UTPA SACS Reaffirmation of Accreditation

→ Home / Quality Enhancement Plan / Minutes for QEP Meetings

QEP Team Meeting Minutes

QEP Phase II 6^th Meeting, 11/29/2005

Members Present: Karen Watt, William Turk, Judy Davidson, Christina Villalobos, Chad Richardson, Ana Maria Rodriguez, Glenn Martinez , George Eyambe, Hector Ochoa, Cyndi Valdez.

Members Absent: Ludivina Rodriguez, David Sturges, Gilbert de los Santos, Jeanette Broshears, Farzaneh Razzaghi.

Vistors: Dr.Lokenath Debnath and Dr. John Bernard.

Meeting convened at 2:50 p.m.

Subcommittees reported on their meetings:

Statement of Need
- Chad Richardson reported on area of greatest need, math courses.
- Dr. Ana M. Rodriguez reported on the following: 1. gate keeper courses, 2. the
  idea of a collaborative effort with STC, and 3. statistics for UTPA math courses.
Interventions
- Committee reviewed and approved survey, discussed the effectiveness of learning
  frameworks classes, discussed the success of learning communities, and reviewed
  type of faculty development opportunities.
- Judy Davidson reported on pilot course of a fast track English 1320/1301
  presently taught by Dr. John Wittman, Department of English.

Discussions

Interventions and Resources

Dr. Lokenath Debnath discussed difference in Math and English courses and why
interventions in some areas are not necessarily effective in other areas. He discussed
resources needed in math to develop the interventions.
Dr. John Bernard shared intervention ideas from two other universities with which he is
familiar. He will provide thecommittee other information before the next meeting.

Vote

Chad Richardson moved that the focus of the QEP project and interventions be directed
toward three math courses: 1300, 1334, 1340. George Eyambe seconded the motion. The
members voted affirmatively on the motion.

Next meeting will focus on:

College algebra data: Dr. John Bernard will provide information.
Texas Instruments data, Gear-Up data, and most successful school districts data: Cyndi Valdez will provide information.
Interventions.
Project "Chance".

Next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, December 13, 2005, 2:45-3:45 p.m., University Library, Room 310.

Meeting adjourned at 4:00 PM

Respectfully submitted:
Patricia Villarreal

QEP Phase II 3 ^th Meeting, 10/11/2005

To: Members of the QEP Team

From: Patricia Villarreal

Re: Minutes, October 11, 2005

Date: October 12, 2005

Members Present: Karen Watt, Ana Maria Rodriguez, Judy Davidson, Jeanette Broshears, William Turk, Chad Richardson, Glenn Martinez ,Hector Ochoa, Gilbert de los Santos, Christina Villalobos, George Eyambe.

Members Absent: Ludivina Rodriguez, Cynthia Valdez , Farzaneh Razzaghi, David Sturges.

Guests: President Cardenas, Carol Rausch

Business:

Welcome: Karen Watt

Introduction of President Cardenas: Bill Turk

President addresses committee:

Thoughts on QEP topic

Improving the quality of education.
Who are the players.
The power of the outcome.

Advancing first-generation students

Model

Families
Peers/Social group (the student and the student’s world)
Institution
- PreK-12
- Community College
- University

What is it we do for the students so they can succeed, and how do we connect with the families?

There has to be adaptation.
How do we intervene to be successful?
What kind of adaptations do the institutions make for the students?
Both the students and institution must be in a reciprocal relationship

VAMOS Recipient

Model that reconciles culture values

Adaptation

Academic Issues
- Preparedness - From an academic stand point, what do the students need to have learned?
- Informational - What kind of information do the students need to have about education to make wise choices?
- Instructional - What approaches/adaptations should the university community make for instruction?
Personal Issues - heuristic skills
- Attributes of successful first-generation Mexican American students
- Characteristics of successful students
- How do they negotiate when conflicts occur
  - Expectations
  - Identification
  - Validation
Financial Issues -
Structural Issues -When, where and how
Institutional Culture
- Are there other ways to encourage student interaction?
- What is working to engage students?
- Social advancement - are there more ways to get family involved?

Model starts in

PreK-12
Community College
University
Preparedness
Success
Completion

How do we make students visible and elevate the value of completion for them?

