Executive Committee Minutes
Attendance: Tolhuizen, Vinodgopal, Lindmark, Blohm (for Sandoval), Hass, Schultz, Bosman (for Stevens), Delunas, McShane. Guests: Executive Vice Chancellor Virginia Helm and Desila Rositti, Center for Management Development
I. Call to Order
President Jim Tolhuizen called the meeting to order at 1:05 p.m.. The purpose of this special meeting was to discuss an option for IUN accreditation entitled, Academic Quality Improvement Project or AQIP.
As chair of the NCA Steering Committee, Professor Vinodgopal provided some background on this issue. In the past, IUN sought re-accreditation via the traditional NCA process. In February, however, he and others investigated AQIP, and last spring, IUN held a two-day retreat to discuss in depth the AQIP option. At that time, it was agreed that the faculty should be able to examine AQIP and have an opportunity to give its approval or disapproval. Professor Vinodgopal then invited Executive Vice Chancellor Helm to make a presentation to the Executive Committee.
Executive Vice Chancellor Helm began by introducing Desila Rositti from the Center for Management Development. Desila would be the AQIP coordinator, should we decide to pursue that method. She distributed some handouts describing AQIP. She offered a summary of some of the salient points about that process:
. An AQIP institution should pick three to five values on which to concentrate. One of those must be under the "Helping Students Learn" component.
. AQIP does not have the deadlines characteristic of the traditional NCA process.
. Normally, about 80% of a university's instruction problem areas occur in only 20% of the total number of programs. So, IUN would pick between three to five areas to study specifically. Examples could be remediation; or, perhaps enrollment growth.
Executive Vice Chancellor Helm added that the AQIP approach is attractive because we will study ourselves continuously, rather than just do so every ten years. Plus, AQIP is much more focused. The IUN administration views it as a process to improve a lot of offices across campus.
Several members of the Executive Committee had questions:
Q: What happens to all of our reports we have produced over the past two years?
A: While individual departments and divisions have completed some self-studies, the work to compile the NCA report has not begun.
Q: Is the "Comprehensive Self-Assessment" portion of AQIP very different from the traditional NCA study? In other words, where would we start with AQIP?
A: We would need to appoint a Steering Committee. Plus, much work has been done at the two-day retreat last spring. We still need to do the details, that is, the "nuts and bolts" of the process.
We should be careful, though, to avoid re-inventing all of the conversations, discussions, and work of the Shared Vision process.
Q: The traditional NCA examines the whole institution. Why should we give that up?
A: AQIP holds people accountable much more than the traditional NCA process.
Q: What are the additional costs of AQIP?
A: The only additional cost Desila has seen is the trip to the Strategy Forum, one of the four "Process Steps" in the AQIP taxonomy.
Q: How does the Strategy Forum work?
A: Eight people from our campus would go to the Forum, including faculty and administrators. In our case, those persons could be members of the AQIP Steering Committee.
Q: So, where do we go from here?
EVC Helm replied that she had some questions of her own about AQIP, such as cost, broad campus involvement, and the amount of work required. She will contact NCA with these questions right away.
She asked the Ex Comm for a statement to allow administrators to proceed to further investigate AQIP. The Ex Comm gave "conditional approval" to do so and agreed to draft a statement and get it to EVC Helm promptly.
EVC Helm and Desila Risitti thanked the Executive Committee for its time and left the meeting, whereupon a statement about IUN's pursuance of AQIP was drafted, as follows:
The Faculty Organization Executive Committee understands that the IUN Administration wishes to procee with the Academic Quality Improvement Project (AQIP) as the vehicle for IUN's re-accreditation. We support the administration in its decision. We further make the following requests:
A. No additional administrative costs should be incurred for AQIP during the process.
B. The full IUN faculty shall have ample opportunity to become acquainted with and discuss the AQIP process.
C. The AQIP should be conducted by the Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs.
D. All previous IUN self-studies, including documents produced for NCA, Shared Vision, and other endeavors, should be seamlessly woven into the AQIP process.
A motion to approve the above statement was made, seconded, and passed unanimously. President Tolhuizen will send it on to Executive Vice Chancellor Helm.
NOTE: In an email to the Ex Comm after today's meeting, President Tolhuizen reported that EVC Helm was pleased with the statement and by its unanimous passage. She had, however, one request, that Item A of the resolution be revised along the following lines:
Any administrative costs incurred should not exceed anticipated costs of the traditional self-study and site visit re-accreditation process.
President Tolhuizen called for an email vote on this change. Aye and/or nay votes were to be cast by August 15, 2001.