SOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE
Institutional Effectiveness Committee
September 2, 2005
9 a.m. – Founders Room
MINUTES
Members Present: Jay Driver, Phil Anderson, Gail Platt, Julie Gerstenberger, Larry Nichols,
Denny Barnes, Marla Cottenoir, Lesa Woods, Stephanie Jones, Fran Cotton, Rafael Aguilera,
Teresa Salinas, Kimbra Quinn, Kristi Barker, Lee Cox, Dane Dewbre, Jeri Ann Dewbre, Cary
Marrow, Tim Winders, Pam Burnett, Stephen John
Members Absent: Rob Blair, David Conner, Frances Coats, Teresa Green, Darrell Grimes, Dick
Walsh, Jack Wardlow.
The Institutional Effectiveness Committee met 9 a.m. September 2, 2005 in the Founders Room.
Teresa Salinas, Kristi Barker and Pam Burnett were introduced as new members to the
committee. A student representative to the committee is needed. Members may nominate a
student to sit on the committee. We will also work with the Student Activities Office and the
Student Government Association to appoint a student representative.
The following agenda items were discussed.
Update on 2005-08 Institutional Plan: Committee members briefly discussed the current draft
of the 2005-2008 Plan. Stephen John reported that the plan was presented to the Board of
Regents at their August 11, 2005 meeting. They will formally adopt the plan at the September 8,
2005 meeting. John thanked the IE Committee for its role in developing the new plan.
Review Committee Progress on 2004-2005 IE Plan: An updated report on the IE Committee’s
2004-2005 Plan was presented for review. Major accomplishments included the adoption of a
revised Mission Statement, adoption of a planning and budgeting calendar, progress on
defining learning outcomes for the college’s educational program, development of an employee
satisfaction survey for administrative support services, and development of the targeted
objectives for the 2005-2008 Institutional Plan.
Review IE Plan for 2005-06: Based on the results of the IE Committee’s work in the previous
year, a new IE Plan for 2005-06 was presented and discussed. Eight targeted objectives have
been identified for the new plan year. They include the following:
1. Investigate the implementation of online planning activities and resources.
2. Continue to develop a group of planning process experts to serve as a resource for
planners.
3. Provide leadership in developing and facilitating a process that defines learning
outcomes for the educational programs of the college (continuation objective).
4. Conduct a comparative review of THECB accountability system and align SPC
performance reporting to meet new requirements.
5. Provide leadership in organizing a task force to develop graduate follow-up survey
process and system.
IEC Committee Meeting, 9/2/05
1
6. Administer the support services survey and distribute results (continuation objective).
7. Continue to transition leadership and responsibility for NEO Day 3 of New Employee
Orientation to the IE committee (continuation objective).
8. Foster employee awareness and understanding of the 2005-08 Institutional Plan.
Status Reports and Action Items from IE Subcommittees: John asked new members and
members of the Mission Statement Subcommittee, which has completed its work, to become
involved with one of the other active subcommittees. A current list of subcommittee
membership will be distributed to help with these reassignments.
Chairs of the IE Subcommittees presented the following progress reports.
Planning Processes Subcommittee: Larry Nichols distributed the Planning and Budgeting
Calendar for 2005-06. He noted that the Administrative Council made a minor modification to
the budget side of the calendar, eliminating budget activities for the month of October and
shifting these activities to November and December.
In other discussion, it was noted that about 95% of departments presented IE Planning Reports
at the March 2005 Planning Hearings. Members discussed actions that should be taken to
improve this measure to 100%. IE Committee Members who become identified as “planning
resource experts” may be called upon to monitor and review the use of the IE Planning Report
matrix among various planning units in order to ensure the college’s planning process is
uniform, consistent, systematic and interrelated. Additionally, the committee discussed the
development of a web site with planning information and resources, as well as working with
the Professional Development Committee to identify opportunities to support a “train the
trainer” approach to developing planning experts.