Questions and Thoughts from Committee:

Committee members engaged in discussion about the remarks from the President.

Next meeting will focus on:

	-	Questionnaire will be circulated for final comments.
	-	Karen Watt will summarize President's discussion.
	-	Share proceedings of SACS Meeting in Austin with the committee.
	-	Judy Davidson will send electronically Chad Richardson's article discussing Hispanic drop-outs to the committee.
	-	GEAR UP - Cynthia Valdez will discuss UTPA's program.

Next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 1, 2005, 2:45-3:45 p.m., University Library, Room 310.

The meeting adjourned at 4:20 p.m.

Respectfully submitted:
Patricia Villarreal

Close Meeting

Top of Page

Meeting, 09/27/2005

QEP Phase II 2 ^th Meeting, 09/27/2005

Members Present: Karen Watt, Ana Maria Rodriguez, Judy Davidson, Jeanette Broshears, William Turk, Chad Richardson, Glenn Martinez , Hector Ochoa, Gilbert de los Santos, Christina Villalobos, Farzaneh Razzaghi, George Eyambe.

Members Absent: Ludivina Rodriguez, Cynthia Valdez

Committee discussion:

Definition of Student Learning: (refer to handout provided by Bill Turk)

Meaning of Student Learning: (refer to handout provided by Karen Watt)

Were students involved in phase I?
Discussion: One graduate student and two undergraduate students served actively on QEP Phase I.
Do we need input from students?
Discussion: The committee agreed that student input is a good idea.

Focus group with students:

Studies show we should have focus groups with students.
Strategies
Need feedback from student.
QEP would benefit from a needs assessment.
Which programs have higher retention? Look at data and find out what works.

Where are we with student performance?

Look at data/studies- ex: learning communities, 1301 course, and retention
What are our resources?
Send survey to departments.
Registrar's office
Look at number of students who start a program and finish
Keep President's ideas in mind (refer to table distributed at meeting)

Next meeting assignments:

Judy Davidson will bring strategic plans and alignments.
Bill Turk will contact Institutional Research Office for data.
Hector Ochoa will provide article for committee.
Gilbert de los Santos will draft the questionnaire/survey.

Group breakout discussion:

Discuss plan, ideas.
What is being done for retention?
What is the criteria?

Discussion from the breakout groups:

1st Group

Ana Maria Rodriguez, Chad Richardson, Bill Turk, Christina Villalobos, Glenn Martinez

Department

Get retention, GPA, graduation rates by college/department. Then, look at successful departments and ask:
- How do you measure success in your program?
- Name 3 things that your department is doing to help ensure success.

Student

Student random sample of 600 students.
- Identify students that succeed or not and determine what factors that contribute to success or not.

2nd Group

Judy Davidson, Hector Ochoa, Jeanette Broshears, George Eyambe, Farzaneh Razzaghi, Gilbert de los Santos

Department/Program Outcomes:

	1.	Is there a mentoring component in your department?
	2.	What is the department doing to engage students? Mentoring in and out of class?
	3.	What is your pass rate on the certification/licensing aspect of your area?
	4.	Do you have departmental structures that allow for cohort building?
	5.	How well do our students rate in relation to state and national cohorts?
	6.	How well do your students do after graduation?
	7.	What is the percentage rate of acceptance to various programs? (Selective or open admission?)
	8.	Does your area have a field-based component? If so, does it help student learning?
	9.	How many students begin a program and how many finish it?

Next meeting will focus on:

Work in groups to discuss what student learning means to us.
Set goals based on university goals and QEP projected goals.

Next Meeting scheduled for Tuesday October 11th, 2005, 2:45-3:45 p.m., University Library, Room 310.

President Cardenas will attend the next meeting to address the committee.

Meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitte:
Patricia Villarreal

Close Meeting

Top of Page

Meeting, 09/13/2005

QEP Phase II 1 ^th Meeting, 09/13/2005

To: Members of the QEP Team

From: Judy Davidson

Re: Minutes, September 13, 2005

Date: September 14, 2005

The QEP committee convened for business at 2:30 p.m. Tuesday, September 14, 2005, in the University Library Research Room 310.

Members Present: Watt, Broshears, Martinez, Richardson, Rodriguez, de los Santos, Turk, Hancock, Rodriguez, Valdez, Davidson.

