November
4, 2008
Report of the Chair of the Faculty
This
report provides a summary of the discussions at the three open forums sponsored
by the Task Force. I’ve tried to provide some of the key issues and concerns discussed
in each forum. The recommendations for academic standards and policies from 2.8
of the report are now in the hands of the Admission and Retention Policies and
Academic Standards Committees.
Open
Forums on Strategic Enrollment Management
At each session, Dr. Bailey explained
that these recommendations from the Task Force on Strategic Enrollment
Management are intended to be options for pursuing an appropriate enrollment management
strategy. The report will be presented to the Board of Trustees at the November
Board meeting.
Following the forums and the meeting of
the Task Force on October 30, the final draft of the Report was prepared, and
is now ready for discussion, revision, and approval by the university community,
and implementation by the appropriate individuals and units.
The four major issues around which the
report is focused are:
Access
Retention and graduation rates
Academic program mix
Infrastructure
Access
Several individuals pointed out the
risk of slowing growth, since a smaller increase in enrollment means fewer
enrollment increase funding dollars. But, the impact of the unrestrained growth
over the last decade was clear this fall: a higher yield of first-time,
full-time first year students that exposed the weaknesses in infrastructure—classroom,
office, and housing space, lack of student services, increased need for part
time faculty, etc.
Tension between access and quality will
have to be addressed. While we want to be able to serve our traditional student
base, 60% of our total enrollment comes from west of I95—a change from the
traditional makeup of our student population.
Retention
and graduation rates
Retention and graduation rates must be
the focus now—retention rates are dropping and graduation rates are stagnant,
but a higher quality student population should address those issues. Future
funding may be tied to graduation and retention rates
Among the concerns surrounding students
are the following:
·
Dropouts
(withdrawal from classes last 2 semesters)—50% are DE graduate students
·
Seniors with 90+
hours also withdraw
·
Standards for
retention/academic standing/appropriate GPAs to continue
·
Retention numbers from the 1st to
the 2nd year, but also after 3-4 years: What are the factors that
impact students’ ability/desire to return? Surveys are being revised in such a
way that we can better ascertain the reasons for their leaving/not returning to
the university.
·
Increased
standards for Community College transfer students
·
Number of grade
replacements and how they affect GPA and financial aid; Fundamental lack of
understanding of GPA—and how long it takes it to improve; training for both
students and parents can be made available on the website
·
Importance of
COAD 1000 to retention of first year students
Synergy between units and university as
a whole is important and we should work together to try to identify students
who may transfer.
The participants in the forums
identified support for tutoring programs as one way to aid retention. But
others felt that we should not usurp the role of the community colleges, but
should work with them to ensure that students who need more college preparation
get appropriate support.
Academic
program mix
Questions were raised about the availability
and enrollment of traditional on campus students in online classes intended for
off campus students as well as the appropriateness of online classes for
traditional students.
Concerns were also raised about
students registering for UNC Online classes—space available basis? Who makes
decisions about mix in the class? Articulation among campuses? Quality control
of the classes? Who determines what is appropriate for a particular ECU degree?
University College/Studies degree has
been proposed. Concerns about students whose GPAs are too low for specific
majors are balanced by the wisdom and feasibility of such a degree. Faculty
members expressed concerns about the negative connotations of such terms as
“General Studies” or “University Studies” degree.
As we develop programs, we need to look
at big picture and the impact on both graduate and undergraduate programs. Our
mission pertaining to an undergraduate education can be enhanced by strong,
productive graduate programs and research agenda.
Infrastructure
Continued concerns about:
·
Banner
implementation
·
Financial aid
·
Appropriate
faculty resources; teaching, clinical, research
·
Need for
improvement of counseling center
·
Duplication of
resources with various tutoring programs
·
Quality of
space, efficient use of space