8:30 – 10:30 a.m., Virtual Meeting via Teams
Attendees
Voting Members
- Martin Abraham
- Lorraine Acker
- Mike Andriatch
- Lexi Bradley
- Monica Brasted
- Austin Busch
- Frances Dearing
- Michael Doyle
- Tom Hernandez
- Cathy Houston-Wilson
- Sara Kelly
- Stephanie Learn
- Yin Liu
- Theresa Martinez
- Carl O’Connor
- James Onley
- Kathy Peterson
- Heather Raczkowski
- Elliot Weininger: Co-Chair Elect
Non-Voting Members
- Priya Banerjee
- Julie Caswell
- Jackie Clark: Co-Chair
- Steve Cook
- Eileen Daniel
- Damita Davis
- Crystal Hallenbeck-McPhall
- Skye Paine
- Darson Rhodes: Co-Chair
- Melissa Wight
Guests
- Jennifer Blood
- Mustapha Ceesay
- Thomas Chew
- Keith Davis
- Kathleen Donlin-Smith
- Kandie Gay
- Jennifer Green
- Scott Haines
- Jennifer Haytock
- Debbie Jacob
- Rachael Killion
- Dana Laird
- Jose Maliekal
- Frank Mancini
- Tyler Moesle
- Gary Morog
- Pamela O’Keefe
- Oana Prajitura
- Janet Roy
- William Ruiz
- Megan Sarkis
- Darlene Schmitt
- Rey Sia
- Bonnie Swoger
- Sarah Unger
- Susan Wielgosz
- Aaron Wilkinson
- Robert Wyant
- Kathy Zunner
Regrets
Voting Members
- Kristin Hartway
Non-Voting Members
- President Macpherson
The meeting was called to order at 8:30 a.m.
Approval of the Minutes
Dr. Rhodes asked the committee members to review the November 30, 2023, meeting minutes. Ms. Dearing motioned to approve the minutes; Ms. Learn seconded the motion. 13 members voted to approve the minutes. Therefore, the minutes were approved.
Announcements
No announcements at this time.
Retention Update
(Presentation is available in Teams)
Dr. Kelly and Ms. Prajitura provided an update on retention. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- Appreciation was extended for the retention update.
- The question was raised regarding SUNY New Paltz and if there is any correlation between their higher retention rate and lower acceptance rate. Also, does this mean with our higher acceptance rate causes a lower retention rate. It was stated that we do study the peer institutions that have higher retention rates than us. We have talked to individuals from New Paltz, but it is hard to know what drives their rate over ours. You could look at program array and see if some of our programs are more challenging or they have more students that live closer to home. It is a difficult question to answer and unfortunately there isn’t an answer right now.
- The question was raised regarding the two lower retention rates in African Americans and Emerging Scholars and what the overlap may be between the two groups. It was stated that the overlap number is not available today but could be supplied at a later date.
- It was suggested that we look at the overlap to determine if there is more that can be done to provide an intervention.
- The question was raised regarding what resources are being offered to emerging scholars throughout the semester especially knowing that they don’t quite meet the minimum standards. It was stated that there is a program that extends the whole year for Emerging Scholars. We are always trying to enhance what we are doing with this priority population of students. We see the trends and we know they are in need of additional support. The ASC staff has been working on additional ways to do outreach and get them connected. We have worked on a Living Learning Community. It was added that the primary addition to support this year was the bridge. The addition from a couple years ago has been the 3-credit APS class that is required for all first-year emerging scholars. Jianna Howard who runs the Fannie Barrier Williams Scholars program and oversees the emerging scholars outreach does a targeted point of outreach and does additional programming based on these things. For APS, she meets and communicates with the instructors regularly to check on the progress and needs of those students. She will add additional programming if necessary, based on the feedback she gets from the instructors. The outreach programming will then extend through the spring semester. We do extended outreach throughout their time here. The hardest part is that when they become upper class students, they are not self-identifying and don’t necessarily chose to hang out together. Therefore, we emphasize reaching out to them and going to them. Especially those that are on academic recovery or have shown concern through the flags we get; they are prioritized as individuals that need that support.
