 |
OHIO
BOARD OF
REGENTS
|
Advisory Committee Meeting Notes
September 10, 1998
Members Present
Sam Bassitt, Vice President for Instruction, Lima Technical College
Chris Dalton, Vice President, Planning and Budgeting, Bowling Green
State University
Barb DeYoung, Senior Budget Analyst, Ohio State University
Ralph Gutowski, Director, Budgeting, Planning and Analysis, Miami University
Robert Hallier, Vice President, Business and Finance, Stark State College
of Technology
Rosemary Jones, (Committee Vice Chair), District Director, Institutional
Planning and Evaluation, Cuyahoga
Community College
David Lindsley, Associate Vice President, Academic Affairs, University
of Toledo, representing Judy Hample
Joan Patten, Research Associate for Institutional Planning and Research,
Sinclair Community College
Nancy Scott, Vice President and Dean for Enrollment Management and
Student Affairs, Kent State University
Rob Sheehan, Professor of Educational Research, Program Evaluation,
and Statistics, Cleveland State University
Darrell Winefordner, Associate Provost for Budget and Planning, Ohio
University
Members Not Present
Wynette Barnard, Interim Vice President for Institutional Advancement and
Strategic Planning, Lakeland Community College
Eric Kornau, Chief Information Officer, Cincinnati State Technical
and Community College
Ohio Board of Regents (Regents) Staff Present
Chris Doll, Financial Data Area Analyst
Jay Johnson, Administrator, Information Systems and Research
Don Langford, Faculty-Staff Data Area Analyst
Andy Lechler, Senior Analyst
Rich Petrick, Associate Vice Chancellor, Budget and Information Systems
Jackie Seevers, Administrator, Information Systems and Research
Amber Stephens, Writer-Editor
Daryl Wright, Assistant Director, Information Systems and Research
Guests
Sue Lindsey, Director, Institutional Research, Cleveland State University
Cindy McQuade, Assistant Director, Inter-University Council
Nancy Zajano, Director, Legislative Office of Education Oversight
Handouts
-
Draft HEI Advisory Committee Meeting Notes, July 10, 1998
-
Draft Faculty Survey (two versions)
-
Copy Matt Filipic's letter to James Garland
-
Draft Key Performance Indicators
-
Regional Meetings Proposal
Welcome Nancy Scott to the Committee
Members welcomed Scott to the Advisory Committee. Scott succeeds Mitchel
Livingston, Vice President Student Affairs and Human Resources, University
of Cincinnati, on the committee.
Agenda Review
The chair recommended varying the order of some agenda items. A brief discussion
of a new chair was postponed until the next meeting.
Announcements
Sheehan announced that he is returning to a faculty position and will also
be leaving the Advisory Committee. Wright also announced his resignation
with Regents. Petrick thanked both men for their years of service to the committee
and to Regents.
Automatic Letters to Institutional Presidents Due to Late Submissions and
Status Report
Johnson said that most of winter and spring term data have been submitted.
A majority of institutions submitted the data in good time and good faith.
The committee said it was in bad faith to send letters to the institution
presidents when schools submitted data late. The letters came across as
a chastisement.
Johnson said the letters were sent because some schools continuously
submitted late data in the UIS. Wright added that the presidents requested
to be informed of HEI progress. One member said his campus was working
in good faith and his campus did not know there were problems in the programs
until they saw the results of the summary edits from the Course Enrollment
(CN) file, which is the third submission. Another member said technical
delays at HEI made it impossible to load the files on time. He recommended
a longer load window that could be a permanent 10 day extension.
The committee discussed the need for presidents to receive letters and
the need for a 10 day extension for one year. The committee agreed that
letters should be sent to the presidents when schools are not working in
good faith to submit data. This decision should be made on a case-by-case
basis.
Members asked if there was a structural problem to extending the load
window. Petrick said there is not a structural problem. He noted that whatever
the time frame may be, people will push the window. One member suggested
keeping the load window as is, with the understanding that there are 10
extra days of flexibility before any letters would be sent to the presidents.
The committee moved for an automatic 10 day extension of the submission
window for a one year time period without negative ramifications available
upon request. This is to last through summer term 1999 reporting.