Members Absent:Eyambe, Ochoa, Ramirez, Razzaghi, Villalobos.

Business:

Members were welcomed to the first meeting of the QEP Phase II.
Members introduced themselves.
Judy Davidson summarized the committee activities of the QEP Phase I. Others who served on QEP Phase I contributed to the discussion about the activities leading toward the selection of the topic. QEP Committee Phase I did the following: researched literature, met and discussed the findings from the literature, invited guest speakers, held Town Hall Meetings for each college within the university and for the university staff. Ultimately, the committee recommended a topic to the Leadership Team, and they made some changes and recommended a modified version of the topic to the President. President Cardenas reviewed the work and made suggestions. The final topic for the QEP is the following: Gear Up to Graduate: A Model for Academic Success for First-Generation Mexican American University Students.
Karen Watt was introduced as the Project Manager for QEP II.
Karen discussed her ideas related to establishing the future work for the committee.
Karen asked Gilberto de los Santos to share his article with the members of the committee.
The committee briefly discussed issues that will need to be addressed over the coming weeks; one question to be addressed will be how academic success is defined?

Next Meeting:

Karen requested that Ana Maria bring the template for Title III/Title V grant writing to distribute at the next meeting, and for Cindy Valdez to bring a copy of the Gear Up grant to distribute at the next meeting.
She asked Bill Turk to bring the SACS definition of student leaning to the next meeting.
She asked each committee member to review the literature bibliography prepared by Farzaneh.
She asked each member to be familiar with the QEP document that was provided at the first meeting.
The next meeting will be held on September 27, 2005, 2:45-3:45 p.m. in the Library, 310.

The meeting adjourned at 3:40 p.m.

Respectfully submitted:
Judy Davidson

Close Meeting

Top of Page

Meeting, 04/05/2005

QEP Meeting, 04/05/2005

To: Members of the QEP Team

From: Judy Davidson

Re: Minutes from April 5, 2005

Date: April 6, 2005

The QEP committee convened for business at 2:15 p.m. Tuesday, April 5,2005, in the University Library 310.

Members Present: Alday, Alanis, Benavides, Broshears, Brown, Curts,Davidson, Davis, M. Gonzalez, Grant, Guo, Hancock, Hinojosa, LeMaster, Llanes, Montgomery, Ozuna, Reed, Richardson, Tijerina, Timmer, Rodriguez, Turk,Villalobos.

Members Absent: Belau, Emery, Mann, Mery, N.Gonzalez, Valdez .

Guest: Wendy Fowler (to be appointed to replace Jeff Getchell)

Webmaster: Xueyan Zhao

Business:

Ana Maria, Susan, Bill, and Judy reported to the committee Dr. Margaret Sullivan's advice and feedback on the QEP. Sullivan, a representative from SACS, has thirty years of experience in working with the SACS accreditation processes. She offered the following advice:

QEP problems most often cited are the following:

lack of a plan for assessing the QEP;
lack of clear goals for the QEP;
little or no link between the QEP focus and student learning; and
lack of a timeline andresources to accomplish the goals of the QEP.

General advice from Sullivan:

Use a Title III (or V) document as the format whenwriting the report.
Provide an extensive literature review of thetopic.
Determine the QEP office, administrator, and methodfor how the plan will be assessed and financed.
Build student learning outcomes into it.
Let the focus be academic.
Be highly focused.
Incorporate control groups.
Try small pilot groups to refine the project
Write student learning outcomes by disciplines.
Avoid retention as a primary measurement; it may be used as a secondary measurementof what we do.
Remember that good QEPs are highly fundable proposals.
Expect that QEPs are moved and directed by faculty.
Think of a topic that would "put us on the map."
Usethe strength of your area and your student population to create a unique topic.

Extensive committee discussion followed. The committee voted toapprove the following "working" title and statement:

A Model for Academic Success on the South Texas Border

This theme calls for the university to develop a model for continuing to ensure access and increase success through student learning for the firstgeneration college students of the border region.

Next Step in the Process:

The above working title and statement will be presented on April 21 to the SACS Leadership Team for discussion, modification, and review.
Following approval from the SACS Leadership Team, the working title and statement will be sent to President Cárdenas for review.

