Seven members of the Student Success Task Force (Douglass, Rode, Eaton, Forest, Gage, Lusk, and Rigg) were in attendance and heard reports from five of the six subgroups – campus climate, impacted majors, advising, retention and graduation and VSA. A brief overview of the work for the sixth subgroup on concept papers was also given. Cassidy and Seaver joined the meeting and provided relevant information relating to survey administration and NIU policies and procedures as needed. Themes began to emerge from the discussion of the questions each of the subgroups raised.
Six members (Castle, Cisneros, Krishnamurthi, Parker, Pritchard, and Townsend) of the Curricular Innovations task force met and separated into three subgroups, integration of new technology in learning environments, implementation of a ‘themed year’, and methods to expand and enhance engaged learning. These groups met for approximately 90 minutes and tried to 1) identify and frame questions of interest related to their issue; 2) relate these questions to a small number of overarching goals; 3) identify potential resource needs (both internal and external to NIU) to address questions/goals; and 4) identifying both initiatives and/or strategies that could be implemented to achieve the broad goals. Discussions were open, lively, and productive. Task force members in attendance were encouraged to communicate and/or meet with other members of their subgroups (especially those not in attendance) during the next four weeks.
At the meeting currently scheduled for Friday, January 11, 2008, a member from each of the six subgroups from the Student Success Task force and seven subgroups from the Curricular Innovations Task Force will be asked to summarize the subgroup activities and outline overarching questions/goals and various strategies/initiatives associated with each goal. Subgroups are welcome to invite Douglass and/or Changnon to participate in discussions prior to the January 11th meeting.
At approximately 11:30 am both task forces joined and Douglass and Changnon provided a brief overview of their sessions. The chairs re-emphasized the activities (i.e., identifying overarching questions/goals and related strategies/initiatives) that the subgroups would be responsible for developing prior to the January 11th meeting. Douglass noted that a library resource area had been developed next to her office in the Campus Life Building, Room 110. Also, subgroups were challenged to develop discussions in Blackboard to further the communication of information between members and the chairs. An issue was brought up that many individuals would not be able to make the Jan. 11 meeting due to faculty meetings and other pre-semester obligations. The Chairs will send out a email message asking for feedback. It could be that one task force meets in the morning and the other in the afternoon. The meeting adjourned about noon.