March 25, 2014 Meeting

Agenda


Strategic Planning Committee
Agenda for Special Meeting
9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Human Resources Conference Room

To: Sam Aunai, Darcy Bogle, Agnes Eguaras, Greg Hawkins, Vicki Herder, David Layne,
Mark Williams

From: Eric Berube, Chair

Date: March 24, 2014

Recorder: Debi Wooley

Timekeeper: TBD

 

Agenda:

1. Approval of Minutes of the March 21, 2014 meeting – 5 minutes (9:00 am-9:05 am)

2. Institution-Set Standards – Eric – 55 minutes (9:05 am-10:00 am)

Objective: Produce recommendation for Governance Council on a set of Institution-Set Standards.

3. Adjournment

 

EB/dw

Minutes


Minutes of the Strategic Planning Committee
9:00 a.m., Tuesday, March 25, 2014
Human Resources Conference Room

Members Present: Sam Aunai, Eric Bérubé, Darcy Bogle, Agnes Eguaras, Greg Hawkins, Vicki Jacobi, Mark Williams

Members Absent: David Layne

Guests Present: Alex Castro, Brandy Young

 

Agenda:

1. Approval of Minutes of the March 21, 2014 meeting

The minutes were approved by consensus.

2. Institution-Set Standards – Eric

Objective: Produce recommendation for Governance Council on a set of Institution-Set Standards.

The SPC members came to consensus on the following:

1. There should be six measures for Institution-Set Standards:

TCS 1: Retention – enrolled in at least one class by end of term

TCS 2: Successful Course Completion – completion with a passing grade

TCS 3: Persistence – enrolling in all of first 3 consecutive terms

TCS 4: 30 Units – completing 30 units within three years

TCS 5: Remedial – starting pre-college completing college-level (English, Math and/or ESL)

TCS 6: Completion – completing a degree, certificate, transfer related outcome, or a course sequence in a CTE discipline

2. Cohorts would be defined as fall first time full time students although this would not preclude looking at other groups as appropriate.

3. Each measure should be disaggregated on a number of variables including but not limited to age group, gender, race/ethnicity, discipline, and program.

4. Disproportionate impact on any disaggregated measure would be defined by the “80% Rule,” which states that any subpopulation within the disaggregated data that falls below 80% of the highest performing subpopulation would trigger further investigation.

5. Small N would be taken into account when looking at disproportionate impact.

6. Specifics for who (committees, programs, etc) looks at specific disaggregated data and guidelines for what to do about findings of disproportionate impact would be decided upon in future meetings.

3. Adjournment—The meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m.

 

Debra Wooley
Secretary

©