Minutes from Meeting of Jan. 26

Attendees: Fred, JoAnn, Katie, Courtney Clayton, Katherine, Brad, Taiwo, RHA, Cedric, Doug, Alan, Tim, Rosemary B. Jason, Stephen D, Meagan

The three sub-groups made brief presentations on their work. Peer mentor programs review -- Alan G. FYA + 1 programs review -- Rosemary B. Academic programs review --Rosemary A.

See the reports submitted by each group for additional details..

Discussion followed the group presentations.

We discussed the feasibility and desirability of having a common reading experience and the formats such a program might take. After looking at the whole of the QEP as we have developed it, we agreed that the common reading experience was not necessary. We agreed to drop this idea.

Have agreement on outcomes covered in +1, curriculum needs to be developed and timing for implementation needs to be discussed, Do we develop peer mentors in year 1, then implement +1 until the following year, Do we pilot some things in the first years and then develop more fully,

JoAnn reported that Academic Services is implementing a peer advisor program, but we need to be clear that this is not for QEP.

During the discussion of the academic portions of the QEP, Courtney expressed concern about the first year students who end up on probation at the end of their first semesters. We agreed that supporting these students is important, and that this is something that can be addressed through the +1 program.

Our QEP will include the following components:

Orientation programs (Peer Mentors will be drawn from the pool of Orientation Leaders. One does not have to be a Peer Mentor if selected to be an Orientation Leader, but all Peer Mentors will also be Orientation Leaders.)

Convergence center

Peer mentor program (training and support for peer mentors, recruitment and training of new mentors)

FYA +1 (FYA sub-program, +1 sub-program, Faculty advisor development to support FYA +1, Staff development to support FYA +1, Student activities sub-program) Academic programs -- with Faculty Development for each aspect

Writing program/Speaking program/Information literacy program Coordination of services from academic support centers and the centers work together to develop the modules.

Discussion followed.

We agreed that these aspects of the program build on what we currently have in place. We can make the case that the new things we are introducing -- peer mentors, the +1 "class", the writing/speaking/library modules -- will enhance programs we currently provide.

We discussed the broad timeline for implementing the QEP. There was support for the idea of piloting some aspects of the program in the first year. Everything does not have to be introduced in full on day one. We can pilot, assess, improve, and expand through the course of the QEP.

Next steps:

1. Add detail to the materials submitted by the sub-groups 2. Flesh out the time line 3. Refer back to our data analysis and make reference to this as we make the case for the aspects of the program we are proposing. 4. Develop the assessment plan.

Rosemary A. will distribute the literature review, with emphasis on research about the use of peer mentors.

Taiwo will review the proposals and provide feedback that will help us start developing the assessment plan.

Alan will give Paul Messplay the materials we've developed so far so he can start addressing the resource needs.

Next meeting is February 9 at 4 p.m., probably in GW 215.