APASC Meeting
September 15, 2006
Agenda Item #2
Page 1 of 7
Draft – draft – draft
Academic Program Articulation Steering Committee
ASU at the West Campus
Meeting Notes
April 28, 2006
Participants:
Members:
Virginia Cantu (Maricopa), Richard Drum (AWC; co-chair), Jennie Scott (AAATF),
Kate Dillon Hogan (community college at-large), Jerry Hogle (UA), Ruth Jones
(ASU Tempe), Dave Padgett (Pima), Ron Pitt (NAU; co-chair), Julie Ramsden
(ASU at the West campus), Randy Skinner (ATAC),
Linda Heiland (CAC), Michael Awender (ASU at the West campus), Jeanne
Swarthout (NPC)
Others:
Andy Beier (CAS), Bryant Castañeda (CAS), Sam DiGangi (ASU Tempe,
Associate VP of Information Technology), Bill Fee (UA), Melinda Gebel
(ASSIST), Mike Hensley (ATASS Business Analyst), David Schwalm (ASU
Polytechnic; GEATF co-chair) [phone-in], Kathy Wigal (ASU Tempe)
Agenda Item #1—Welcome and Introductions
Ron and Richard called the meeting to order at 10:00 am. Michael Awender and Julie Ramsden
welcomed everyone to ASU at the West campus.
Ron presented Richard Drum with a plaque acknowledging his service as co-chair of APASC
(2004-2006); the group extended its best wishes to Richard on his retirement.
Agenda Item #2--Approval of February 17, 2006 Meeting Notes
It was moved and seconded to approval these meeting notes; unanimous approval.
Agenda Item #3—Membership and Co-Chair Discussion
Review of Organizational Chart: the description of the General Education Articulation
Task Force (GEATF) needs to be completed, including that GEATF members are part of the
general education committees at their home institutions.
APASC Co-Chairs for 2006-2007: Respectively, the university and community college
APASC members separated into caucuses; from the university caucus—Ron Pitt, and from the
community college caucus—Maria Harper-Marinick, Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs,
Maricopa County Community College District.
1
APASC Meeting
September 15, 2006
Agenda Item #2
Page 2 of 7
Agenda Item #4—Report from the GEATF (David Schwalm)
AGEC-S proposed change: rationale for change: students not getting enough science
sequences; proposal allows closer alignment with the course patterns of students who start at
the university; should result in more AGEC-S completers; effective date: Fall, 2007;
motion/second/approval
AGEC-B proposed change: brought forward by the Computer Information Systems
ATF and the Business ATF; change allows students to complete the introductory computer
course as part of the general education block which is advantageous for those not wishing to
complete an A.Bus. degree. Bill Fee offered an amendment to split out “F” of the proposed
change into “F” Computer Information Systems—3 credits with a line immediately below
reading: Introduction to Computer Information Systems and “G” Options—0-3 credits. Motion
to accept proposed change with the amendment; seconded; discussion: delete the CIS row in
the Business Common Course Matrix, and place it below as a “required item” which the
Business ATF maintains in the AGEC-B; the question arose as to if the language of “or higher”
would be appropriate here: suggestion that the Business ATF could discuss this at their Fall
2006 meeting; effective: Fall, 2007; motion approved unanimously.
Action: the Articulation Facilitator will send a note to all community college CAOs and
request that these two AGEC changes be processed through local curriculum committees.
AAC&U Team: Dave summarized the team goals for the trip. Ron clarified the funding:
APASC will cover the conference and room and board fees; home institutions will cover the
transportation and incidental fees; the team will submit a report at the September APASC
meeting.
Agenda Item #5—Review of APSC Strategic Plan—Retreat Follow-up
Richard presented the strategic plan summary and asked if the priorities are agreeable.
At the January retreat, the six goals were re-worked into five. Ruth observed that a three year
range for the goals was reasonable (2006-2009); Richard added that these goals should be
adopted with the understanding that they can be periodically updated. Kate wondered how the
APASC goals aligned with the six JCC recommendations:
1. Increase transfer credits for select programs
2. Increase the number and scope of community college-university partnerships
3. Establish joint-funding models
4. Expand university system campuses and statewide programs
5. Develop a pathway for baccalaureate degrees at community colleges
6. Explore the need and create a pathway for a regional baccalaureate degree
granting college
Richard thought that including past accomplishments of goals would strengthen the
strategic plan.
Action: APASC members are to study the six JCC recommendations and the five
APASC goals and bring to the September meeting how the two sets are similar and different.
Action: Richard and Mike will work on a new brochure, formatted along the lines of the
APASC Strategic Plan 2004-2007.
The group unanimously approved these follow-up discussion items and actions.
2
APASC Meeting
September 15, 2006
Agenda Item #2
Page 3 of 7
Agenda Item #6—ATF Issues (Mike Hensley)
Review of Common Course Matrix (CCM) changes: Mike presented a summary chart
of the CCM changes submitted for approval by the ATFs from the 2005-2006 academic year.