Next meeting: The next meeting has not been scheduled. After the response from the LeadershipTeam and response from the President, the committee will be notified, and wewill determine the next time for the committee to meet.

The meeting concluded at 3:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted:
Judy Davidson

Close Meeting

Top of Page

Meeting, 03/22/2005

QEP Meeting, 03/22/2005

To: Members of the QEP Team

From: Judy Davidson

Re: Minutes from March 22, 2005 QEP Meeting

Date: March 23, 2005

The QEP convened for business at 2:15 p.m. Tuesday, March 22, 2005, in the University Library 310.

Members Present: Alday, Alanis, Belau, Benavides, Broshears, Curts,Davidson, Emery, Getchell, M. Gonzalez, Grant, Guo, LeMaster, Mery, Montgomery,Ozuna, Richardson, Tijerina, Timmer, Rodriguez, Turk, Villalobos.

Members Absent: Members Absent: Brown, Davis, Llanes, Hancock, Hinojosa, Mann, N.Gonzalez, Reed, Valdez.

Guest: Terrie Garcia, serving as recording secretary.

Announcements:

It was announced that Jeff Getchell will be leaving UTPA to work for another university. Jeff's work on the QEP committee and his contribution to the university are greatly valued. We will miss him, and we wish him well with his new position.
Bill elaborated upon the QEP survey and explained the process which will be directed by the Center for Survey Research.
The committee thanks those who volunteered to serve on subcommittees and appreciates the work directed toward revision and refinement of the themes and descriptive paragraphs: First sub committee: Ana Maria Rodriguez, Susan Hancock, Adelle Mery, Gary Montgomery, Jane LeMaster, Bill Turk and Judy Davidson. Second sub committee: Ana Maria Rodriguez, Jane LeMaster, Bill Turk, and Judy Davidson. Third sub committee which divided into small groups: Linda Belau, Sandra Benavides; Chad Richardson, Jeanette Broshears, Servando Hinojosa; Debby Grant, Cynthia Brown, and Rick Davis.

Business:

The committee discussed, revised, and refined the three proposed QEP themes. The goal was to create a consistent presentation, yet one which allowed each theme to retain its distinction from the others. After a lengthy but productive session, the committee members reached a consensus on the way the themes were written. The results are as follows:

Quality Enhancement Plan:A Survey

The University of Texas-Pan American has begun the process of seeking renewal of accreditation from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools(SACS). One component of the SACS accreditation process is the Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP). SACS defines QEP as "a carefully designed and focused course of action that addresses a well-defined topic or issue(s)related to enhancing student learning."

We would like to know which theme you think would describe best how to enhance student learning at UTPA. Please read the themes and record your preferences.

Please mark your preferences in the blank space before the theme title:

1 -first choice; 2 - second choice; 3- third choice

Partnerships for Access and Success

This theme calls for the university and the external community to join together to promote greater access to the university and success for all undergraduate and graduate students. It would promote greater access for the unique populations of this border environment, especially focused on the first-year experience of students and on students who are the first in their family to attend a university. This could include but not belimited to internships, scholarships, non-traditional learning opportunities, advisement, and student communication skills.

Engagement of Life-long Learners

This theme calls for the university to engage undergraduate and graduate students in a process of continuous life-long learning. It would promote greater engagement among faculty, students, staff, alumni, and the community. This theme could include but not be limited to critical thinking, research, communication, co-curricular activities, professional networking, leadership development, and technological expertise.

Active and Collaborative Learning for Student Success

This theme calls for a focus on active and collaborative learning in a learner-centered environment. It would promote greater collaboration in creating learning models among faculty, students, and respective fields of study. This theme could include but not be limited to new models of learning and teaching, faculty and curricular development, higher academic standards, and increased proficiency with technology.

Next Meeting:

The next meeting will be held after the results of the survey are completed. It may be in mid-April. The committee will be notified about the meeting as the survey results are completed.

The meeting concluded at 4:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted: Judy Davidson.
Terrie Garcia, acting secretary.

Close Meeting

Top of Page

Meeting, 03/15/2005

QEP Meeting, 03/15/2005

To: Members of the QEP Team

From: Judy Davidson

Re: Minutes from March 15, 2005 QEP Meeting

Date: March 16, 2005

The QEP team convened for business at 2:15 p.m. Tuesday, January 25, 2005, in the University Library Research Room 310.

