SOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE
Institutional Effectiveness Committee
April 18, 2014
9:00 a.m. – Founders Room
MINUTES
Members Present: Billy Alonzo, Corye Beene, Nanette Blair, Rob Blair, Shanna Donica, Ann Gregory,
James Harman, Stephen John, Kara Martinez, Jessica Miller, Cathy Mitchell, Stuart Moody, Gary
Poffenbarger, Paxton Pugh, Gracie Quinonez, Rody Reding, Yolanda Salgado, Amanda Sims, Shalyn
Slape, Ron Spears, Pete Stracener, Dawn Valles, Ben Walton, Jack Wardlow, and Alan Worley. Daniel
Nazworth attended in the absence of Lynda Reid.
Members Absent: Jim Belcher, Urisonya Flunder, Sue Ann Lopez, Mollie Melton, Yancy Nuñez, Lynda
Reid, Lance Scott, Jeremy Todd, Jim Walker, and Ronnie Watkins.
The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. Paxton Pugh was introduced as the student representative for
the committee, replacing Jenna Holt-Day who had a Friday class conflict this spring. Minutes of the
January 31, 2014 meeting, distributed earlier by email, were presented for approval. Motion by Jack
Wardlow to accept minutes by consensus. Motion seconded by Rob Blair. Motion passed on voice vote.
The following subcommittee reports and agenda items were presented.
Assessment Subcommittee
Shanna Donica reported that an Assessment Roundtable program will be organized for the fall semester.
The program will include short assessment presentations and discussions held in a brown bag lunch
format. It will be a way to get feedback for other professional development opportunities. She also
announced that the West Texas Assessment Conference hosted by Texas Tech University is scheduled for
Oct. 22. A call for presentations is posted online. SPC is a community college partner in this conference
along with Midland College. A community college panel presentation is being organized for the
conference program.
Institutional Research and Data Subcommittee
Jack Wardlow reported that the National Student Loan Data Center is changing its requirements for
reporting student major data. The center is becoming more strict with how Colleges and students declare
majors and fields of study. He said advisors need to be more careful and diligent in recording the proper
major code in a student’s record. Major codes are now being reviewed against CIP codes to make sure
alignment is correct. Cathy Mitchell ask committee members their thoughts on the need to be more
intentional with how we report majors and to develop a formalized major declaration policy and process.
Should we designate a specific procedure for students to declare a major and at what point in the advising
process should this procedure take place? Gary Poffenbarger said advisors may be reluctant to change or
update major codes for a student in the advisement process because they do not know who to reassign the
student to if the student changes his or her major. Mitchell said it might be possible for the advising
system that is being developed to automatically reassign students to a new advisor. Wardlow said he
would need to check if there is a limit to the number of major changes that would be acceptable. Jim
Harman suggested that new students be blocked from self-registering online and must register through an
advisor. Mitchell said that option is not available for now, but implementation of ESP@SPC will move us
in that direction. Billy Alonzo said students are retaking courses without knowing whether or not they
need to. CampusConnect needs to be programed to let students know if they have already taken a course.
Rob Blair said technical education is held accountable for making sure major codes are correct because
completion rates are tied to the major codes. However, it was also noted that students frequently declare a
IE Committee Meeting, 4/18/14
1
technical major and then don’t enroll in that program. For example, Wardlow and Blair conducted a
retention analysis for selected technical programs and discovered that students had been coded for
Cosmetology but were not enrolled in any Cosmetology courses. Blair noted that major codes are listed
on the course roster and that faculty need to examine the roster to make sure all students in that program
are properly coded. Alonzo asked to which majors would you reassign students if they were not in a
particular program? Should all students be classified as general studies students until they formally
declare a major and enroll in corresponding courses? Following additional discussion, it was consensus
that this issue would require further study.