Twenty-four matrices were listed; most of the changes were additions to the pathway notes,
shared majors, and common courses. Two matrices, however, needed APASC’s closer
attention: Business and CIS.
Business: the row entitled “Business Computers” should be deleted from the block of
common courses and placed below separately with a title reflecting its move to the AGEC-B,
such as “Required Course in the AGEC-B: Introduction to Computer Information Systems:”
The Finite Math/Quantitative Methods row: a long discussion ensued about the
commonality of the math courses in this line and what the actual math requirements are in the
bachelor’s degrees; several solutions were discussed, but the resolution from Ron is to prepare
two math lines: one with finite math with the ASU Tempe cell empty, and the other with MAT
211 in the ASU cell and the other cells showing the equivalency of MAT 211: Calculus I and
Calculus II; these two lines are to be separated by an “or.” Members approved the resolution of
two math rows.
CIS: the Finite Math/Quantitative Methods row on this matrix is to be handled in the
same way as the Business matrix.
The new “Systems” and “C#” rows: The ATF members requested that those community
college courses being designed for these two new common courses be entered into the matrix
at the Fall 2006 meeting, provided that they are in the CEG at that time, and that their effective
date be Fall 2006. Approved unanimously.
Bill requested that future changes on matrices be made in either bold or italics type so
that those without color printers may be the changes more easily.
Interpreter Policy Review: It was moved, seconded, and approved to adopt
the policy language as recommended for requesting and cancelling disability support services at
ATFmeetings:
If an individual requires Disability Support Services for a statewide meeting, the chair,
host and articulation facilitator should be contacted 2 weeks prior to the meeting with
information about the specific services needed. After the 2 week window, the host institution
and the articulation facilitator will make their ‘best effort’ to provide the services needed. ATASS
will fund any Disability Support Services that are needed at statewide transfer meetings. If the
individual requiring services cancels within 72 hours of the meeting, the individual’s institution
must assume the costs of the services.
Action: Articulation Facilitator: include in the 2006 ATF chair training.
Action: Mike: add to the state website
Agenda Item #7—ATF Attendance 2005-2006 (Mike Hensley)
Mike presented a summary table of this past year’s ATF attendance. He noted that two
chair reports were still outstanding: Nursing and Computer Science/CIS. When these are
received, their attendance will be added, and an updated report will be appended to these
meeting notes.
3
APASC Meeting
September 15, 2006
Agenda Item #2
Page 4 of 7
Mike thanked ATAC for helping finalize nine outstanding reports; the UA requests that
they be listed as a non-member in AJS.
Agenda Item #8—Standardizing AP/CLEP scores (Mike Hensley)
Languages AP recommendation: the attached table was submitted by the Languages
ATF; because there is such a variety of practices regarding lower-division credit for AP
language exams among the universities, the ATF decided to use a general statement directing
students to check current university catalogs. It was noted that students could actually lose
credits when they submitted AP scores to those universities which do not give credit for 101 and
102 language levels.
The UA corrected the note on the table to read 14 credits instead of 12.
Bill said that the practice at UA was to treat AP as a “source institution” and that AP and
CLEP are actually in the TA (transfer articulation) tables; he suggested that we archive these
standardized scores, as we do the year-specific CEG.
Sociology CLEP recommendation: the Sociology ATF had adopted a CLEP score of
50 for Introduction to Sociology at their Nov. 5, 2004 meeting, but was omitted in the list
submitted to APASC last year; it is presented now for approval.
It was moved, seconded, and approved to accept both of these recommendations;
implementation: Fall, 2007.
Agenda Item #9—IMS Statewide License Proposal (Andy Beier)
Andy summarized the attached IMS proposal whose purpose is to provide interfaces
with our institutions’ student information systems (Peoplesoft, Banner, Datatel, Jenzabar, and
home grown) so that student records can be read for degree audits. He emphasized that this is
an important tool in view of multidirectional transfer.
Ruth observed that the product ought to be able to request audits back and forth
between institutions, and that this is an example of how we can address the first three JCC
recommendations.
How would this proposal be funded? Richard suggested using our reserves. Ruth
moved that APASC cover the statewide license and that each institution be responsible for
installation and annual maintenance; seconded and approved.
Action: three additional institutional commitments (Pima already has been piloting the
system) are needed within the next two months; commitment statements are to be sent to
Richard.
Mike: compile a list of student information systems and send to Andy.
Agenda Item #10—Reports from APASC Subcommittees
Communication: none
Evaluation: Two Canadian consultants, Frank Gelin and Finola Finlay, will meet with
some of the members of the subcommittee July 12-14, at ABOR to help us re-write the RFP
(request for proposal).
4
APASC Meeting
September 15, 2006
Agenda Item #2
Page 5 of 7
Budget: Ron went over the attached ATASS Fiscal Year 2008 Budget as well as the
ATASS Reserves for FY 2006-2007. He asked us to consider the salary savings this year and
to look for the possibilities in the reserves for the $28,000 for the IMS proposal.
