SUNY New Paltz Academic Affairs Committee

Minutes of the October 28, 2003 Meeting

David Blankenship, Jason Carter, Lisa Chase, Hala Elhoweris, Ben Endres, Wilma Feliciano, Glenn Geher (Chair), Yoav Kaddar, Provost Lavallee (guest), Kelly Parmley (guest), Matthew Schwartz, Chi-Yang Tsai, Greg Wirszyla, , Mohammad Zunoubi

1. Minutes of the September 23 meeting were unanimously approved.

2. No announcements

3. Discussion of SEI plan with guests Provost Lavallee and Kelly Parmley Director of Institutional

Research (IR).

Glenn gave an overview and background for the idea of implementing a plan that would produce a new or revised format to the current SEI that are used on campus. The proposed plan with its timetable for administration was put together by Glenn and Kelly.

Kelly gave the committee some background information regarding SEI’s at other institutions and in Higher Education in general, how SEI’s are used (if for summery and/or as informative tools) and pointed to several articles that committee members could refer to.

Kelly suggested that the committee might consider taking these next steps in its work on this issue:

· Look at the history of SEI’s on our campus.

· Make the campus community aware that SEI’s are used on other campuses as well.

· Gather information regarding opinions and feelings on campus to SEI’s.

· That the committee should put forth recommendations for changes and/or revisions to the current SEI.

Kelly brought the “Cafeteria” plan as one example for a SEI version. This plan basically has a core of general questions that refer to all faculty in all areas across campus. In addition it also has a pool of questions from which faculty can draw from and would clearly relate to the faculty’s field of expertise.

Kelly’s main concern regarding her office and the administration of the SEI’ s is to make this whole process a more efficient and productive one.

Provost Lavallee supported the idea of the “Cafeteria” plan. His main concern is that questions, and especially the “core” questions, should be as objective as possible.

Ben asked that the committee’s role and responsibility with this plan and its implementation be clarified.

Provost Lavallee mentioned that the committee work on this plan in conjunction with other central committees that are directly affected by the SEI’s such as Tenure & Reappointment and other governance bodies on campus.

The provost asked not to over emphasize the importance of the SEI’s.

David B. mentioned that the SEI is only one way to evaluate teaching and that it should be put in the whole context when addressing the issue of evaluating teaching.

Glenn concluded the meeting by summarizing and setting the next steps to be taken in the plan:

· Together with Kelly he will come up with a plan of validity and reliability.

· Gather faculty and student opinions on the subject.

· Address the history of the SEI process here on campus

· Begin to make actual content changes to the current SEI.

Meeting adjourned at 12:30pm

Respectfully submitted,

Yoav Kaddar