Members Present: Alday, Belau, Benavides, Broshears, Brown, Davis, Davidson, Emery, Getchell, Grant, Guo, Hinojosa, LeMaster, Llanes, Montgomery, Richardson, Tijerina, Timmer, Turk, Villalobos.

Members Absent: Alanis, Curts, Hancock, Mann, M. Gonzalez, N. Gonzalez,Mery, Ozuna, Reed, Rodriguez, Valdez.

SACS Webmaster: Xueyan Zhao

UWC Secretary: Barbara Castellano

Corrections to Minutes of March 1,2005:

From the College of Arts and Humanities, it was requested that thefollowing category be added to the minutes reporting their Town Hall Meeting: Other: service learning; research (3); learning,teaching and scholarship; research university as a goal; new facilities -Music Building; basic necessities - showing up on time, own phone line,subject matter preparation; faculty research, halt grade inflation; culturalrelevance; research and scholarship, faculty recruitment and retention;instituting institutional uniqueness; raising academic standards; WAC (3);practical learning and better equipped classrooms.

Report of Town Hall Meeting:

Jeanette Broshears reported:

Staff Town Hall: The Staff Town Hall met on Monday, March 14, 2005, in the Library Schilling Room; approximately 22 people attended. Light refreshments were provided. Dr. Bill Turk gave a Power Point presentation providing information related to the SACS accreditation process and the QEP connection to the process. The attendees divided into groups and discussed the draft of the five QEP topics. After discussions, a table moderator reported the ideas and feedback. The order of topic preference was presented as follows: 1) College experience preparatory; 2) Enhancing in students' knowledge, skills, behaviors, and/or values/attitudes/responsibilities/ethics; 3) Learning and teaching; 4) Cultural diversity; 5) Community engagement. The longer list of suggestions is on file in the UWC Director's office with the other extended lists of suggestions from all the Town Hall Meetings.

Announcements:

There will be a National Teleconference, March 24, 2005, in the International Room, IT Building, from 12-2 p.m. The conference topic is the following: Learning Communities, Pathways to Deep Learning and Campus Transformation. You may register for the conference by calling Marcy, ex. 7919.
It was announced that the President responded to the draft of the themes and suggested ideas by telling us to proceed forward.
Appreciation was expressed to Jane LeMaster, Ana Maria Rodriguez, and Bill Turk for work on producing the draft of three themes that included all the suggestions produced from Town Hall meetings.

Business:

The committee divided into table groups to discuss the most recent draft of the three themes and the suggested ideas under each one.
It was generally agreed that the themes required more revision before presenting to the campus faculty, staff, and students for survey purposes.
Linda Belau and Sandra Benavides volunteered to revise the first listed theme: Engagement of Life-long Learners.
Debby Grant volunteered to invite one or two other committee members to assist her with revising the second listed theme: Active and Collaborative Learning for Student Success.
Debby Grant volunteered to invite one or two other committee members to assist her with revising the second listed theme: Active and Collaborative Learning for Student Success.
Chad Richardson, Jeanette Broshears, and Servando Hinojosa volunteered to revise the third listed theme: Partnerships for Access and Success.
The three sub committees will have their revisions complete by the next meeting, Tuesday, March 22.
Appreciation was expressed to Linda, Sandra, Debby, Chad, Jeanette, and Servando for volunteering to serve on revision sub committees.

Next meeting:

The next meeting will be held Tuesday, March 22, 2005, 2:15-3:15 p.m., Library 310.
The business agenda for March 22 will be to discuss the new revisions and determine if the themes are ready for campus surveys.

The meeting concluded at 3:15 p.m.

Respectfully submitted:Judy Davidson
Barbara Castellano, Secretary

Close Meeting

Top of Page

Meeting, 03/01/2005

QEP Meeting, 03/01/2005

To: Members of the QEP Team

From: Judy Davidson

Re: Minutes of March 1, 2005 Meeting

Date: March 2, 2005

The QEP team convened for business at 2:15 p.m. Tuesday, March 1, 2005,in the University Library Room 310.

