St. Cloud State University
Strategic Planning Committee Minutes
February 15, 2001, 7:45 a.m. St. Croix

Members Present: Jim Bertram, John Burgeson, Marlene DeVoe, Judy Foster, Bonnie Hedin , Jeanne Hites, Judy Kilborn, Pat Krueger, Arthur Mehrhoff, Glen Palm, Mike Pesch, Mary Soroko, Addie Turkowski, Jay Vora, and Brenda Wentworth

Members Absent: Deb Binsfeld, Debra Japp, John Palmer, Karen Thoms, Fred Walker, and Eric Wimberger

Support Staff: Subimal Chopra and Lucie Schwartzkopf

Guest: David Shupe, MnSCU Director for Academic Accountability

Guest Observer: Hirosuke Honda, from Japan. He is doing administrative research and has an interest in Strategic Planning

  1. Minutes from February 1, 2001, were approved with no revisions.

  2. We will place the mission statement on the listserv for discussion. Arthur Mehrhoff was asked to list some of his comments from a previous meeting on the strategic planning listserv for discussion.

  3. Discussed idea of inviting President Saigo to participate in a discussion about updating the Vision and Mission statement of the Strategic Planning Committee. It was decided that a thorough discussion by the committee on this topic should take place prior to inviting President Saigo. Jeanne will give him highlights of this listserv discussion.

  4. David Shupe, MnSCU Director for Academic Accountability.

    Distributed and discussed hand-out: "Quality, Accountability, Assessment". He conveyed there are choices to be made in how to assess student outcomes.
    1. Standardized nationalized tests are one option for assessing student learning. Winona State is using this method.
    2. Mr. Shupe invited us to work together to do something (faculty, MnSCU, and administration). We need to determine what the outcomes should be, and the right people to put the assessment together. He raised the question of working together and working differently. Who will decide? What would it take to give you greater capacity (framework) to help calibrate this? The thought is to give students something by which they can assess themselves. This is feasible.
    3. The bar is going up nationally and regionally. Questions are being asked:
      1. How well prepared are your students for the future they're walking into?
      2. How well can we answer the above question?
    4. This is not a short-term task. He shared he's trying to set a larger context for the committee. Down-town St. Paul is interested in accountability measures because a third of the states are already requiring them. Academically, measuring numbers of graduates and so forth doesn't make much of a difference, and doesn't really answer question #1 above. The legislatures enjoy accountability measures (in terms of numbers of graduates, etc.) because it answers their questions. He expressed he was not mandating that this must be done. Rather his role is to share that he sees it is a matter of time until it will become "what will be imposed" rather than "if something will be imposed". It feels like an imposition, and it is not where Minnesota wants to go. Rather, we are interested in student learning. The role he is playing is to not be silent. He is trying to convey that the institutions know best what they can do. He wants to advocate that the individual institutions choose what they want to do. He is suggesting that we would do well if we were to say to ourselves: "Let us together begin to figure out how to make our student learning outcomes more visible." He's learned that if MnSCU realizes nothing is being done on an issue, they have a tendency to set parameters. However, if there is activity going on, they will lean toward allowing the institution to determine its course.

Planned meeting times

Thursday, March 01, 2001, 7:45 am - 9:00 am, St. Croix
Thursday, March 22, 2001, 7:45 am - 9:00 am, St. Croix
Thursday, April 05, 2001, 7:45 am - 9:00 am, St. Croix
Thursday, April 19, 2001, 7:45 am - 9:00 am, St. Croix
Thursday, May 03, 2001, 7:45 am - 9:00 am, St. Croix

Untitled Document