REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Meeting of the Enrollment Management Committee (EMC)

advertisement
REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Enrollment Management Committee (EMC)
Eureka: 7351 Tompkins Hill Road, Boardroom
Monday, September 12, 2011
1:10 p.m.
NOTES
PRESENT
Rachel Anderson, Jeff Cummings, David Gonsalves (phone), Kathy
Goodlive, Sheila Hall, Allen Keppner, Mark Renner, Keith SnowFlamer, Ken Strangfeld, Juana Tabares, Bruce Wagner and Danny
Walker.
ALSO PRESENT
Jennifer Bailey, Nick Bogdan
ACTION
2011-2012
ENROLLMENT
PROJECTIONS
Institutional Research will be doing a comparison of FTES at census
to last term. IR is also beginning to store data for “point in time”
comparisons. IR’s goal is to create a report that is fully automated and
will be updated several times a week and available continuously.
There was discussion about the use of the term “fill rate,” Mark
Renner brought it to the committee’s attention that the appropriate
terminology is “fill percentage.” The committee agreed with Mark,
however, to change the terminology at this time would only cause
confusion.
There was also discussion regarding:
 Student location and TLUs.
 TLUs based on originating campus.
 Caution regarding too high fill rates.
PLANNING
AGENDA
There was discussion regarding the definition of “Retention” and
“Persistence.” The IE indicators will be brought back for discussion
and review of parameters by the committee at the next scheduled
meeting.
Some scheduling changes have occurred due to requirements from the
Chancellor’s office regarding how instructional minutes are counted.
This is detailed in the Student Accounting Manual provided by the
Chancellor’s office.
There was also discussion regarding the allocation of TLUs and if the
same number of courses are being offered in the 101 corridor as last
year.
Keith noted that when the budget for this year was created it was
assumed that there would be additional funds available to meet the
FTES target for spring. If additional funds are available a
determination will need to be made to where the TLUs should be
allocated to best enable student success.
Discussion also took place on the following topics:
 Course repeatability.
 Changes to the BOG requirements.
 How are GE needs being met?
 My EDU.
 TLU allocations for spring.
ADJOURNED
The meeting adjourned at 2:20 p.m.
SUBMITTED
lw
Download