College-wide Governance MeetingNovember 2, 2011

Agenda

1. Middle States Update (Luzadis)2. SUNY Senator Report3. Student Life Committee4. Instructional Quality Report

a. Resolution #2011-02

5. Executive Committee Report

ESF Reaffirmation of Accreditation by Middle States Commission on Higher

Education (MSCHE)

Faculty Governance Meeting2 November 2011

Accreditation Background

• Strengthens institution through self-regulation and commitment to continuous self-assessment

• Federally approved accreditation agency, Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE), creates and implements review structure

• ESF agrees to comply with MSCHE Standards of Excellence• Best practices for higher education

• Peer review every 10 years after initial approval (2011-12) • Periodic review completed by ESF at 5 year point

Review of the Process

• Two parts– Self-Study on a Selected Topic

• Allows us to devote concentrated attention to topic• MSCHE suggested that we use this approach• Sustainability chosen by Executive Cabinet as topic

– Demonstration of compliance with MSCHE Standards of Excellence

• Through development of a “Document Roadmap” prepared separately from the Self-Study report

ESF’s Self-Study Report

• Advancing Sustainability at ESF: A Selected Topics Self-Study for MSCHE Reaccreditation

• http://www.esf.edu/middlestates/

• Developed through a highly participatory process directly involving nearly 100 ESF faculty, staff, and students– Input from full campus community

External Evaluation Team Visit

• November 6 -9, 2011• Meetings with students, faculty, staff, administrators

• Open session purposes• To help team to understand ESF• To discuss sustainability efforts at ESF

• Open session for faculty• Tuesday, November 8, 408 Baker, 4:30 – 5:15

• Open session for staff• Tuesday, November 8, 408 Baker, 1:15 – 2:00

The Evaluation Team

• Chair – Thomas Buchanan• President, University of Wyoming

• Co-Chair – Barnett Hamberger• Assistant Provost, New York University

• Members• Michelle Appel, Assoc. Dir. Enrollment Planning & Policy, Inst.

Research, Planning & Assessment, University of MD, College Park• Tom Apple, Provost and Chem Prof, University of Delaware• Arthur Johnson, Former Provost, Poli Sci Prof, University of MD,

Baltimore County• Margaret Plympton, Vice Pres Finance and Admin, Lehigh University

Next Steps

• MSCHE External Team sends their report to ESF for comment in December

• Team report and ESF response are submitted to MSCHE Commission

• MSCHE Commission makes decision on reaccreditation in March 2012

Questions?www.esf.edu/middlestates

Steering Committee Members• Robert Davis, Director of Forest Properties• Michael Kelleher, Director of Renewable Energy Systems• Danette Desimone, Assistant Director of Business Affairs• Maureen Fellows, Director of Institutional Planning and Governmental Relations• Robert French, Vice President for Enrollment Management and Marketing• Richard Hawks, Chair and Professor, Landscape Architecture Department• Rene Germain, Professor, Forest and Natural Resources Management Department• Kimberly Schulz, Associate Professor, Environmental and Forest Biology• Gary Scott, Faculty Governance Representative, Chair and Professor, PBE • Richard Smardon, Professor, Environmental Studies Department• Arthur Stipanovic, Chair and Professor, Chemistry Department• Anna Stewart, Environmental and Forest Biology, PhD Candidate• Valerie Luzadis, Assistant Provost, Professor and Chair, ES Department

University Faculty Senate MeetingPurchase College, October 20-22, 2011

Resolution on Shared Services

• Shared Presidencies without consultation of UFS, College Councils and campus governance

• Resolved that:– Policy of shared presidencies by carefully considered– Governance bodies be consulted andhave working

groups for shared services in the regional campus alliance

– Shared services only after serious consultation with governance bodies (BEFORE action)

Resolution on Evaluation of Shared Services• System Administration is encouraging campuses to

share services AND establishing an oversight process• Resolved that:

– System-wide committee of faculty/students/administrative staff to guide process

– Provide benchmarking and procedures for accountability– Measure extent of enhanced spending on academic

programs is achieved– Transparency of process– Report “no less frequently” than annually

Of SUNY Central:

“Failure to acknowledge the wisdom and knowledge of faculty and staff –students don’t have longevity of the faculty and staff.”

Susan Camp, OswegoCampus Governance Leader

Campus Governance Leaders Topics

• Shared Services/Shared Presidencies• Grade Change Policy

– Resolution 2011-03 submitted by Shannon/Bongarten in IQAS for revision and discussion

• Course Evaluations

ESF Academic ESF Academic Integrity Policy and Integrity Policy and

Procedures:Procedures:

Faculty Perceptions and Faculty Perceptions and ParticipationParticipation

Ginny CollinsCraig DavisKelley DonaghyValerie LuzadisTsutomu Nakatsugawa Ken TissJulie White

academic

integrity@ESF2008

Academic integrity policies and procedures are Academic integrity policies and procedures are important for developing ethical students.important for developing ethical students.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

strongly agree

agree

neutral

disagree

strongly disagree

percent of respondents (of 45)

Survey sent to 170 faculty

In the last academic year, how many violations of In the last academic year, how many violations of academic integrity do you know occurred in your academic integrity do you know occurred in your classes?classes?

