Notes - Approved

Meeting Notes

Koue Vang
Jeffrey Sacha
BJ Snowden
Adam Windham
Kathryn Sorensen
Diana Garcia
Yujiro Shimizu
Jeffrey Moran
Veronica Lopez
Jeffrey Sacha
Jessica Nelson
Diana Lopez
Christina Wagner
William Robey
Joel Keebler
Jennifer Laflam
Aleia Stalker

NAME OF COUNCIL/TEAM: Institutional Effectiveness Council
OBJECTIVE OF MEETING: Provide updates regarding the institutional campus climate study and the professional development project team; Discuss preparation for the upcoming accreditation process and discuss the institutional data use statement
DATE OF MEETING: 11/18/2019
TIME: 3:00pm
LOCATION/ROOM #: Student Center Board Room
CALL-IN NUMBER:
CALL-IN CODE:
FACILITATOR(S): Adam Karp and Bill Simpson
ASSISTANT: Joelle Gibson-Wittrup
MEMBERS PRESENT: Roger Davidson, Adam Karp, Kevin Porter, William Simpson, Naomi Dasari, Joelle Gibson-Wittrup, Jennifer Laflam, Kay Lo, Janay Lovering, Tyler Rollins, Rina Roy
INVITED GUEST(S): Chris Olson
SUPPORTING RESOURCES (ITEMS READ IN PREPARATION FOR AND/OR BROUGHT TO MEETING):
Attached Files:
Institutional Campus Climate Survey -- Process
ISER Template
SEA Annual Report Training Sept-Oct 2019
SEA Annual Report Template 2018-2019
ACCJC Online Training
District draft accreditation timeline 9-23-19
DRAFT ARC Data Use Statement
 
UPDATES AND BRIEF REPORTS:
Topic Person(s) Responsible Notes
Institutional campus climate study update - process - student survey - employee survey Adam Karp
-Process: See attached document regarding the process (what data is being collected and why). Includes a table detailing the demographics of the sample. Will also include a table with the demographics of the actual respondents. 
-Student Survey: Paper survey, sample population. Copy was shown.
-Employee Survey: Online, all employees. Not finalized yet. 
-Questions have similarities but employee survey will have questions related to ARC's Strategic Goals that are more appropriate for  employee experiences. 
What is the status of the Professional Development project team? PD team members
-Structure of the report: pulling out themes and noting what's missing (from an equity stand point) from job descriptions. Some shared themes, some specific to classified or faculty. Mirrors the Institutional Equity Plan.
-Foundational training will be for all employees. Discussed action level versus inquiry level training.
-Discussion regarding aspirational PD; will discuss with PD team.

Essential conditions needed for the plan: 
-Ample staffing 
-Steering guide (IEC or other group?) 
-Accessible space (move to ITC?)
-Employees have sufficient time
-Supportive management culture
What is the status of Program Review and Annual Unit Planning? Janay Lovering
-Facilitated a preview for department chairs. Discussing AUP training and the best way to train non-faculty employees. 
-College shift from old EMP may need to include change in business practices that mention EMP (forms, etc.). 
-Integrating program maps into AUP process. 
2018-2019 SEA Annual Report process Adam Karp
-Last spring ARC submitted the SEA plan.  This closes the loop as the follow up report.
-Accounting piece (how the money was spent) as well as metrics sections. 
-Specific directives (must select certain DI group(s)) from the state.
 -This update will go to PES this week. 
ACTION ITEMS:
Question Person(s) Responsible Notes and Decision(s) Next Steps
 
       
DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Question Person(s) Responsible Notes and Next Steps
How will the college prepare for the upcoming accreditation peer-review process including the institutional self-evaluation report? Adam Karp and Bill Simpson Training last month at district with the accreditation liaison for ARC. District has an accreditation timeline; meeting Dec 6. ISER draft completed Spring 2021. IEC sponsor a project team for evidence gathering?
-Differences from last accreditation: 100 page limit, has a template, more evidence gathering less analysis.
-District will be writing some of the sections that are the same across the four colleges.
-Quality focused essay topic determined by college. Feedback will be provided, no "right" answer.
What feedback does the council have on the institutional research data use statement? Adam Karp -Feedback: defining data, philosophy and listing what is available is great. Will facilitate a use of data culture. Essential for fostering an equity culture. Needs to be in the forefront.
-In the philosophy section, could add employees better understanding themselves as well.
-Responsibility IR has; how do we support the campus entities?
-Certain situations when IR should be involved (publishing documents, etc.). Gatekeeper when outside entities want to survey students. Detail when it would be appropriate to have IR involved, where boundaries are.
-Add information about the IRB (Institutional Review Board).
ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION:
Topic Contact Person
NA