Meeting Minutes – October 18, 2005

In response to Ms. Daniels’ request, we reviewed and discussed the recent Security Alerts and Updates, the incidents that prompted them, and the University’s reactive and proactive responses to matters of safety and security.

Sub-committee chairs McKeever, Daniels, and Oakes led review and discussion of their sub-committees’ work to date on the Council for the Advancement of Standards (CAS) study of the University’s judicial programs and services.

Mission, program, leadership
Mr. McKeever (chair), Dr. Neubauer, Dr. Oppliger

Based on information that appears in the Student Guide to Resources, Rights, and Responsibilities, most standards seem to be well met, although the University community might benefit from additional positive programming and education regarding appropriate conduct, noting that The Affirmation represents a step in that direction. Praise was afforded to the Division of Student Affairs’ Community Development staff for their dedication to student development and student learning, with a note that the promotion of learning, while our ultimate aim, may not be practical in every disciplinary encounter, and to their efforts, particularly the recently introduced periodic training refresher/audio-discussion series, to continue to develop the skills of preliminary and administrative hearing officers and Judicial Board members.

Equity and access, campus and external relations
Ms. Daniels (chair), Mr. Bollerman, Ms. Cannon

It was agree that there is a need to meet with members of the Judicial Board and we are in the early stages of review of the Student Guide’s disciplinary procedures section. Questions also will be added to the student survey (see next item).

Diversity, ethics
Ms. Oakes (chair), Mr. Brightman, Dr. Busse, Br.Kinzler

In addition to an analysis of published information, the sub-committee plans a survey of students to try to determine their experiences in regard to these topics. Ms. Oakes volunteered to include questions from the other two sub-committees if they would like to add student views to their analyses at this stage.

The remaining six parts of the CAS study – organization and management; human resources; financial resources; facilities, technology, and equipment; legal responsibilities; and assessment and evaluation – are being undertaken by the Community Development unit, which leads the implementation of our judicial/disciplinary system. A status report will be requested for presentation and discussion at our next meeting.

Dr. Cicala presented the findings of the three recent surveys of current resident students, faculty, and staff members with regard to the possible addition of new living learning communities to our student residences. (The related survey of commuter students will be presented at our next meeting.) A small but significant percentage of responding faculty seem to be interested in becoming involved with residential living learning communities and, while responding staff members over-estimated in all cases students’ potential interest in living learning communities, the percentage of responding students who indicated that they would be somewhat or very likely to reside in a living learning community, 43%, tells us we should move forward on at least an experimental basis for 2006-2007. The themes that seem to be of most interest to current resident students are co-curricular (organized around student organizations or teams), academic (organized around majors or groups of majors), and substance free. Once the results of the survey of current commuter students are added to our analysis, we will have a more clear understanding of the scope and nature of potential interest and will proceed accordingly.

This entry was posted in Student Affairs Committee. Bookmark the permalink.