Nichols reported his subcommittee would meet to begin looking at how the IE Planning Report
could be incorporated into an online process. It was the consensus of the committee that before
an online process is implemented, all planners must be competent in utilizing the paper
reporting process. He said his subcommittee will meet to develop a timeline for developing
online planning resources.
Assessment and Outcomes Subcommittee: Gail Platt provided a written report of a
subcommittee meeting held May 3, 2005 (refer to report handout) that was also attended by a
number of faculty guests. The subcommittee will focus this year on working with faculty to
identify the college’s curriculum’s “universal learning outcomes.” The following definition for a
learning outcome was offered for review and comment.
“Learning outcomes are specific understandings or skill sets that a student is expected to
achieve at the end of a learning experience. They can be applied to a course, a program, or a
complete degree. Learning outcomes can direct teaching and learning, curriculum development,
and assessment.”
An extensive evaluation report on the college’s core curriculum was made to the Texas Higher
Education Coordinating Board in September 2004. The report was prepared by Dr. Platt,
IEC Committee Meeting, 9/2/05
2
working with departmental chairpersons. This report can be used as a starting point, along with
the THECB’s core competencies and intellectual perspectives. Committee members discussed
the process that would be used to develop the learning outcomes document. All agreed that it
must be faculty driven. The subcommittee presented its three objectives.
1. Investigate, identify, publish and disseminate the universal learning outcomes (AY 200506).
2. Develop a process and engage faculty in analyses of the curriculum (in regard to the
learning outcomes, AY 2006-07).
3. Develop a process and develop/select tools for measuring student learning outcomes
(AY 2007-08).
It was noted that the THECB is encouraging colleges to develop other methods for
demonstrating student learning other than the traditional “grading” method. This could
include student portfolios of work, capstone experiences, standardized assessments, etc.
Employee Survey Subcommittee: Jeri Ann Dewbre presented the list of survey statements for
the Support Services Survey that is ready in online format. IE Committee members were asked
to review the statements and provide feedback. The committee discussed several points on the
survey. The question was raised how employees should respond if they have never used the
service. Respondents would select the neutral (3) value on the scale. It was suggested that the
definition of “neither agree/disagree” be changed to indicate not using the service as a choice.
At the previous meeting, the use of the term “adequate” in describing the level of service
received was questioned. The committee has substituted the term “satisfactory” in appropriate
statements. The survey instrument will be modified and will be announced in early September.
Results are expected to be available in report form in September.
NEO Day Three: Volunteers are still needed to help with Day Three of the New Employee
Orientation. That workshop is scheduled for September 23, beginning at 9 a.m. All IE
Committee members are encourage to participate and to hear what new employees have to say
about their experiences at the college. The day’s agenda and a list of current volunteers were
distributed.
Adjustments to Institutional Benchmarks: John asked the committee to begin reviewing the
benchmark measures that are outlined in the 2005-08 Institutional Plan (pages 40-46). The IE
Committee needs to determine if current minimum benchmark measures of 3.0 on a 5.0 scale
are satisfactory in demonstrating quality and effectiveness for the college. He noted that the
Administrative Council set minimum benchmarks of 3.5 and 70% agreement on the Employee
Survey. Items which fell below these benchmarks were identified as areas for improvement.
Members briefly discussed the measures for Faculty Evaluation surveys and Student Services
surveys. This action item will be discussed at future meetings.
Student Surveys – SSI and Faces of the Future: This fall the Title V Project will administer the
Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory. Additionally, the ACT Faces of the Future Survey is
scheduled to be administered. Kimbra Quinn will work with other IE committee members to
coordinate these two surveys.
IEC Committee Meeting, 9/2/05
3
Meeting Dates for the Year: The IE Committee will meet on the following dates: Friday, Oct.
28, 2005, 9 a.m.; Friday, Jan. 20, 2006, 9 a.m.; and Friday, March 31, 2006. Meeting will be held in
the Founders Room.
With no further business, the meeting adjourned: 10:20 a.m.
IEC Committee Meeting, 9/2/05
4