Meeting Minutes: Regents Administrative Committee on Student Affairs (RACSA)
Atlanta Metropolitan College
November 9, 2000
The Fall Meeting of RACSA was held November 9, 2000 on the campus of Atlanta Metropolitan College. The meeting was called to order by RACSA Chair, Charlie Nutt at 12:40 PM. Jacqueline Gray, Vice President for Student Affairs at Atlanta Metropolitan welcomed meeting attendees and introduced the President of Atlanta Metropolitan, Dr.Wade, who gave a brief welcome.
Tonya Lam, from the Central Office, introduced representatives from PipeLine who gave a demonstration of their product and answered questions regarding use of PipeLine on system campuses. Questions focused on human and fiscal resources needed for implementation. PipeLine representatives indicated the need for server availability and the desirability of appointing a content manager as a contact point on each campus rather than distributing maintenance across campuses. OIT and Banner specialists would coordinate installation of PipeLine. Additional questions related to target group identification and advantages over other systems such as Mascot. It was indicated that PipeLine is more integrated with Banner and provides more opportunities for group targeting. It was also suggested that PipeLine brings more academic information into the system and that system linkages are more integrated. In terms of costs, PipeLine requires the purchase of a server whereas Mascot has no initial costs and is later based on FTE. In conclusion, PipeLine was presented as more favorable due to integration with SCT.
The projected timeline for implementation of PipeLine coincides with the release of Banner 4.0, which is scheduled for March 2001. Estimated costs to institutions will vary based on FTE with 12-14 thousand indicated as an approximate cost for 3000 FTE.
Following a short break, Dr. Gray introduced Linn Inlow who provided information on the status of Alternative Dispute Resolution on campuses. She described a new initiative designed to offer ADR to students as well as to faculty/staff. After presenting a brief history of the evolution of ADR on Georgia campuses, Ms. Inlow discussed the goals of the initiative, which are to:
- Establish a system-wide process for conflict resolution
- Decrease reliance on adversarial processes
- Achieve timely resolution and reduce reoccurrence of conflict
- Offer more protection of human dignity and foster trust and more effective communication
- Make the University System a national exemplar on ADR
Ms. Inlow also provided information on the role of campus ADR committees and the resources available to campuses from her affiliate, the Consortium on Negotiation and Conflict Resolution. She further indicated that each campus should have a campus liaison selected by the President of the institution with responsibility for making certain that ADR programs are sustained and enhanced. In addition, the campus liaison is responsible for offering campus programs, conducting assessment, and handling logistics when referrals are made to the system level. A rating summary conducted in 1998 on all system institutions was distributed with information that a follow-up will be conducted in early 2001. Ms. Inlow ended her presentation with the announcement that a Summer Institute on Conflict Management will be offered in the summer of 2001.
Dr. Gray and Dr. Wilcox (Georgia Tech) provided information on a survey designed to assess the status of ADR in assisting students. The survey will be sent to campuses and should be completed before the end of Fall Semester. Each campus will receive 400 surveys and should strive for a 50% return rate. Campus liaisons have been notified that the survey is being sent. Some discussion of the difficulties of completing the survey by the end of the semester followed with encouragement from Drs. Gray and Wilcox to make every effort to complete it before the Winter Break.
Dr. Nutt identified Tonya Lam from the Central Office as the person who will serve as a link between the Board Office and campus enrollment/student affairs services regardless of where these services fall in a campus organizational structure.
Dr. Penny Wills (Floyd College) provided an update on the Committee on Technology in Student Services. This groups is working to build a collaborative relationship with OIT at the system level to reduce the number of decisions made without appropriate and adequate input from campus practitioners. Of particular interest to campuses is the status of the degree audit initiative (CAP) and the status of the PipeLine project. Special concerns were raised regarding the costs of PipeLine. Ms. Lam indicated that she would attempt to collect and disseminate information so that campuses could plan accordingly. There was a general expression of concern that recent decisions regarding technical applications for system institutions have been made without adequate institutional input. Ms. Lam encouraged the RACSA group to develop strategies that will provide decision makers at the system level with input from various campuses and insure that such input is incorporated into the decision making process.
A number of questions were raised on various technology issues. These included the use of technology fees for residence hall wiring and for the provision of disability services. Questions were also raised regarding the use of fees for hiring personnel. It was indicated that an earlier veto of using fees for wiring has been rescinded and fees may be used in this way. It was also suggested that the intent of the prohibition of using fees for disability services was to prevent institutions from using these fees to provide reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities and detracting from the designated use of technology fees. Accommodations are to be provided as required by law and should be the responsibility of the institution rather than mandatory student fees. There is no prohibition against using technology fees to provide services to students with disabilities; technology fees, however, should not be used to meet the institution's standard responsibility regarding ADA.