- The question was raised in regards to the academic deficiencies that are known for the emerging scholars population and if there are any academic intervention strategies being done like utilizing faculty or group them in classes with stronger students. It was stated that a lot of the intervention and outreach is academic based. The feedback and ideas of additional ways to support these students by utilizing certain instructors for this cohort is appreciated and will be looked into more. The APS course is academic-based, skills-based and includes ways to connect to resources. It does have the wholistic mentoring and advisement pieces like the 1-credit APS course, but it is significantly more academic based. In addition, if individuals would like to discuss how programs are tailored for specific majors, they should reach out so ASC can partner with them. It was added that conversations are occurring around these questions, and we are working on ways to develop our curriculum to help make students successful. We are looking at the data on what we currently do and what the challenges are. There are a lot of things that are know that we can begin to implement. We are also looking at other institutions that have already begun to address these challenges and determining ways we can implement them here. These conversations are just starting, so no specifics can be given on what will be implemented. The emerging scholar population has gone up and will continue to go up. We are seeing a different population of students today than we saw 5-10 years ago. This means we have to change the way we teach our students because the students aren’t the same. We are behind with making these changes, but that isn’t anyone’s fault because it is the natural evolution of things. We are getting there and hope to be there over the next couple years as we make changes and expect to see the impacts in our retention numbers as well.
- It was suggested that we should be looking at DEW rates to identify students that would benefit from a targeted intervention. It can be difficult to get students to utilize resources even though faculty encourage them to do so.
- The statement was made that the retention rates and academic intervention of the African Americans and Emerging Scholars is an important conversation, but we need to remember that the reason these students leave may not be entirely academic. It can also be about the culture or climate and whether they feel welcome here which can have a lot to do with the fact that we are a primarily white institution. Some students’ reluctance to go into the ASC may have to do with how they feel there. We need look at how diverse our faculty is and do these students have faculty members they can identify with.
- The question was raised if the student survey could include some of the issues of belonging and comfort. It was stated that we do have demographic information and we have information on satisfaction and sense of belonging. We can look at putting it together. With all of the qualitative work, we just haven’t had a chance to do that analysis yet. It was added that a sense of belonging was in the last strategic plan and the ASC spent a lot of time on it. One of the main things that came out in the service departments was representation matters. How do we put ourselves out there in marketing? Our staffing is our staffing, and we do our best to hire a diverse staff. One thing we can’t control all the time is our student staff. For the ASC and other offices, making the students have a sense of belonging is really important. This is big picture conversations that we have had in the past and continue to have. This is a good reminder for other offices that haven’t thought about the wholistic image of are students coming into a place where they feel welcome.
- The suggestion was made that maybe more data is needed to correlate the challenge of academics and sense of belonging more robustly. Once this is done, there can be some obvious solutions, but this requires a deeper analysis. This might be a worthwhile place to put some resources in to.
- The question was asked regarding the funding support for the Fannie Barrier Williams program since the funding support from the transformation funds did not work out. It was stated that we are still working on the funding. There was a line in the transformation funding that indicted additional funding and we are following up with SUNY. In addition, work has been done with the Grants office on a Department of Education grant. Hopefully, we should know in the next couple of months on the grant. We are also working with Advancement with some possible interest. It was added that takes a while on the private side for funding, but we are still working on it.
- The question was raised regarding the student survey and if there are any plans at breaking down the data by undergraduate and graduate. It was stated that the data is available and can be passed on to the committee. They way we broke it down was by theme so individual areas could take action.
- The statement was made that in terms of the transfer retention, Nursing brings in at least 200 students a year into the RN to BSN program. Many of them step out of the program for some reason or another (job, family, a new baby, etc.), but then we recapture them. This may be happening in the psych completion program and the business programs that have adult students in them and step out due to life circumstances and then come back. Are we watching this in some way? It was stated that we started looking at the ODC numbers but realized that we are having a hard time getting all of the data. As we are working some of the dashboards, we are talking about breaking it down by program and see how it tracks. It is definitely one of the nuances when we look at serving different students that might have different needs that come in and out. That is a good point that we should be looking at. It was added that the way that we calculate retention is based on if the student is enrolled a year or two years later. If a student happens to take that semester off a year later, they wouldn’t be counted in the retention. If they came back for the second year, they would be counted again. It is not necessarily the students that formally withdraw are the ones that didn’t retain, it could be that they are taking a semester off or some other length of time.
- The question was raised regarding the freshman retention rates by high school GPA and there is only a small number within the 80-83 range or below 80 range. It was stated that below 80 is 50-65. The 80-83 range is 100-140 over the past couple of years. This is per cohort. It was expressed that these numbers have climbed considerably. This is a notable success and the campus determine whether it bears investigating further to see what is going on there. It was stated that there was a jump with EOP students in that cohort and a lot of EOP students fell within that GPA range. We are looking into how many are EOP students to follow-up on that particular area.
