{"id":160,"date":"2013-11-01T16:09:32","date_gmt":"2013-11-01T16:09:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ct-test-wp.taftcollege.edu\/spc\/?p=160"},"modified":"2013-11-01T16:09:32","modified_gmt":"2013-11-01T16:09:32","slug":"strategic-planning-minutes-november-1-2013","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/committees.taftcollege.edu\/spc\/strategic-planning-minutes-november-1-2013\/","title":{"rendered":"Strategic Planning \u2013 Minutes November 1, 2013"},"content":{"rendered":"
Minutes of the Strategic Planning Committee<\/strong><\/span> Members Present:<\/strong> Eric B\u00e9rub\u00e9, Vicki Herder, David Layne<\/p>\n Members Absent:<\/strong> Sam Aunai, Darcy Bogle, Brandy Cramer, Agnes Eguaras, Mark Williams<\/p>\n Guest Present:<\/strong> Sharyn Eveland<\/p>\n Timekeeper:<\/strong> Eric B\u00e9rub\u00e9<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Agenda:<\/strong><\/p>\n 1. The minutes of the October 4, 2013 meeting are being transcribed \u2013 5 minutes (8:30 am-8:35 am)<\/strong><\/p>\n 2. Governance Council Update \u2013 Vicki \u2013 5 minutes (8:35 am-8:40 am)<\/strong><\/p>\n October 25, 2013 Meeting:<\/p>\n Eric distributed instructions for completing the ranking of Annual Program Review Goals to the council members. Darcy and Mark updated the council on progress in establishing the Student Success and Student Access Committees. Adrian gave a report on progress made in establishing a centralized intranet site for TC committees. The council agreed to support the establishment of a new Safety Committee. A draft of a charter for the Budget Committee was introduced, revised, and approved.<\/p>\n 3. Budget Committee Update \u2013 David \u2013 5 minutes (8:40 am-8:45 am)<\/strong><\/p>\n No update at this time.<\/p>\n 4. Report on Action Items from the Previous Meeting \u2013 All \u2013 15 minutes (8:45 am-9:00 am)<\/strong><\/p>\n a. Comprehensive Program Review (Cognos, SSS)<\/p>\n The discussion continued regarding the CPR process. Vicki brought an Integrated Planning Model from DeAnza College that was introduced at a student success conference she attended. It was well received by the committee members and Vicki was encouraged to take the planning model to Dena to see if she would be interested in adopting something similar for TC.<\/p>\n b. RP Group Definitions<\/p>\n Eric distributed a handout of definitions of Key Success Indicators. The group discussed the definitions and concluded that there is confusion campus wide regarding these and other definitions (i.e. ARCC Report and the Scorecard). Vicki volunteered to put together a matrix showing data elements and a list of the different versions of the definitions.<\/p>\n c. Hope Scale<\/p>\n Eric distributed a handout regarding the Hope Scale and requested that the committee members read it in preparation for discussion in the future.<\/p>\n d. National Clearinghouse\/Datamart Student Tracking<\/p>\n Eric noted that we are making progress on this. Currently we are submitting data to see what we get back.<\/p>\n 5. Key Success Indicators \u2013 Eric \u2013 50 minutes (9:00 am-9:50 am)<\/strong><\/p>\n Objective:<\/strong> Develop a preliminary list of potential Key Success Indicators for use in monitoring institutional effectiveness.<\/p>\n Eric distributed a copy of the Taft College Strategic Plan 2011-2016. The discussion began with a question regarding the difference between a benchmark and a key success indicator. Eric explained that a benchmark is a standard of performance that you want to reach. He said he would send out an article that he had on setting benchmarks. He also noted that benchmarking is a big part of the new standards.<\/p>\n Regarding key success indicators, Eric defined those as measures that are aggregated to a higher level, the important ones, the ones that really matter to the institution as a whole. A core set of measures are important to an institution to monitor the health of the institution. Key success indicators cut across the whole gamut of institutional effectiveness. We\u2019ve got about 18 months to get this accomplished before our accreditation site visit. We do have student achievement outcome indicators, but we need to benchmark those and what we\u2019re going to do with them as an institution, that is, determine how we monitor those indicators and when and how we intervene when performance on those measures drops.<\/p>\n Eric said that he will bring back definitions of KSIs or send them out. We have a start with Student Achievement Outcomes, Scorecard, and Institutional Level SLOs. We need to break it down by strategic plan area, then we benchmark\u2014we know what the measure is\u2014but what do we do with it and why.<\/p>\n We also need to line up and integrate all of our cycles, make time to work on it, and identify time for the Governance Council to address KSIs. Both top down (administrative and faculty leadership oversight) and bottom up (faculty and staff participation) processes are needed and are critical for the institution.<\/p>\n Action Item:<\/strong> SPC members should review the Strategic Plan and be prepared to discuss KSIs for each area of the Strategic Plan in the near future.<\/p>\n 6. Other Items \u2013 All \u2013 10 minutes (9:50 am-10:00 am)<\/strong><\/p>\n No other items were introduced.<\/p>\n
\n8:30 a.m., Friday, November 1, 2013
\nCafeteria Conference Room<\/p>\n