2106 Reaffirmation QEP Committee Meeting Minutes Friday, February 19, 2014 Cope Conference Center Members Present Carol Boraiko, Michelle Boyer-­‐Pennington, Dwight Brooks, Bud Fischer, Jeff Gibson, Terry Goodin, Tim Graeff, Ronda Henderson, Neyland Hopkins, Marva Lucas, Sheila Otto, Dianna Rust, Jason Vance Members Absent or Excused Scott Boyd, Rebecca Smith Ex-­‐Officio Members Present Faye Johnson Jeff Hoyt Others Present Lexy Denton Call to Order Dianna Rust, committee chair, called the meeting to order at 2:00 pm in the Cope Conference Center. Members signed the roll upon arrival. Greetings and Introductions The committee welcomed new member, Neyland Hopkins. Neyland is a junior in the College of Business and serves as an SGA Senator. Focus Group Participation Lexy Denton shared the current participant list for the student focus group sessions that will be held on February 21 and 26 for junior and senior students and February 24 and 28 for freshman and sophomores. The junior and senior sessions are nearly full and will be held as scheduled. The freshman and sophomore sessions do not have any confirmed attendants, and committee members were asked to actively pursue students within their departments for these sessions. Review of Institutional Data Dianna Rust, QEP Chair, led a round-­‐table discussion of the data provided by IEPR, and committee members were asked to offer comments and possible topic ideas based on the data presented. General survey data was covered with the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) opening discussion about areas in which MTSU scored lower than the national average. The report showed a lower level of student engagement in all 5 benchmarking categories. For the question to what extent has your experience at this institution contributed to your knowledge, skills, MTSU’s mean score was significantly lower for writing; speaking effectively; thinking critically; analyzing quantitative problems; working with others; understanding people of other racial backgrounds; solving real-­‐world problems; and developing personal code of ethics. . Dr. Fischer pointed out that there were trends in the data around topics like communicating; writing across the curriculum; quantitative literacy skills; and engagement. Jeff Vance pointed out discrepancies between the NSSE and the California Critical Thinking Skills Test. Jeff Hoyt noted that the CCTST test is administered at the end of a student’s term when motivation is at a low. Efforts to remove obvious false entries are made but not all are discovered. The Alumni survey showed areas for improvement in writing and job-­‐preparedness. The graduating senior survey was reviewed. Tim Graeff presented two recent studies, the Employer Satisfaction Focus Group and the Student Retention Survey Project. The Employer Satisfaction study spoke to employees across six disciplines to determine what skills they were looking for from graduates. Career readiness skills led the responses including work ethic, oral communication, motivation, and teamwork. MTSU graduates were evaluated as 1 or above on these items. It was mentioned that the problem-­‐solving skills and decision making skills on the list of skills could both be seen as critical thinking skills. Students ranked below 1.0 on both in terms of evaluation of MTSU graduates. Problem solving was ranked mid-­‐range importance (5.3) to employers and decision making was ranked lower on importance. The Student Retention project looked at reenrollment gaps and areas for improvement by interviewing 1777 students over two semesters. Top factors stemming from the report were Student pride in their degree from MTSU, students feeling like they “fit in” at MTSU and seeing how an MTSU degree will help students succeed. One comment was made that the University fit could also be linked to lack of engagement. Another comment was made that some of the results were also related to career readiness and the idea of Application verses Theory in the classroom mentioned in the Employer Focus Groups. Sheila Otto presented the General Education Learning Outcomes Assessment. Data showed a consistent need for improvement in information gathering/synthesizing in oral communication and writing. Overall there was a higher percent of students performing unsatisfactory in writing and math than oral communication. In discussion of the findings, she also discussed the general education course redesign pilot and it was noted that students show resistance to active learning. Dianna Rust then reviewed the Enrollment Degree and Information category of the IEPR report and discussed what type of student is enrolled at MTSU. The difference in 1st vs. 2nd generation students was discussed and the committee requested data on the completion rates of the two student segments for comparison. Jeff Hoyt noted that the FAFSA and ACT numbers provide some data on first generation but measurement tools have not been reliable so far. Discussion about the type of student enrolled at MTSU showed the students body is not as atypical as many believe. Announcement Dianna Rust announced that the next meeting would be March 5 from 2 to 4 p.m. at the Walker Library, Room 457. Tim Graeff will provide an initial summary of the student focus groups at the beginning of the meeting and then the group will begin brainstorming on topic ideas. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 3:02 pm.