- The question was raised regarding if we are looking at the students that are not getting services, completing surveys, not engaging or participating to develop strategies and high impact practices for the middle group that gets lost in the rush of helping others because the ones filling out the surveys will be either very happy or very dissatisfied. It was stated that with the larger surveys, it is clear what groups are responding. We haven’t dug as further into who isn’t responding and how do we get that feedback. There are focus groups that individuals have done. A big part of our student success and equity intensive is going to look at a more robust way we collect information with student voice. This is a big priority for the program. It was added that there have been questions about getting help for various student populations. Through the SSEI initiative we will be able to gather the information in question because it goes beyond which population needs what kind of help. It is not about getting students into an extra help program. It is about putting those learning components that they need in order to be successful directly into our course content. There have been some recent Senate resolutions regarding changes to courses. This shows we have been doing continuous improvement all along, we just have to start documenting it to show the changes made us better.
Scholarship Return on Investment
(Document is available in Teams)
Dr. Kelly provided an update on the scholarship return on investment. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- Appreciation was extended for the scholarship return on investment update.
- The question was raised regarding if the students who receive scholarships are surveyed as to why they came to Brockport to see if the scholarship encouraged their decision. It was stated that the students who do not come to Brockport are surveyed and there is a question on that survey asking if they didn’t come because they were not awarded a bigger scholarship and some students do say yes. We do not survey the students that receive scholarships to see if the scholarship was the specific reason they came to Brockport, but this opportunity can be looked into.
- Clarification was requested on the Fall 2022 Cohort sheet and if the retention rate difference to overall fall 2022 was the comparison between the cohort and the global retention rate. It was stated that was correct.
- The question was raised regarding if the change in scholarship amount correlates to the number of students that scholarships brought in. It was stated that a couple years ago we looked at how competitive we were for scholarships. When looking in SUNY BI, we could see a report that showed the aid amount students receive, merit based, scholarship aid and Pell. We were on the lower end. We knew we needed to be more competitive with our scholarships. We tested it a little bit and fall 2022 was our bigger scholarship improvement. Fall 2023 we made more enhancements to improve the amounts students were getting. The only amount that is changing next year is the out-of-state scholarship will decrease. This is to offset the decrease in out-of-state tuition. The amount of the scholarship makes a big difference. We hear from the students all of the time that they are getting a certain amount from another school, and they are typically private schools. We do a lot of financial literacy with students, so they understand the amount of scholarships they are getting versus the cost of attendance. Also, reading the fine print to see how long the scholarship in for and the criteria to keep the scholarship. Cost is on the top of the list for students, and it is very important to them and their families to be able to afford to go to college. There are more families that are averse to taking loans and going into debt. We are in a strong position to help families to find an option that will work.
- It was stated that there is additional information that can be shared regarding demographics for scholarships. It will be sent to Dr. Rhodes and uploaded for members to review.
Campus Based Fee Review Committee Report
Dr. Hallenbeck-McPhall provided a report from the Campus Based Fee Review Committee. The following questions, answers and discussion points occurred:
- Appreciation was extended for the report from the Campus Based Fee Review Committee.
- Clarification was requested that the comprehensive fee would not impact course fees. It was stated that was correct.
- A suggestion was made that other programs consider placing a statement on department websites regarding course fees like Nursing does for accreditation purposes.
- The question was raised if there are guidelines from SUNY prior to submitting the requested increases so we have a better understanding what will be approved. It was stated that with the potential of the comprehensive fee, there are discussions of using the consumer price index instead of the HEPI. Also, giving the campuses more flexibility in setting the fees. We have also heard the reverse of that. There isn’t a firm answer until we get more guidance from SUNY.
The statement was made that it appears the campus puts a lot of thought, preparation and coordination for SUNY to deny the increases without better guidance about what will be approved. It was stated that we do put a lot of hours into the submission, but the exercise that we do to complete the submission is beneficial. It gives us a point in time analysis to review the IFR account balances to see if we need to make adjustments internally. This was one the key drivers to show we needed support in Athletics.
Additional Items from the Committee
The following item was discussed:
- Members were encouraged to wear their Brockport apparel tomorrow for Green and Gold Friday.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:08 a.m.
JC/DR/mw