Minutes of the Student Affairs Committee
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, FRESNO
5241 N. Maple Avenue, M/S TA 43
Fresno, California 93740-8027
Office of the Academic Senate Ext. 8-2743
February 9, 2011
Members Present: C. Edmondson (Chair), L. Burgos, C. Coon, A. Fiala, N. Nisbett, W. Skuban, A. Strategmeyer, L. Weiser
Visitors: Daniel Pavlovich, Student
Members Absent: K. Fugelsang, (Excused)
The meeting was called to order by Chair Christine Edmondson at 10:00a.m. in Thomas Administration, room #117.
1. Minutes. MSC to approve the Minutes of 1/26/2011
2. Agenda. MSC to approve the Agenda.
3. Communication and Announcements
a. New Academic Senate Support Coordinator – Venita Baker
b. Memos submitted to Executive Committee:
i) Request for Class Size Initiative
ii) Endorsement of Graduation Initiative
iii) Changing Majors will be submitted on 2/10/2011
c. Chair Edmondson submitted her resignation to FACEL on 1/26/11.
i) Request for a committee member to be the new liaison to the committee.
ii) It meets from 2:00 – 3:00 on Wednesdays.
d. SSTF Update
i) Report from Meeting on 12/09/2010 (see attachment).
ii) Report from Meeting on 1/20/2011 (see attachment).
iii) Volunteer to attend the next meeting 2/17/11 1:00 pm Hack Center Boardroom.
e. Please provide input into the strategic plan.
f. Please respond to HERI survey.
4. Old Business
a. Upper Division Writing Requirement
i. Chair Edmondson provided a review of the committee’s deliberations thus far.
ii. Additional discussion (see memo to Executive Committee dated3/14/2011).
iii. MSC - “The Student Affairs Committee does not endorse the recommendation for
all majors to make the Upper Division Writing Requirement a formative experience or
pre-requisite to a course or set of courses in all academic programs. Further, at
this time, the committee does not endorse the use of an advising hold to encourage
student s to complete the requirement by a certain point in their academic career.”
b. Co-curricular Leadership Certificate Consultation
i. Carolyn Coon provided background information on the development of the certificate.
ii. Discussion – How will the certificate appear on the transcript?
iii. Discussion – How will Student Involvement create a mechanism to expand the number
of faculty mentors in order to develop a truly co-curricular program?
iv. MSC – “The Student Affairs Committee endorses the CoCurricular Leadership Program
and encourages faculty to advise students to participate in the program and to mentor
students as they complete the 8 experiences designed to expose them to leadership
competencies.”
c. Examination of Q-DOGS portfolio pilot program
i. Chair Edmondson provided a summary of the charge from the Executive Committee.
ii. Chair Edmondson and Dr. Fiala reported on the October 11, 2010 meeting about Q-DOGS,
which was called by Michael Caldwell. At the meeting, the endorsement of the portfolio
assessment pilot program was discussed. Chair Edmondson and Dr. Fiala noted that the
endorsement of the pilot program at the meeting the QDOGS Task Force was not unanimous.
iii. Discussion – The on-going budget decreases and impending escalation of the budget
crisis is a much more pressing issue for our students, programs, and faculty. Any
consideration of the use of portfolio assessment should be examined in light of on-going
budget decreases and the impending escalation of the budget crisis.
iv. Discussion – There are significant cost concerns related to the use of faculty
and staff resources for the implementation and evaluation of a student portfolio program,
particularly as it may be used for outcomes assessment.
v. Discussion – Shouldn’t we assume that major and GE expectations and requirements
are sufficient activities that will enable students to develop the “Qualities Desired
of Graduating Students?”
vi. Discussion – Perhaps the activities associated with developing the desired qualities
of ethics and engagement are best defined by Academic Programs rather than by University
Administration.
vii. Discussion – Because of our strategic planning efforts, the Chancellor’s Graduation
Initiative, and the effects of the ongoing budget decreases and impending escalation
of the budget crisis, perhaps the QDOGS philosophy and recommendations should be revisited.
viii. Discussion – There is a concern that the pilot project was implemented without
review or endorsement by any Academic Senate Committee.
ix. Discussion to Continue at the next meeting of the Student Affairs Committee.
MSC to adjourn at 10:50 a.m.
Next meeting March 16, 2011.
Agenda
1. Minutes from 2/9/2011
2. Agenda
3. Communications and Announcements
4. Executive Committee Response to Class Size and Student/Faculty Ratios
5. Executive Committee Response to Senate Resolution Regarding the Graduation Initiative
6. Examination of QDogs portfolio pilot program
This PDF is provided as a print-only reference document and may not be fully accessible to users of assistive technology. For more information, please visit Title II Rule on Digital Accessibility page.