Minutes: Middle States Steering Committee
Salisbury University
Frederick Room, Commons Building
Meeting 2
3-5pm, February 13, 2004
Members present: Ron Dotterer (chair), Robin Adamopoulos, Anita Brown, David
Buchanan, Kerrie Jones Bunting, Grace Clement, Betty Crockett, Charles Emery, John
Fields, Susan Muller, Bryan Price, Elizabeth Rankin, Lesley Schiff, Brenda Stanley,
Rosemary Thomas, Ying Wu, Ellen Zinner. Absent: Sandra-Cohea-Weible, Darrell
Newton, Lesley Schiff.
Introduction of new members not here last time: Ellen Zinner & Rosemary Thomas.
Announcements: Bryant Penn will be one of the two undergraduate students on the
committee, but still n need an additional undergraduate student member from SGA.
1. Distribution of documents: minutes of 1/23/04 and mission statement and values as
they have appeared over the past year.
2. Review of minutes from last meeting and the strengths and challenges list we created
during our working groups and common sessions. Corrections of minutes to be sent to
Ron D within the next week (2/20). Corrections to list of strengths and challenges made.
Strengths- Division 3 athletic achievements, Alumni involvement, all schools endowed,
excellent ____and alumni boards
Challenges Met- Stabilizing administration, student housing, and facilities master plan;
New challenges, budget cuts, not received proportional dollar increases to increases in
student numbers, maintaining positive community relations, still need more student
housing and housing, integration of collective bargaining with governance re-structuring
necessitated;
Challenges remaining- under-funding by state of MD, assessment and accountability
improved but not yet universal, continued growth of scholarly and creative activity
improving, faculty and staff benefits and salary improvements, shared governance,
[delete community relations from this list and put into new challenges list], physical
facilities adequacy
3. The remaining agenda item from Jan 23 meeting-Goals and Outcomes- Ron D.
suggested looking at Iona College’s self study design as a guide. These can be starting
points for the operating premises for us, if they seem suitable.
1) Involve the entire college community in a thoughtful and comprehensive evaluation of
ICs mission, activities, strengths and challenges, and in the ongoing process of
assessment and planning for continuing improvement
2) Develop widely shared sense of University’s current situation and prospects for the
future
3) Produce a set of recommendations for enhancing ICs strengths and dealing with the
challenges facing the University
Grace C - the group’s response [lack of it] to outcomes and objectives is not reluctance
but more concurrence with those. The committee supported the 3 goals and objectives.
Ellen Z. - noted that these sounds a lot like what we just did with Strategic Plan Process
Academics, student centeredness, diversity, external community
Dave B. –Need to consider what our identity is. We need to- grapple with questions: what
is the central task that the University is in- what do we think it is, what is it really, and
what would we like it to be.
Ron D. – added that this Middle States self study is a process of bringing together people
who do and those who do not routinely make the campus’ decisions, involving them
together in the process of determining the directions of the University.
Betty C. - when we do get to the point of deciding, we need to be sure everyone of the
campus has been kept appraised of the process and have a common understanding of
what the desired outcomes are
Ying W. - a lot depends on what the identity of the university is because that will change
the challenges.
4. Ron D. indicated that in the spring 2004 semester we are beginning the process of
informing and involving the community in the Self Study process. The governance
groups and all other groups we represent need to learn
What Middle States is all about;
What we would like to see as the outcome of the self-study.
Charles E. - noted that other groups have already made statements and reviewed many of
the things we need to do and we need to look at what is there. For e.g.-does building
facility plan reflect missions and goals?
5. What a self-study design is:
Nature & scope of self-study;
Special goals & objectives of self-study, organizational structure,
Responsibility and membership of self-study,
Charge to working committees / task forces,
Outcomes assessment,
Inventory of resource documents,
Self-study timeline,
Editorial style and format of task force reports,
Format of self-study,
Profile of evaluation team
# 4, #5, #6, #10 are the remaining foci for this semester
6. The remaining portion of the meeting was spent determining how to connect the 14
standards of the self-study and the titles of working groups. There was unanimous
support for limiting the number of working groups to between 4 and 8.