The use of technology fees for hiring personnel remains a confused issue and will require some clarification from the Executive Vice Chancellor. It was suggested that this might be approved if hiring brings direct benefit to students.
Dr. Nutt called attention to new leadership in the Central Office and to strong indications that input from institutions will be a higher priority. He encouraged each RACSA member to utilize a positive approach when making recommendations for change rather than focusing on issues of dissatisfaction in the past. He further suggested that a number of issues require the attention of RACSA and these should be detailed and presented to the Central Office in a proactive manner.
The general session was adjourned for sector meetings followed by a reception, tour of the new Student Center, and dinner.
November 10
Charlie Nutt called the second session of the Fall RACSA meeting to order at the administrative offices of the Board of Regents. He announced that the spring meeting would be held in March on the campus of Columbus College and State University. The summer meeting will be held at Sea Palms Resort on St. Simons Island.
The following items were suggested for meeting agendas:
Mike Vollmer on accountability.
P-16 initiative, perhaps featuring a speaker from another area of the country. Dr. Wills indicated that she would forward specific suggestions to Dr. Nutt.
Benchmarking - specifically, the University system approach to benchmarking.
Dr. Nutt emphasized the need for agenda items which foster collaboration between academic and student affairs for the summer meeting. It was suggested that more joint meeting with Chief Academic Officers would be beneficial to both groups.
Dr. Nutt presented information on the history of the RACSA list serve. He announced that other listserv's supported by the Central Office are available to RACSA members and that access is critical to the communication of important information. In addition, a motion was made to add key members of the Central Office staff to the RACSA listserv. The motion passed with no negative votes. Earl Bagley, RACSA listserv manager, will be provided with a list of new recipients. These will include Tonya Lam, Cathie Hudson and members of the OIT staff.
Dr. Nutt indicated that he has received requests from vendors to present at future RACSA meetings and asked for suggestions on responding to these requests. Following brief discussion, it was decided that vendors may send representatives to meetings and may distribute information but will not be provided time on the agenda. It was suggested that vendors be solicited to sponsor meeting events in a manner that is compatible with gratuity laws. Caution to avoid competing with professional associations where vendors are invited to serve as sponsors was encouraged. In addition, only vendors with products that would be of strong interest to system institutions should participate in RACSA meetings.
Barry Fullerton introduced the President of the Student Advisory Council, Nells Peterson. He provided an overview of processes used for making recommendations to the Central Office and indicated that the following issues are of current interest to SAC:
- Pass/fail courses
- State flag
- Student fees
- Contract administration (involvement in contract negotiation on matters that have direct impact on students)
- Disbursement of HOPE book money-A recommendation has gone to the Chancellor requesting that the HOPE book allowance be distributed to students prior to the beginning of term. The Chancellor has indicated support for this resolution with the caveat that institutions may opt to not participate if such action will be problematic.
- Tax exemption for book purchases
Dr. Wilcox called attention to the Student Bill of Rights, which appears in some system catalogs. After some discussion, it was stated that the Bill appearing in some catalogs was approved by the former Chancellor administratively and was never taken to the Board. SAC presented a more detailed document in 1999 but it has not moved forward. This does not appear to be of significant interest to students at this time.
Dr. Fullerton indicated that a number of resolutions were approved administratively in the past but appropriate records of such decisions were not maintained. Documentation would be required for a resolution or practice to remain operative. Without such documentation, these items should be considered unofficial. The current Bill of Rights would be an example of an "unofficial" position due to lack of documentation.
Tim Wise (ABAC) indicated that students on most campuses are not aware of the Student Advisory Council. He suggested that a public relations effort and more communication through campus newspapers would be helpful. It should also be assured that SAC voting delegates disseminate information on their respective campuses.
Bruce Harshbarger (Georgia College & State University) complimented SAC on accomplishments in recent years. He advised that desired changes not be communicated in an adversarial manner to presidents. It has been the experience on some campuses of aggressive action by special interest groups with targeted agenda items. Fee issues are especially vulnerable to special interests. He issued a reminder that students provide recommendations to presidents. An aggressive self-serving position may result in veto by presidents. On campuses, recommendations should go to Chief Student Affairs Officers then to Presidents.
The Student Government President from Georgia State was introduced and he encouraged RACSA members to insure that all campuses have active representation in SAC.
Dr. Fullerton reported that not every school has adequate access to Georgia Easy and that skill levels vary. He also reported that a Spanish version is under construction.
Tony Lam distributed a list of issues from the most recent meeting of the academic vice presidents. The "System Supplement" and "Budget at a Glance" were also distributed. Lam reported that the survey on student services would be conducted each year. She distributed results of the 2000 survey.
