next steps?

  • Student information; from focus groups, follow-up on some issues/questions, including information from former students
  • Deans groups submit proposals for funding; examine issues
  • Services Councils should be aware of follow-up on data
  • Governing Board, CEC to recognize importance of these issues, support recommendations for improvement
  • ITS support for new system, system improvements
  • Work with/support institutional researchers, standardization of institutional data elements, measurement tools, common technology across colleges.

UNIVERSITY TRANSFER/GENERAL EDUCATION

Goals:
Students who transfer to a baccalaureate degree granting institution will be prepared to successfully attain their educational goals.
(Students will demonstrate post-secondary competencies in communication [writing, speaking, listening], reading, the humanities, science, critical thinking, problem solving, computer and information literacy and mathematics.) Report for this goal due in February 2001
Students will experience a seamless transfer to baccalaureate degree granting institutions.
Students will successfully complete certificate and associate degree programs.

1. What did you find was most valuable about the information in this section of the report?

  • Number of students at ASU and who get a degree have done so with MCCCD credits – best secret in town – Bond focus
  • Graduation rate (persistence, do better than native students)
  • Transfer with degree lose some credits - several reasons (data based)
    • Old AA degree versus new pathway
    • AGEC should help towards [more completers, less loss] flexibility
    • Some credits were transferable/applicable. (clarify definitions for transferable/applicable)
    • Students looking at transfer guides of universities
    • Self advisement does work
    • Does AA degree student stop/start
    • Measurement – transfer rate not just AA degree
    • What is advisement’s role?

2. How do you think these data can be best utilized?

  • Public exposure – share with taxpayers, with students
  • Report data correctly
  • AA and BA graduates, how many return to MCCCD? Post-BA entity
  • Use data to protect programs (“course creep”). Many majors becoming upper degree majors
  • Prescriptive guidelines
  • Is some data just shared with colleges (letter from ASU West – re: two degrees), but not shared with others
    • Investigate how to get data
    • Standard report for Governing Board and outcomes success
  • Operationalize AGEC process to change outcome
  • Advisement is shared responsibility
  • Share in context with Workforce Development
  • Look at goals other than state universities, re: evaluate how we look at success

3. Based upon how you think these data can best be put to best use, what do you think needs to happen next?

  • Use data to publicize for recruitment, marketing (develop plan)
  • Ombudsperson on campus (voice for students) Transfer Student Ombudsperson
  • Get information to students through advising
  • Self advisement
  • General gate keeper courses (impediments – how to provide safety nets), identify these
  • Confirm self data with hard data
  • Accessibility of [accurate, updated, same] information
  • Prioritize how to get students to value advisement
  • Standard operating procedure for feeder high schools
  • Colleges need to know more about our students what methodology to use
  • Get committee to develop criteria
  • Share data with ASU
  • CAS/degree audit system
  • Were survey questions set to Board outcomes, most not self-reported; hard data not easy to get
  • Measure more specific data

4. Who should be involved in the next steps?

  • Academic Advisors Council (AAC)
  • Marketing
  • Institutional Effectiveness/Institutional Researchers
  • Technology – CAS/degree audit
  • Better sharing with ASU; stronger agreement
  • Partnering with ASU, high schools, private universities
  • Committee with non-Maricopa folks, Governing Board charge
  • Were expectations consistent with Governing Board desire?
  • Where are students? Expand opportunity for their input

CONTINUING/COMMUNITY EDUCATION

Goals:
Community members will be provided opportunities for personal interest and development to include: a. accessibility to college facilities and services as appropriate (libraries; recreational/athletic facilities; arts programs; internet/technological delivery; courses of an avocational nature to include leisure, wellness and specialized training). b. Forums, dialogs for balanced views of contemporary civic and public issues.
Maricopa Community Colleges will have collaborative partnerships and programs with elementary schools and high schools and other higher education institutions to increase the number of students that matriculate to the college level.

1. What did you find was most valuable about the information in this section of the report?

  • Worthwhile information
  • Numbers a shade under national average
  • Good list of programs
  • Large percentage of satisfied students
  • Growth of dual enrollment
  • Courses were taken that led students to academic courses
  • Courses considered as Academic Icebreakers
  • Age and time variables
  • “E” versus “L” (education versus learning)
  • Identify other evaluation instruments for non-credit

2. How do you think these data can be best utilized?

  • Improve non-credit offerings
  • Develop new courses and other survey methods
  • The “when” and “how” courses are offered
  • Continue institutional support of these programs
  • Meeting the needs/satisfaction with the college
  • Need for consistent data
  • Program versus course data
  • Asking questions about theater, music and drama to improve programs

3. Based upon how you think these data can best be put to best use, what do you think needs to happen next?

  • Additional instruments
  • Facilities questions about usage
  • Marketing efforts
  • Civic participation forums
  • Immediate feedback
  • Further study on student profiles
  • More data on age demographics
  • Price

4. Who should be involved in the next steps?

  • Appropriate Deans and Directors, Division Chairs
  • Research staff
  • Marketing directors
  • Target markets
  • Needs assessment
  • National trends
  • Individual colleges should take the initiative
  • Collaborative efforts between colleges
  • Sharing instructors

WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Goals:
Students will be provided programs and services that support their learning, educational and employment/career goals.
Students will be provided programs and services that support their personal growth and citizenship development.