Ron D. presented two models—one based on internal categorizations of an institution
(such as the SU’s six values) and the other as arranging the 14 standards into groups. The
example provided was from the self-study of St. John’s Fisher groupings using the
language of Middle States criteria:
1. Academics, curriculum and student learning outcomes
2. Faculty and staff, professional development
3. Students: recruitment, student life, and student support
4. Planning (mission, goals, objectives), resource allocation, assessment, institutional
renewal
5. Leadership, governance and administration
6. Institutional resources and resource development, alumni and community relations
The steering committee discussed how to group the 14 standards into working
committees that will assess the University. Some support for following the six core
values of the University identified:
VALUES
The core values of Salisbury University are excellence, student-centeredness, learning, community, civic engagement and diversity.
We believe these values must be lived and experienced as integral to everyday campus life so that students make the connection
between what they learn and how they live.
Excellence: Excellence, the standard against which all University activities and outcomes are measured, connotes the perfection and
the quality for which we strive and hold ourselves accountable. We accept the notion that the quality of
a university depends on the heads and hearts of those in it.
Student-Centeredness: Our students are the primary reason for our existence. Our focus is on their academic and individual success
and on their health and well-being. We are committed to helping students learn to make reasoned decisions and to be accountable for
the outcomes of the decisions they have made.
Learning: We believe that learning is fundamental to living a life with purpose in an increasingly interrelated world and that our role
is to teach students not what to think, but how to think. The University introduces students to a system of ideas about the nature of
humanity, the universe, and the world created by art and thought. Through active learning, service learning, international experience
and co-curricular activities, students connect research to practice, and theory to action.
Community: Salisbury University takes pride in being a caring and civil place where individuals accept their obligations
to the group, learn through their interactions and relationships with others, where governance is shared, and where the focus is on the
common good. We honor the heritage and traditions of the institution, which serve as a foundation for future change.
Civic Engagement: The University stands as a part of, rather than apart from, the local and regional community.
Recognizing its history and traditions, we seek to improve the quality of life for citizens in the region. We believe it is our
responsibility to enrich cultural life, enhance the conduct of public affairs and contribute to the advancement of the region.
We seek to instill in our students a lifelong commitment to civic engagement.
Diversity: Salisbury University views itself as a just community where there is respect for the value of global, societal and individual
differences and commitment to equal opportunity. Diversity is purposefully cultivated as a way to strengthen and enhance our
University community.
Once the 4-8 working groups are decided, they will be comprised of cross section of
representatives and at least one steering committee member will be on the committee,
preferably as chair. Already have 10 people who volunteered to be on the working
committees who were the additional nominees from the constituent groups.
Kerri J-B- as an alumni rep, what would task be- Ron responded that role would be to
find alumni to be on working committees and to be in a group of interest herself?
Majority of the time spent on talking about how to cluster and what we do with each
standard.
<Charles>7,14,6-assessment,10,11,12-faculty;4,5-governance;3,13-resources;8,9students
<Anita>1+6,2+3,4+5, 7+14,8+9,10,11+13
<Ying>Macro-1+6+7, Planning and resources2+3,Governance & admin4+5, Faculty
10,Student admin 8+9 educ. offerings11,12,13
<Ellen>Macro Issues1,6,7;resources2,3;leadership4,5, eacademics?10,11,12,13,14;
student issues 8,9
<Brenda>Re SU Values=
Excellence-1,3,6,7,14; Student centered-8,9,10,11,13; learning-8,10,11,12,14;
community- 2,3,5,6; civic engagement4,5;diversity-13
<Elizabeth>Institutional core1,4,5,6; planning and assessment2,3,7;student services and
assessment 8,9,14;academics, 10,11,12,13
<>Build on strategic plan: academics, student centeredness, diversity, external
community relations
Much discussion ensued as to how to do it:
Rosemary’s suggestion- take specific topic areas and then look at how each standard is
reflected in topics.
1. Academic excellence, learning activities and educational offerings
2. Student-centeredness, student support and admissions
3. Diversity and globalization
4. Our communities-internal and external
5. Assessment of the people, planning and mission
6. Resource allocation and development
The committee agreed to review these clusters prior to the next meeting, discuss if they
wish by email to one another their preferences, and at next meeting decide on the
working committee titles and standards to be assigned to each. Adjourned at 5pm.
Next meeting: February 25th 3-5pm, Fulton Dean’s Conference Room (FH259)
Elizabeth Rankin
Recorder: Elizabeth Rankin