Mission Statement Evaluation Subcommittee
Kara Martinez presented a final draft of the revised Mission Statement document. She summarized the
process the Mission Statement Subcommittee has employed to review and update the document. The
subcommittee began its work after it was appointed in November 2012. Over the next six months, the
committee met to review the following items: peer institution mission statements, the state statutes for
community college role and scope, results of employee, student and constituent surveys related to
mission, role and scope, and institutional assessment data. With this input, the committee drafted a
revised missions statement, role and scope statement and eight institutional purposes. This draft was
posted on MySPC in May 2013 for input by faculty and staff. In January 2014, the subcommittee hosted
focus groups with faculty, staff and students. Participants were asked: 1) What do we do at SPC? and 2)
Where do you see SPC in 10 years? Martinez presented a summary of this focus group input organized as
an infinity diagram. A select group of faculty and staff met April 11 to address and clarify some of the
language in the statement and to recommend a final edit of the statements. Questions about the use of the
term “lifelong endeavor,” compensatory education, service area definitions and the institutional purposes
were addressed.
Following discussion, John asked for motion to approve the revised Mission Statement and recommend it
to the Administrative Council. A motion was made by Wardlow to approve. Motion seconded by Ben
Walton. Motion passed on voice vote. Martinez was asked to repost the statement to MySPC for
additional faculty and staff review and comment. Any additional comments will be addressed by the
Administrative Council.
Student Retention
Dawn Valles shared with committee members information from a student retention presentation she
attended recently at Texas Tech University. The presentation provided outcome data for TTU’s
TECHniques Program, a student support program for students with disabilities. The fee based program
makes use of seven counselors who meet with participants weekly. Students also have access to peer
mentors and tutors. The program had a 96% fall to spring retention rate and a 90% fall to fall rate. Valles
suggested the some of the program strategies could serve as a model for ESP@SPC.
THECB Accountability Report 2013
IE Committee members were presented with SPC’s Accountability Report for 2013 as reported by the
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. Also presented were copies of the College’s Institutional
Resume for Students, Parents and the Public and the Institutional Resume for Legislators and
Policymakers. The latter documents present selected accountability data related to enrollment, financial
aid, costs, student success and degrees/certificates awarded. SPC data is compared to the Large College
Peer Group data. In all measures, SPC performed as well or better than peers. For example, SPC is doing
better with graduation rates and transfer rates than peer institutions. Various aspects of the reports were
discussed by committee members.
It was noted that the College’s success point total had dropped from 13,062.5 for FY 2011 to 10,359.8 for
FY 2012. Drop in points were seen for 1) students who complete 15 SCH; 2) students who complete 30
IE Committee Meeting, 4/18/14
2
SCH; 3) students who pass first college-level math course, 4) students who pass first level reading course;
and 5) students who pass first level writing course.
Committee members discussed the need to advise students to enroll in and complete 15 SCH each
semester, as well as the challenges this sometimes presents to students who work. Mitchell said that we
need to change the mentality that full-time is 11-12 hours and encourage students to enroll in at least 1516 hours each semester. This load shortens time to degree. Studies show that the longer a student takes to
complete a degree, the more likely they will quit along the way. Alonzo said that from his experience as
an advisor many students cannot enroll in 15 hours because they are working and because students want
to attend college just two days a week. The MW and TTh schedule makes it difficult to take 15 hours in
two days, especially when lab science courses are scheduled. Mitchell said advising should be on a
student by student basis, but we should still strive to have them enroll in 15 hours. Students with a fuller
schedule also tend to do better academically. We may also need to change the two-days a week college
culture and have students spread out their courses over four to five days. Martinez agreed that scheduling
may need to be adjusted to help students succeed.
An explanation for the drop in success points for completing first college level math, reading and writing
courses will require further study and an understanding of how the THECB calculates the success points.
Wardlow said the Coordinating Board recently changed the report data from which they pull the college
readiness and success data. John said he would review these concerns and report back to the committee.
Employee Survey Update
A total of 293 employees have completed the Employee Survey as of this morning. The survey will stay
open until the end of the semester.
Strategic Planning Process Update
John said that an Institutional Plan Task Force is being appointed to serve as an edit group for plan goals,
objectives and strategies. The group will start its work this summer.
Open Discussion and Announcements
Corye Beene announced that the Social Science Department will host Constitution Day on Sept. 19 and
the topic will be the 14th Amendment on equal opportunity. This topic is especially timely given the
recent judgment by the Department of Labor that college athletes can be considered paid employees
because of their scholarship support.
With no further announcements or business, the meeting adjourned at 10:26 a.m.
IE Committee Meeting, 4/18/14
3