Members Present: Alanis, Alday, Belau, Broshears, Benavides, Brown,Curts, Davis, Davidson, Getchell, M. Gonzalez, Grant, Guo, Hancock, Hinojosa,LeMaster, Llanes, Mann, Mery, Montgomery, Ozuna, Richardson, Tijerina, Timmer,Turk, Villalobos.

Members Absent: N. Gonzalez, Valdez, Emery, Reed, Rodriguez.

Secretary and Webmaster Present: Barbara Castellano, Xueyan Zhao.

Good news! Forty-five percent (45%)of all full-time UTPA faculty members attended a Town Hall Meeting.

Announcements:

Committee members were thanked for organizing and implementing excellent Town Hall Meetings.
A Town Hall Meeting for staff will be conducted after spring break. The date, time, and place will be announced.
The QEP tentative schedule for the remainder of the spring semester is the following:
The spring schedule was summarized: the next two QEP meetings, the faculty focus groups in February, and the May 1 deadline for the QEP topic.
1. Monday, March 7, 2005 - Draft and Design SubCommittee meets to revise information from the TownHall meetings.
2. Student survey forms will be distributed to QEPcommittee members to survey classes during the last two weeks in March. Members will return the survey responses to Judy.
3. Last two weeks in March, campus telephone and othercampus surveys will take place.
4. Tuesday, April 5, 2005, full QEP committee meets todiscuss survey results.
5. Tuesday, April 12, 2005, full QEP committee meetsto rank order the top three topics to submit to the President.
6. April 19 or 26, complete the choice for the QEPtopic. (Deadline of May 1, 2005)

Reports of Town Hall Meetings:

College of Arts and Humanities: The Town Hall met on Thursday, February 24, 2005, in the Albert Jeffers Theater; approximately 85 people attended. After discussion, a ballot was distributed and people were asked to vote three times, not ranking their choices. The ballot results were the following:
Changes in students' knowledge, skills, behaviors, and/or values/attitudes (56votes),
Learning and teaching (51votes)
College experience (38votes)
Cultural diversity (18votes)
Community engagement (15votes)
Other. The Othercategory included suggestions for specific needs; several voiced interest in Writing Curriculum as an area of importance. (26 votes)
College of Health Sciences and Human Services: The College held two Town Hall Meetings, February 22 and 23, 2005; 10 people attended. A Power Point presentation provided information defining the QEP and its connection to the SACS accreditation process. Extensive table discussions included emphasis on internships and first generation college students. The discussions also included ideas for specific discipline-related suggestions. A ballot resulted in rank ordering the following topic choices:

Changes instudents' attitudes (A tie vote resulted between one and two.)
College experiences
Learning and teaching
Community engagement
Cultural diversity
Other
College of Science and Engineering: The College met on Thursday, February 24, 2005; 50 people attended. A Power Point presentation provided information about the QEP and its connection to the SACS requirements for accreditation. Discussion ensued covering issues such as computer literacy, testing types, class size, and other discipline-specific concerns. The Dean addressed the college and emphasized the idea of Engagement-Student Engagement, Faculty Engagement, Community Engagement. This idea received favorable discussion. Results of an electronic ballot are forthcoming.
College of Business: The College met on February 17, 2005. The attendance was 66% of the College. The Dean presented a vision plan for the college and linked it to some of the QEP topics and the University's Mission Statement. A Power Point presentation explained the QEP and the connection to the accreditation process. After discussion on numerous specific areas, including extended discussion of career placement for students, the meeting concluded. A survey was sent to faculty members requesting ranking of the five general QEP topic areas. A 50% response rate produced the following order rankings:
College of Education: The College met on February 25, 2005; 50 people attended. After a Power Point presentation defining the QEP and its connection to the SACS accreditation process, table discussions followed. The group discussions covered a two hour period generating numerous specific ideas. It was suggested that the QEP topics should follow the University Mission Statement. The idea of the College Experience was emphasized along with thoughts that students must be life-long learners. The groups expressed interest in topics in the following order:
Teaching and Learning(combined with the category of Changes in student's knowledge, skills,behaviors, and/or values/attitudes)
Cultural Diversity
College Experience
Community Engagement

Each College group was asked what they would do differently about theTown Hall process.

Several groups thought more time was needed to educate the faculty about QEP before the Town Hall Meetings.
Several suggested small groups for discussion would have been better than one large open discussion.

General recommendation