1. What did you find was most valuable about the information in this section of the report?

  • 42.5% students enrolled in occupational courses
    • 90,000+ students in occupational courses. Need to tout benefits of certificates and AAS degrees
    • Are we doing enough to get 2 year degree?
    • Big income difference if get AAS degree
    • Can analyze data for Carl Perkins students
  • Nearly 50% of occupational programs graduated less than 10 students (AAS and certificate programs)
    • Needs more review as to why?
    • Is this economically feasible?
    • Check if get job or why not graduating?
  • Look at (understand) what is students’ goals and are they meeting goal?
  • When are we capturing data?
  • May have completed, but not applied for certificate – go on record as completer of certificate or degree whether apply or not (Rio and GWCC does this)
    • Potential next step
    • System-wide priority

2. How do you think this data can be best utilized?

  • More studies with programs of less than 10 students (if just started programs)
  • Are students working on dual track (certificate and general education)?
  • May redefine success in getting workforce skills – lots enrolled, not completing but higher earnings and are employed = success
  • Determine market and what they want, must market this success
  • Define but what students say
  • Students changing careers, data doesn’t reflect that. Report will come later to show students with degrees already and enrolled for skills (certification) only
  • Use data to look at common language and practices across the system. Have more definitions and interpretations in report
  • Zip with campus name analysis
  • What was percentage of respondents? Answer = 14.83 and 70% said goal met
  • Improve return rate – maybe said with certificate or degree

3. Based upon what you think these data can best be put to best use, what do you think needs to happen next?

  • Use data to gain credibility with industry partners
  • Use as marketing tool
  • Don’t know how many are not served and we need to find them
  • Analyze how to define success
  • Get 90,000+ students enrolled to define goals early
  • Get all students who might be interested in occupational programs(are all declaring an occupational program?) help students declare “right” goal
  • Could do exit interviews of students
  • Report more demographic data

4. Who should be involved in the next steps?

  • Get Occupational Deans and Institutional Effectiveness to look at data and make recommendations to CEC, Administrative Deans, Finance, Marketing
  • Common definitions
  • Go to our partners

DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION

Goal:
Students will demonstrate competencies in courses below 100 level (reading, mathematics, English) that prepare them for success in college level courses.

1. What did you find was most valuable about the information in this section of the report?

  • Information in report raised other questions
  • Baseline data
  • What is average class size of developmental education – compare across cohorts
  • How many developmental students use student services (and what difference does it make)?
  • What percentage of developmental education is taught by adjuncts?
  • Math students retention rates are lower but more continue on, English retention rates are higher but continuation lower, why?
  • Workplace requirements affect math rates?
  • Failure rate has not improved
  • Benchmark data
    • Comparative developmental education completion/success rates

2. How do you think this data can be best utilized?

  • More in depth discussion, faculty, instructional councils, IR groups
  • Math – adult returning students more affected by math
  • Disaggregate data by college (look at successful programs, best practices)
  • Additional variables
    • Demographic
    • Incoming skills
    • Socio-economic
  • Set targeted improvement rates, instructional council, faculty
  • Hire faculty with specific skills for teaching developmental education
  • Utilize data for resource allocation, link $ to institutional values
  • Organize systems/structures – how is developmental education incorporated within institution – determined by college or district-wide?
  • Allow for each college incoming population or “niche”
  • Add qualitative/anecdotal information

3. Based upon how you think these data can best be put to best use, what do you think needs to happen next?

  • Refer results back to faculty and student support departments/IR to develop
  • Link to strategic plans (college/district)
  • District-wide commitment to developmental education student success?
    • Example: Tie faculty sabbatical requests to developmental education projects, incentive
    • Reward system – utilization of Governing Board contingency funds, submit proposals

4. Who should be involved in the next steps?

  • Faculty,
  • Instructional councils,
  • IR groups

Following the report-out, Mr. Eastin thanked all who participated in the creation of the monitoring report, the presentation at the meeting, participated in the meeting’s brainstorming, and Teresa Toney for her work and coordination of the project. CEC will be working with Teresa Toney on reviewing the data and making recommendations.

The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.

Return to Governing Board Minutes