SOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE
Institutional Effectiveness Committee
January 30, 2004
9 a.m. – Founders Room
Members Present: Jay Driver, Phil Anderson, Julie Johnson, Larry Nichols, Denny Barnes, Rob
Blair, Stephanie Jones, Frances Cotton, Rafael Aguilera, Mark Miller, Kimbra Quinn, Rita
Quinonez, David Conner, Dane Dewbre, Jeri Ann Dewbre, Teresa Green, Frances Coats, Kelvin
Sharp, Cary Marrow, Marla Cottenoir, Gail Platt, Jack Wardlow, Stephen John
Members Absent: Dick Walsh, Lee Cox, Dick Shannon, Tim Winders
The Institutional Effectiveness Committee met 9 a.m. January 30, 2004 in the Founders Room.
The following agenda items were discussed.
Progress reports from IE Subcommittees: Chairs of the IE Subcommittees presented the
following progress reports.
Mission Statement Subcommittee: Julie Johnson and Phil Anderson reported that
subcommittee members were in the process of conducting focus group “conversations” with
SPC employees. Members were employing the affinity diagram technique of brainstorming to
get employee input on the statement: What does South Plains College do? Several focus groups
have been conducted. Early results of this activity were distributed to committee members. The
subcommittee plans to finish its focus group study in February and then compile all the data for
analysis. An analysis of the focus groups will complete by March 12 (Spring Break).
Planning Processes Subcommittee: The subcommittee reported that 99% of its task is
completed. The planning matrix is being used campus-wide with favorable comments and
feedback. The remaining task is to look at the proposed timeline for the planning and budget
cycle to determine if it is compatible. Larry Nichols distributed a proposed timeline for the
planning and budget cycle for comments and recommendations. IE Committee members are to
contact Nichols with any suggestions. A final report would be prepared for the next meeting.
Assessment and Outcomes Subcommittee: The IE Assessment Subcommittee reported that in
it’s analysis it has determined that much raw data are collected and stored in the administrative
system at SPC. These data are somewhat overwhelming, imposing and intimidating.
At this time, the IE Assessment Subcommittee recommends:

Creating a structure for the management and presentation of the data to increase
efficiency of the system. Recognizing the necessity to collect data for state and federal
reporting purposes, we also support continuing to collect data, increasing the writing of
programs for the collection of data, and a focus on analyzing statistically the data and
interpreting results to increase program efficiency and thereby enhancing overall
institutional effectiveness. We support the dissemination of information by improving
data access on a timely and regularly scheduled basis. When we strive to increase
efficiency, we are looking to enable more individuals/offices to retrieve and
disaggregate data in as efficient a process as possible.
IEC Committee Meeting, 1/30/04
1


That departments review the data elements and tools identified as being important to
program planning and evaluation, emphasizing the importance of consistency with data
accessed and evaluated in a uniform fashion from year to year. This point of consistency is
extremely important in developing a strong basis of reporting procedures, which will
aid in evaluating all aspects (programs, departments, divisions, professional
development, etc.) of the college.
An inclusive process so that all departments/entities responsible for program planning
and evaluation have access to pertinent data in a routine and systematic manner.
A copy of the subcommittee will be distributed via e-mail by Gail Platt.
Stephen John reported that at a recent Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board meeting
(Oct. 29, 2003), the THECB staff presented to the board its analysis of the state’s institutional
effectiveness and accountability system for higher education. The CB staff had determined that
the state has in place performance measures that are tied to the “Closing the Gaps” plan for
higher education. Data for these measures is collected, tabulated and reported. What is missing
that would make the system “comprehensive” are identified benchmarks and the
“consequences” institutions would face if the expected benchmark is not met. The CB Staff has
suggested institutions be grouped as peers for benchmark purposes. These peer groups would
also function to provide support and best practices resources for institutions in the group that
fail to meet the benchmarks. John and Kelvin Sharp participated in a conference call with other
community college leaders in a proposed peer group to discuss this concept with Dr. Glenda
Barron of the CB staff. The suggestion by participants in the conference call was to group
community colleges by region rather than by FTE’s, or to even group community colleges as a
whole. The THECB was to take up this issue again at its January 29, 2004 meeting. More would
be reported later.
Employee Survey Subcommittee: The subcommittee presented its final draft of the revised
Employee Survey. The survey questions were ranked by category as they relate to the college’s
overall commitment statements. The suggested random sequencing of the questions for the
actual online survey was also submitted for review. Comments were taken from several
committee members. It was decided that the online survey would be tested on IE Committee
members for feedback before being distributed to all employees. Online and paper
administration of the survey would be available. The survey would be administered after
Spring Break with plans to compile results by May. Motion made by Marla Cottenoir to adopt
the survey pending any revisions as the result of the test. Seconded by Mark Miller. Motion
passed.
Jeri Ann Dewbre also reported that the Employee Survey Subcommittee will begin work on
developing an Administrative Support Services Survey that will provide assessment data for
various service areas.
Review of Strategic Planning Calendar: Stephen John distributed a calendar of planning
activities that have been identified for the preparation of the 2005-2008 Institutional Plan. The
calendar was reviewed by the committee.
IEC Committee Meeting, 1/30/04
2
Presentation of data from Faces of the Future Survey: This presentation was postponed until
the next meeting.
Action Plan Review: Subcommittees were directed to continue to make progress on
accomplishing their tasks.
Meeting Adjourned: 10:15 a.m.
Next Planned Meeting: Friday, March 12, 2004, 10:30 a.m., Founders Room
IEC Committee Meeting, 1/30/04
3