Redwoods Community College District
Enrollment Management Committee (EMC)
Monday, October 18, 2010
Boardroom
MINUTES
PRESENT
Rachel Anderson, Jennifer Bailey, Anna Duffy, Kathy Goodlive,
Utpal Goswami, Sheila Hall, Barbara Jaffari, Anita Janis (phone),
Allen Keppner, Pam Kessler, Geisce Ly (phone), Maggie Lynch,
Michael Peterson, Keith Snow-Flamer(Co-Chair), Bruce Wagner (CoChair)
MINUTES
Minutes from the October 4, 2010, EMC meeting were approved.
ACTION ITEMS
101 Corridor Survey
 Allen asked that we change question 1B to say “educational goal”
and not “degree”
 It was agreed to remove “Klamath Trinity” from question 2 & 4.
 Survey was approved by the EMC with revisions mentioned above
with the recommendation that the survey be deployed this fall.
 EMC will revisit the survey before spring 2011 to discuss any
changes that may need to be made
DISCUSSION
ITEMS
Multiple Measures
Review Operating
Agreement
Sheila Hall and Jennifer Bailey
 Provided examples of multiple measures used in the past by CR (and
other campuses) to generate discussion
 Next steps: Task force of Sheila Hall and Cheryl Tucker will meet
with faculty to discuss how multiple measures can be used for math
and English. A multiple measures recommendation will be forwarded
to the EMC after the task force has had a chance to meet with the
faculty and discuss the issue.
 Bruce Wagner and Pam Kessler will take information back to their
departments to discuss how multiple measures can be applied



Student

Allen Keppner mentioned, under “Membership Shall…” Operating
Agreement reads “Most important priority is students.” Need to
continue to stress the importance of keeping student central to all
decisions and plans.
Pam Kessler expressed the concern that the planning agenda seemed
overwhelming.
Keith Snow-Flamer and Bruce Wagner, as co-chairs, agreed to
review the list of task and provide a prioritized list to the EMC at a
future meeting.
The ASCR has agreed to review the student satisfaction and
Satisfaction
Survey and
Enrollment
Management Plan
enrollment management plan action items. ASCR will provide
feedback to the EMC on what they think the college may want to
focus on to improve the student success.
The EMC will review ASCR’s feedback and begin reviewing both
plans this fall
Wait List






REPORTS
Enrollment
FUTURE
AGENDA
ITEMS
Allen Keppner presented a list of concerns by the Academic Senate
pertaining to the wait lists procedures for fall 2010:
o Conducted “adds” electronically, but still used white add
cards
o Create a flow chart for students and faculty to demonstrate
how the electronic wait lists works
o Feedback loop: when faculty add students, faculty and
students must wait until the next class meeting to see if the
student was added
o Students must understand process
o Faculty must understand process
There was concern expressed about the size of wait lists—having a
20 waitlist for all classes regardless of capacity wasn’t equitable. It
was suggested there be three wait list limits: one for normal capacity
in person, one for large classes, and one for online classes.
Concern about the process/procedure of how the wait lists work
Kathy Goodlive will draft a recommendation for the wait list process
and the number of students on wait lists.
Maggie Lynch said the faculty teaching online were happy with their
wait lists caps of 20.
Maggie will also look into faculty having access to drop students
from their courses.
Rachel Anderson discussed spring course scheduling. The instructional
and student services deans met to discuss reducing the spring schedule
by 26 TLUs, they first looked at picture globally, then by program.
.
 Wait List
 Operating Agreement