MINUTES

ACADEMIC PLANNING COMMITTEE

Meeting of April 23, 2002

The Academic Planning Committee met on April 23, 2002 at 9:30 am in room 481 McHenry.

Present: George Brown (Chair), Ed Houghton, Bruce Schumm (GC), Steve Thorsett (COR), Martin Chemers, Allison Galloway (CPB), Carol Freeman (CEP), Dave Kliger, Wlad Godzich, Steve Kang, Lynda Goff, Frank Talamantes, and Betsy Moses (staff).

Absent: Bob Miller, Bob Meister, Jamus Lin (student rep) and Kathleen Dettman

Guests: Galen Jarvinen

1. Chair Announcements

The enrollment management retreat will be jointly convened by Student Affairs Vice Chancellor Francisco Hernandez and APC chair George Brown on Wednesday, June 5. The Academic Support Committee, Academic Planning Committee, Academic Senate committee on Admissions and Financial Aid, College Provosts, CPB’s sub-committee on enrollment management, and Assistant Deans are invited. The morning session will be dedicated to statistical data and analysis provided by the Office of Admissions and the Office of Planning and Budget, and the afternoon will be dedicated to strategic discussion of enrollment management. The afternoon agenda will focus on campus undergraduate recruitment and yield, and is intended to enact revisions in time to influence the fall 2002 recruitment cycle. There will not be a discussion of admissions comprehensive review; this topic will be discussed in a subsequent meeting.

2. Approval of April 9 Minutes.

The draft minutes of April 9 were approved without comment.

3. External Reviews: Draft Schedule and Draft Self-Study

Chair Brown summarized changes to the academic department external review process that have been incorporated as a consequence of previous APC discussion. Handouts distributed for today’s meeting summarized the external review schedule. They included the Department Self-Study; Appendix I: Overall Department Profile; Appendix II: Undergraduate Profile; and Appendix III: Graduate Program Profile.

External Review Schedule

After some discussion, it was agreed that the senate reports would serve a dual function. Firstly, they would stand alone as valuable internal documents, assessing the status of academic programs and recommending changes; and secondly, they would serve as a basis for selected and appropriate questions to the external review team.

Scheduling review visits during spring may be problematic for some disciplines where professional meetings conflict. The date for the review visit will determine when the senate reports must be submitted. Each fall the VPAA’s office will notify the senate and divisions of departments under review and include the established review dates. The dates will determine the senate’s report deadlines.

Senate committees will be invited to submit items for the 18-month follow-up review. Subsequent divisional follow-up reports will be transmitted to the senate committees.

External Review Committees will be asked to complete their reports within four weeks of the visit.

Department Self-Study

The charge, the self-study, and visit agenda will be organized into three categories: scholarly direction, undergraduate teaching program, and graduate program. Limiting the size of the document will make the document more manageable and more useful.

Members suggested deleting the following questions:

• Are there adequate numbers of faculty to support the program?
• What resources would be required to increase the size of the graduate program by 50%?

Members suggested adding the following questions, some of which are or will be included in the appendices:

• List of undergraduate and graduate students and their faculty advisors.
• Extramural funding generated.
• Department expressed philosophy of its scholarly direction.
• Department perception of how its programs compare to others across the globe.
• Academic contributions to the field.
• Student placement in international programs.
• Other unique programs offered by the department.

The self-study will provide an opportunity for departmental introspection as well as material for external assessment.

Appendix I: Overall Department Profile

The department will provide material for which it is the central repository; the Office of Planning and Budget will provide other data. This will improve data consistency across all reviews and reduce workload for the department.

Members suggested adding the following items:

• Major faculty major honors.
• Public service accomplishments.

Appendix II: Undergraduate Profile

Course syllabi will inform CEP of the current status of courses, many approved years ago and never subsequently reviewed. One member suggested that CEP might consider a sunset clause on new course approvals to ensure syllabi currency. The consensus was that syllabi for all courses offered in the past three years be submitted.

Members suggested adding the following elements:

• Student internships.
• Number and placement sites.
• Minors offered and the number of students declared in the minor.
• Student gender and ethnic diversity.
• Percentage of courses taught by ladder and non-ladder instructors.
• Special programs offered, such as outreach, tutoring, or other support activities.

Integrating undergraduate profile with student assessment measures described in the campus WASC proposal may be feasible.

Appendix III: Graduate Program Profile

All measures listed will be valuable for the oversight of current graduate programs by the Graduate Division and Graduate Council.

Members suggested the following additions:

• Student gender and ethnic diversity.
• Quality of admitted students with financial support.

A pilot survey program for graduate students, undergraduate majors, and “client” departments is part of the current Mathematics Department review. Similar or identical survey instruments will be incorporated into all department reviews. Survey samples will be added to the proposed review guidelines. Chair Brown and staff will meet with department managers and Assistant Deans to further refine the review guidelines.

4. Member Items.

Lynda Goff suggested that comprehensive review of undergraduate admissions be on a future agenda. The Admissions and Financial Aid committee Chair John Tamkun is preparing a recommendation for advancing the campus to undergraduate admissions selectivity. The proposal may not be complete until next year.

The committee agreed that future APC topic should be the role of the department chair at UCSC.

Attest: George Brown, Chair