Technical: Andy summarized the attached report, noting that most of the projects have
been completed; the group needs to look at multidirectional transfer.
Andy explained that having a technical person on the subcommittee would be very
helpful; there was a motion to expand the subcommittee in this way; seconded; approved.
Agenda Item #11—Discussion of Staff Changes at ASU and Review of Current
CAS/ASSIST Contracts and Agreements
Sam DiGangi, Associate Vice President of Information Technology at ASU Tempe,
spoke about the change of personnel and re-structuring of IT. The CAS/ASSIST budget now
falls under his supervision; the Quality Team looks forward to working with Sam.
Action: Kate volunteered to send a thank you note and a token of our appreciation to
Linda Burns who oversaw the CAS project from its beginning in 1996.
Agenda Item #12—CAS Ownership Document Submission Status
Mike reported that of the 13 institutions asked to sign the CAS Joint Ownership
Agreement, only five had done so by April 27. Ron clarified that we need signed copies from
both the CAO and CIO from each institution.
Action: APASC directed Mike to re-send the electronic document to ATAC members
who will assist in having their chief officers sign and mail in the document.
Agenda Item #13—Recommend Name for New “Blended Guides”
Mike gave a brief history of the suggested names for this new advising tool, and
summarized the recent discussions by the Advising ATF and ATAC. The consensus was to
propose the term “Major Guides.” It was moved, seconded, and approved to adopt this term.
Mike demonstrated a sample of the opening page, and then the links to the Major Guide prototypes. The group suggested that there be a Quick Link on each tab to “Major Guides” on the
state website.
Action: Mike and Rebecca will implement these changes and activate the new Major
Guides in late spring/early summer.
Agenda Item #14—ATAC Report (Randy Skinner)
Randy directed members’ attention to the attached report; he wished to highlight two
items: (1) the need for an electronic process to take the place of the paper CEG change
agreements made by institutions at ATF meetings, and (2) the spreadsheet showing the various
titles of ATAC members, and that their time spent spent on articulation issues ranged from 5 to
100%.
5
APASC Meeting
September 15, 2006
Agenda Item #2
Page 6 of 7
Action: Mike and Rebecca are to develop an ATF CEG Change Form and present to the
ATAC members at their June meeting.
Agenda Item #15—Report from the Joint Conference Committee (JCC)
Members were asked to look at the attached report; it was noted that item 4 of this
report—implementation of JCC recommendations—will be addressed at their next meeting this
Wednesday. Ruth noted that there will be a summer JCC task force which will develop
measures for the outcomes which the universities and community colleges will discuss at the
upcoming meeting.
Agenda Item #16—ASSIST Steering Committee Report
Melinda summarized the highlights of her two attached reports. She said the categories
of transfer students were being refined into three levels of classification: casual transfers, solid
transfers, and pure transfers. There will be a summer follow-up meeting to refine and determine
analysis and reporting structures.
Agenda Items #17 and 18—Quality Team and ATASS Business Analyst Reports
Mike combined these two into one report, noting that many of the items had already
been discussed. The main topic of the Quality Team report was the plan for transition during
the recent changes of the ASU IT department and of the articulation facilitator. In his report,
Mike highlighted the upcoming call for prefix and program changes, the AAS database, and the
two newly forming ATFs: Recreation and Women’s Studies.
Agenda Item #19—Admissions and Records ATF Report
Mike summarized the highlights of the most recent A&R meeting April 11 (agenda
attached). He noted that the A&R group wishes to meet with Melinda at their fall meeting. One
item at that meeting was brought to APASC’s attention: about half of the institutions reported
that they use the date when the exam was taken as the basis for determining equivalent credit,
whereas the other half of the institutions indicated that they use the date when the student
requests that scores be evaluated.
After a brief discussion, it was determined that this issue should be treated as courses in
the CEG: the date when the student took the test should be the guiding principle.
Action: Mike will ask the A&R co-chairs to place this on their fall agenda, and he will
explain APASC’s rationale to them.
Agenda Item #20—Other Items/Discussion
Bill and Jerry presented a handout from UA about delivery systems of courses. Since
this will entail a lengthy discussion, it was decided to place this on the fall agenda.
Randy asked how does the information from APASC get back to “the implementers of
policy?” A more timely dissemination of APASC minutes and meeting materials was discussed.
6
APASC Meeting
September 15, 2006
Agenda Item #2
Page 7 of 7
Agenda Item #21—APASC Meeting Schedule 2006-2007—Dates and Hosts
September 22 at NAU [subsequently changed to September 15 at MCCCD]
November 21 at ASU Tempe
January retreat ABOR? Somewhere else in Valley? Jan. 11th or 12th? TBD
February 9 at UA
April 13 at MCCCD [Kate will check to see if this conflicts with Easter or
Passover]
The meeting adjourned at 2:30 pm.
MH:7-7-06
7