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0

1

2-5

>5

nu

mb

er o

f o

ccu

rren

ces

percent of respondents (of 45)

~10

~14

~16

If you had incidents of academic dishonesty during If you had incidents of academic dishonesty during the last academic year, what was your response the last academic year, what was your response (select any combination of answers that apply)?(select any combination of answers that apply)?

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

settled issue with student

reported to chair/director

reported to Student Life

did nothing

other

percent of respondents (of 30)

If you had incidents of academic dishonesty in the If you had incidents of academic dishonesty in the past 4-5 years, how frequently have you reported past 4-5 years, how frequently have you reported these?these?

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

never

sometimes

always

percent of respondents (of 29)

I am familiar with ESFI am familiar with ESF’’s policies and procedures s policies and procedures regarding academic integrity.regarding academic integrity.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

very familiar

familiar

neutral

unfamiliar

very unfamiliar

percent of respondents (of 45)

ESFESF’’s academic integrity policies and procedures s academic integrity policies and procedures are cumbersome.are cumbersome.

0 10 20 30 40 50

N/A

strongly agree

agree

neutral

disagree

strongly disagree

percent of respondents (of 45)

ESFESF’’s academic integrity policies and procedures s academic integrity policies and procedures are fair to students and facultyare fair to students and faculty

0 10 20 30 40 50

N/A

strongly agree

agree

neutral

disagree

strongly disagree

percent of respondents (of 45)

to faculty

to students

ESF Faculty Perceptions and Participation:

Low participation/reporting rate• Familiarity with procedures• Time commitment for follow-through• Perceived fairness of outcome• Other

The The Judicial Judicial Process: Process: First First OffenseOffense

Instructor Suspects Violation – Notifies Student

Instructor Notifies Judicial Coordinator(prior violations?)

No ViolationFile Destroyed

Instructor Offers Resolution

Instructor Contacts Student & Determines Responsibility

1st Offense Repeat Offender

Student Accepts:Offense and Resolution

Documented and Filed with Judicial

Coordinator

Student Does Not

Accept

Instructor Documents Offense to

Student and Judicial

Coordinator

The Judicial The Judicial Process: Process: Repeat Repeat Offense & Offense & AppealsAppeals

Repeat Offender

Student Does Not

Accept

Instructor Documents Offense to Student

and Judicial Coordinator

No ViolationFile Destroyed

Provost-Appointed Appeals Board

Student Accepts

Student Does Not

Accept

Appeal DeniedAppeal Accepted No Violation

File Destroyed Board Levies Sanctions

Provost Review

Review by Committee on Academic Honesty

(a) Offense

(b) Sanctions

The Judicial Process: The Judicial Process: SanctionsSanctions

1st Offense

Assignment/Exam Failure-and/or-

Course Failure

Reflection Paper

-educational-

2nd Offense

Disciplinary Probation

Assignment/Exam Failure-and/or-

Course Failure

Educational Project

3rd Offense

Suspension

4th Offense

Dismissal

Future Initiatives

-Streamline procedures-Improve faculty awareness of procedures

-Develop campus-wide culture of integrity

IQAS Committee Report 11/11

1. Research how ESF can better support instructional quality at individual and institutional levels.

2. Developing a proposal to modify process to select ESF Foundation teaching award

3. Work to improve the delivery and content of the end-of-course survey

Course Survey - Big Picture

• Course Surveys are an instructor tool, not for P+ T

• We would like flexibility both in the delivery method and in the content of the surveys.

• Current focus is improving delivery method, flexibility in adapting content of surveys will be next.

Survey open dates• Paper survey – Last two weeks of the semester,

instructor controlled. (~ 65% response rate)• Spring 10 – Started two weeks before the end of

the semester, ran through finals, no instructor control (86% response rate using “the stick”)

• Fall 10 – Last two weeks of the semester , no instructor control ( 39% response rate using a sweet “carrot”)

• Spring 11 – Instructor controlled start and stop dates (within a window), with flexibility for short courses and a default of last two weeks (30% response rate)

• Fall 11 – No change.

Proposed changes – Spring 2012

• Survey open period expanded from 2 to 3.5 weeks, instructor can still override

• Instructors will be able to track how many students in each class have completed the survey throughout open period

• Students will be able to select an option to not complete a given survey

Executive Committee Report

• Resolutions submitted to E. Comm.– Resolution 2011-01 – add/drop change of

procedure for summer classes – in COC for revision/review and comment

– Resolution 2011-02 – discussed previously– Resolution 2011-03 – grade change policy – in

IQAS for revision/review and comment

Want to influence campus life?

• Write a resolution (template on governance page) www.esf.edu/facgov/bylaws.htm

• Submit it to either the appropriate committee or to kdonaghy@esf.edu (word documents please)

Screen Shot of www.esf.edu/facgov/bylaws.htm as of 11/02/11 – 1:23 PM

Technology Committee

December 15th 2011

• Reading Morning• 10:00 AM Meeting• FERPA/Faculty Privacy/Disability Accommodations

Breakfast Meeting 9:40 AM for bagels/fruit/yogurt and coffee