Members recommended that instead of sending letters to the presidents,
Regents could send out letters twice a year making statewide comparisons of
reporting performance. Petrick summarized the committee's recommendations
and said that no automatic letters will be sent. Presidents will only receive
letters for reporting negligence. Regents will look into creating a report
on reporting compliance. It was also recommended that liaisons receive
a copy of letters sent to the presidents.
Status Report from Faculty Survey Subcommittee
The committee reviewed the survey draft as presented by Langford. He noted
that the survey is only for full-time faculty. The survey is expected to
be completed by at least 1,200 full-time faculty, about 10 percent of full-time
faculty statewide. The acquisition of full-time faculty identifiers will
come from data in the All Employee (AM) file. Names, campus addresses,
and phone numbers would be provided by campuses to a third party research
firm. Only the third party would receive the faculty names, addresses,
and phone numbers in order to draw the sample.
Members said that more than 10 percent of faculty would need to be generated
to actually get a sample from 10 percent of those receiving the survey.
Some said 10 percent of the faculty of each institution should be surveyed.
Langford asked that members provide him with detailed comments before the
next meeting.
A final version of the survey will be completed soon in anticipation
of the January 1999 implementation. Members asked various questions about
the survey, including: why total campus faculty aren't being surveyed,
will the survey say how information is being used, and will self-reported
data problems by overcome? Langford said the survey will not specify individual
institutions, but it will indicate institution type. Members agreed that
the information will be useful when broken down by type.
Campus and HEI Difficulties/Load Issues
A committee member identified two problems that are affecting her campus.
These include: 1. HEI timing isn't very useful in relation to the campus
calendar, and 2. a shift in reporting responsibilities makes it unclear
who is checking to make sure data are correct. She questioned how campuses
can perform an appropriate audit. There are difficulties catching errors
before the term ends.
A member recommended changing the source of the information, not the
HEI file. Another member suggested a statewide group to hear these types
of issues. He proposed it as one of the items for the upcoming regional
meetings.
Update on University Survey Regarding Doctoral Subsidy
Johnson made reference to an e-mail he sent to campuses asking representatives
how doctoral programs are defined. He noted that most institutions are
narrowly defining doctoral programs. For example instead of listing a program
as engineering, schools tend to organize it in segments, such as civil
engineering, chemical engineering, etc. This information will help Regents
define doctoral programs.
Development of Expert System for Course Classification
Doll noted that Patty James is working to create a course classification
system. Doll said he plans to submit a draft of the system to a peer review
committee. Eventually, the expert system will be a part of the HEI Web
site. This will provide institutions with more information about assigning
proper subject codes to courses. Doll said he expects to have the system
on the Web site by this winter.
Status Report on Subsidy FTE
The process for calculating Subsidy FTE was published to the HEI Web site
September 1. So far, 13 institutions have worked with the process, Lechler
said. A demonstration of the process may be useful for institutions having
difficulty determining subsidy, he said. It was decided that a demonstration
would be performed following the Subsidy Consultation meeting in September.
All campuses would be invited.
Status Report from Data Access Subcommittee
Jones said the subcommittee has concentrated on reporting issues and is
not ready to make a recommendation yet. The subcommittee has established
some guidelines for continuous quality improvement. The inclusion of Key
Performance Indicators should provide meaning to the data.
She noted that the subcommittee is currently working to contact other
groups who have developed data access policies. Petrick said the overall
purpose is to serve students better.
One member asked why workforce development can't be included in HEI.
He stressed the importance of the data for his campus. Petrick said he
is waiting for the workforce development database to be improved within
Regents. After that, there are plans to incorporate the information into HEI.
Status Report on Regional Meetings Planning
Seevers reviewed the video conferencing capabilities. Based on trial run
of these capabilities, Regents decided to hold regional meetings at campuses
again this year. Some of the challenges of video conferencing are: lack
of physical contact, poor visual presentation, and difficulties with discussion.
Regents plans to hold three meetings over a three month time period. Each
meeting will last about three hours. Members suggested that Regents show how
data relate and what data and process are available to institutions now.
There was also an interest in seeing mobility data.
The next HEI Advisory Committee meeting will be held Friday, November
6, at the Ohio Board of Regents offices, 30 E.
Broad St., 36th Floor, in the Main Conference Room.
The meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m.
Notes submitted by Amber Stephens.
Return
to HEI Advisory Committee Home Page
Return to
HEI Front Door
http://regents.ohio.gov/hei/advcom/acnotes09101998.html
Last updated November 19, 1998