Dr. Fullerton introduced Dr. Dan Papp, Executive Vice Chancellor. He discussed the reorganization of the Central Office and issues related to benchmarking and accountability. He indicated that the system would continue to vigorously support all new admissions standards.
In reaction to the new administrative organization of the Central Office, concern was expressed regarding the perception of the value of student services. Some campuses appear to be adopting an organizational structure in which the Chief Student Affairs Officer does not report directly to the President or serve on the President's Cabinet. Dr. Papp indicated that this is not the operational intention of the new structure. Additional discussion pointed out that some campuses are combining academic and student affairs and persons filling those positions have little or no background in student affairs administration. This is resulting in a loss of emphasis on the importance of student services on campuses and the value of cocurricular activities to the learning process. With this model, input from professionals who work very closely with students and provide essential services is diminished or lost. Dr. Papp responded by indicating his support for the presence of Chief Student Affairs Officers on campuses with direct reporting lines to Presidents. He stated that the system model is not necessarily appropriate for campuses. Daily contact with students is the driving force of this difference. This was followed by several comments, which encouraged Dr. Papp to advocate for student affairs with institution presidents regarding organizational structure. A "straw poll" indicated that the majority of RACSA members currently report to presidents and is represented on cabinets but this is regarded as a "threatened practice." It was suggested that the Senior Vice Chancellor title reflect student affairs as well as fiscal and academic affairs. Strong effort should be made to discouraged institutions from following the organizational model of the Central Office.
Bruce Harshbarger encouraged Dr. Papp to include Chief Student Affairs Officers in all communication and decision making. He indicated to Dr. Papp that RACSA is attempting to move from its historical reactionary position. Dr. Wills pointed out that the academic affairs group does not always include the student affairs perspective when making decisions that may impact students. The Student Advisory Council President indicated support for the system reorganization but felt that a similar organization on campus might negatively impact students' communication with presidents.
Charlie Bowen (Dalton) pointed out that additional layers might dilute the input offered by student affairs officers to the Chancellor. In response, Dr. Papp indicated that he plans to participate in as many meetings as possible in order to hear issues directly that may require resolution at the Board level.
In regard to benchmarking, Dr. Papp discussed system to system comparisons in addition to institutional comparisons. In response to the Governor's emphasis on assessment and accountability, the System opted for early participation as a state agency. Consultants identified equivalent groups for sectors as well as 31 indicators for comparison. Information will be collected from those institutions that appear to have the most effective practices. Following this, "lessons learned" will be presented to Mike Vollmer's committee on accountability.
The impact of the study on budget decisions is unknown. It is expected to improve formula funding but the Chancellor does not intend for allocations to be impacted by accountability studies. It was pointed out that indicators related to retention rates should be of special interest to student affairs practitioners.
This was followed by a discussion of new admissions standards. There has been a notable increase in the percentage of students completing the college preparatory curriculum in the past 6 years (75% in 1994 and 87% in 1999). Concern was expressed about an enrollment downturn. Changes in DTAE institutions and lack of a level playing field in terms of cost may impact recruitment. System institutions may also continue to feel the impact of competition from other states and from the private sector.
The System is placing increased emphasis on high profile academic programs such as teacher education. These programs focus on the state's economic needs. Teacher education programs are aimed at increasing the number of teachers teaching "in field." A broad versus a specialized focus is being reviewed in teacher education programs and there is an effort to change campus culture to enhance recognition of teacher education as "liberal arts.
International education has also received attention. The goal of having 2% of the system faculty and student body overseas was achieved for the first time this year. This continues to be a critical area of strategic planning. The infusion of an international focus into traditional classes is a goal. More innovative initiatives with a global focus are expected.
Technology also continues to be a high priority. Every student who graduates from a system institution should be technologically literate. Some campuses are offering certification programs; many offer degree programs. Ladder programs are increasing and are being encouraged. Georgia imports more IT professionals than any other state and the system has adopted a strategic initiative to alter this pattern.
Student service delivery also remains a high priority. Quality service delivery is recognized as a retention strategy. More support and funding are needed for delivery of student services.
Dr. Papp endorsed more exchange between the Central Office and campuses – internships, staff exchanges, etc.
On behalf of the Georgia College Personnel Association, Dr. Bowen announced the annual meeting of community service group during the upcoming week. On February 9, GCPA will host a meeting at Mercer University on "Civility on Campus." The GCPA annual conference will be March 28-30.
This was followed by reports from system meetings on counseling, housing, activities, and financial aid.
Dr. Wills reminded people of the upcoming NASPA and ACPA meetings. Dr. Fullerton requested proposals dealing with prevention of unwanted pregnancies. Funding is available for implementing such programs.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:05.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane Thompson
RACSA Chair-Elect