Date: June 5, 2001
Time:
12:00 to 2:00
Location: 307 Kerr Hall
1. Welcome
Members Present:
Francisco Hernandez, Barry Bowman, Karen Eckert, Tom Vani, Lan Dyson,
Wlad Godzich,
Staff Present:
Betty Rush, Ernie Hudson
Guests: Linda Kittle
2. Agenda:
Chair’s
Items
Summer
Operations
Data Warehouse Review
Student
Profile
3. Chair’s Items:
The committee discussed meeting over the
summer. Several committee members
stated they would be away from campus at various times. Committee members will be notified if a
meeting of the committee will be held during the summer.
4. Summer Operations
This summer will be the last summer without State Funded support. Student Affairs has been interviewing Student Affairs Units as to how summer quarter operations will impact them. Student Affairs will interview other campus support units (transportation, etc.) as to the impact that summer operations will have on them as well. Some of the questions to be answered include: What do customers want? What are other campuses doing? What are the core student services? In addition to interviewing campus units, a survey of current student needs and a survey of summer students needs, will be conducted, as well as gathering information during this summer session.
There was discussion of offering incentives to students to attend the campus during the summer. Santa Barbara and other campuses are offering incentives this summer for the first year of their State supported summer program.
There was also discussion about Registration Fee Funding and how during the current academic year schedule, Registration Fee Funding is separate at UCSC from other Student Fee Income and is used to fund Student Services operations. During the proposed summer quarter, the Registration Fee Funding, as currently projected, is to be bundled with other Student Fee and State income, which would mean that Student support units would have to offer additional services without additional funding or charge fees for services. (An example is OPERS, which is currently funded by Registration Fees, but would not receive additional Registration Fees for the summer under this scenario. In order to offer student services during the summer quarter equivalent to that offered during the current academic year, they would have to charge fees for services.)
It was suggested that a campus decision must be made soon about how funding will be provided for the summer quarter and what the campus plan will be for academic support services funding. As a principle, it was recommended that the campus should assume we have collected Registration Fees and should not charge for services that are traditionally Registration Fee Funded. It would seem unfair for the academic plans to have funding available, while the academic support plans would not have additional funding. There is concern that summer quarter students would have issue with this scenario in that they paid the Registration Fee but are not receiving the benefits through student support services that they receive during the current academic year.
The committee discussed that some academic support offices might need only incremental funding, while some might need substantial assistance. This is an issue that will need to determined in the development of the campus Business Model.
The Interim Business Model discussion addressed the various elements that need to be determined in order to operate a summer session for the academic support units. The elements discussed include:
- Funding
- Effective way to deliver services
- Fund units that are Registration Fee Funded now
- Registration Fee funded services should be open
- Registration Fee funding should be incremental (based on the fraction of students in summer versus academic year)
- Priority list of services to be provided in year 1 and year 2
Summer Session believes that they should get funding and allocate to campus.
Student Services believes that they should get funding. Need affirmation from campus.
There was committee discussion about the first two years of program relying on the Summer Session office to operate Summer Session and when we have developed and are a full quarter, we would no longer need a Summer Session Office. The discussion continued with the question - do we just move to a 4th quarter now?
Other student fees (fees passed by referendum) were discussed. If the fees are to be collected for the summer quarter, will the referendums need to be reissued? It seems that some might need to be revisited and some might not.
5. Data
Warehouse (DWH) Discussion
Linda Kittle, Director of Strategic Planning, presented the results of the Data Warehouse Review. She requested the Academic Support Planning Advisory Committe to:
· Provide input on strategic direction – consider the benefits of 3-4 options
· Provide input on a proposed structure for continued development (especially setting priorities).
· Provide input on how to address policy decisions on issues such as access.
Linda provided information about the Data Warehouse to the committee
including:
History of the System – The
system was implemented in 1994, and now is the repository for such campus
systems as the FIS ODS, SIS Pilot, Business Objects, PPS Monthly and daily, and
the FDX annual. The system was upgraded
in 1999-2000.
A campus survey of the DWH resulted in the following information:
1. System Users Level of FIS User Division of FIS User
10-20 people Clerical 28% Academic
Divisions 31%
benefit from any Managerial 14% BAS 22%
one DWH user. Professional 54% Chancellor’s Office 13%
Other 4% Student Affairs 22%
Other 12%
2. More that 70% of the users
are satisfied with the DWH.
3. Analysts and users wanted
more user support, subject matter experts, and more data. Senior Administrators wanted more student
data and the ability to model and run possible scenarios.
4. Options for the strategic
direction of the DWA include:
· I. Status Quo – FIS, SIS, Facilities
information currently available, accessible by interested users.
· II. Additional
FIS, PPS, SIS, Budget; more frequent facilities information; accessible by more
interested users.
· III. Additional enhancements to DID, PPS, SIS;
more frequent facilities; additional data elements from other sources;
accessible by users at many levels and interests (include senior
administrators).
Committee members responded to option II in that there should be
additional enhancements to the system, which would be accessible by interested
users. Senior Administrators felt that
they would not have the time to access the information, but would rely on staff
to access the information. They would
also like to see continued enhancements of the information in the system so
that more information would be available to them.
In response to Linda’s question about where the administration of the
Data Warehouse belongs (reports to), Francisco stated that the system should
remain in Planning and Budget because most of the information relates to the
budget and expenditure tracking that the Budget Office oversees.
It was discussed that further Data Warehouse administration questions
should come back to the committee for discussion.
6. Student
Profile
Due to time constraints this agenda item was not discussed. It will be carried forward to the next meeting of the Academic Support Advisory Committee.
Tentative meeting dates and times for the 2001-02
Academic Year:
The committee is currently scheduled to meet
from 2-4 pm on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month.
October 9, 2001
October 23, 2001
November 13, 2001
November 27, 2001
December 11, 2001
January 8, 2002
January 22, 2002
February 12, 2002
February 26, 2002
March 12, 2002
March 26, 2002
April 9. 2002
April 23, 2002
May 14, 2002
May 28, 2002
June 11, 2002
June 25, 2002