ACADEMIC AFFAIRS COUNCIL RETREAT
October 14-15, 2010
Thursday, October 14 (following the BOR meeting)
Dorr Room, Surbeck Center at SDSMT
D2L Issues (to include a discussion of EUC) (refer to AAC Item 6.V.1 and Item 6.V.2, September 2010)
Admission Timeline Audit (refer to AAC Item 6.Z and Excel spreadsheet, September 2010)
Transfer Students - Transcript Evaluation (refer to AAC Item 6.AA, September 2010)
Student Success Strategies
Campuses should bring copies of campus plans/strategies to increase student success. Alternatively, if plans/strategies are posted on the institution's website, the address can be provided rather than bringing physical documents.
Adjourn by 2:00 pm
Friday, October 15 (convene at 8:00 am)
Creekside (Norbeck) Room, State Game Lodge in Custer
Dr. Shekleton will circulate materials separately or provide them at the meeting.
The request that follows was copied from an e-mail circulated near the end of September.
Campuses should be prepared to identify issues for discussion.
As members of AAC are aware, there appears to be a set of policy and operational issues that are freezing those involved with Study Abroad programming. Part of this is tied to the recently enacted (and even more recently revised) changes to Board Policy 5:5:4. Other parts of this may link to system-level policies/guidelines but this is not clear. Finally, there may be local issues that can be solved generally. Compounding this, from my perspective it appears that there are no successful strategies to find solutions since proposals from one group are often times not acceptable to others and there are no formal or informal mechanisms that promote inter-function communications. As I’ve asked in my e-mails, I’d like to know what the issues really are from your global perspectives. Once these are set, hopefully we can determine what system-level efforts are needed to solve this. If this agenda item is acceptable, I’d ask each of you to talk individually or collectively with those involved with study abroad programming as well as with the supporting enrollment services (registrars and financial aid directors) and billing functions.
If additional information is available about the College Access Challenge Grant process, this will be provided.
Other topics may be identified by participants.
Concerns are being raised because these are now being included in the low enrollment process. Since these do count in workload, it seems logical that these would be included in a measure designed to promote efficiencies. Data will be circulated separately.
Campuses should be prepared to raise issues.
How can we increase the number of high school teachers qualified to teach college level courses (masters with 15-18 graduate hours in discipline)?