Campus Resources and Planning Committee
October
8, 2010
Present: Bart
Finzel, Madeline Maxeiner, Mark Privratsky, Andy Sharpe, Josh Preston,
Martin
Seggelke, Margaret Kuchenreuther, Lowell Rasmussen, Jacquie Johnson,
Sara
Haugen, Sydney Sweep, Dave Swenson, Dave Aronson
Guests: Gwen
Rudney, Sandy Olson-Loy, Pareena Lawrence, Jim Hall
Minutes
of September 17, 2010 and October 1, 2010 were approved as presented.
Announcements
CRPC will not meet on October 15. Roger Wareham and Jim Hall are on the
agenda for the October 22 meeting.
Continue
discussion of Blue Ribbon Task Force Recommendations
Bart asked Chancellor Johnson to talk about the three
initiatives that are already underway.
Recruitment and Retention
Jacquie discussed a number of topics listed under
recruitment. Regarding increasing the number of degree seeking students we have
already undertaken a number of things to increase applications: marketing to
students electronically by using social networking; our second year of partnership
with SUFE; exploring other international partnerships; visiting community colleges to
set up partnerships; and putting in place transfer guides for selected majors
with community colleges
Additionally, Bryan Hermann is looking at social networking strategies
to do national recruiting that is more niche based. Regarding retention, Jacquie noted that
the Board of Regents are highly focused on retention rates and four-year
graduation rates and are looking to us to meet the goals in the strategic plan. We have put in place a full time
retention coordinator in the CARE office and we may pursue a Title III grant
proposal that focuses on native students retention
rates.
Martin asked if the current Admissions structure was
going to remain as it is now or if there were plans to re-establish the Vice
Chancellor for Enrollment position. .
Jacquie responded that she has nothing in mind in terms of
organizational changes. The current
structure seems to be working. Margaret asked if there were initiatives to recruit
additional Asian students to UMM and if there have been any discussion of
providing additional resources to ensure student success. Jacquie said we have added some
resources using stimulus funds this fall to enhance Nancy Pederson and Nan
GaoÕs positions. There has also been some conversations about offering a longer or
different orientation for international students that would include an English
as a second language component.
Pareena said there is a working group to access data to review what is
working and what is not working regarding the current two-week
orientation. Bart asked if we have
met our planning goals in terms of numbers of international students. She believes we have exceeded the 5%
international student goal stated in the strategic plan. We also want a diverse international
student population not from only one part of the world. Jacquie said the memo
of understanding with SUFE states a maximum of 60 students in any given year. She suggested that we may
want to revisit some of the particulars in the strategic plan. Gwen asked how we have prepared or
assisted the domestic student body in working with and welcoming international
students. Sandy said we want to do
more in making global connections in residential life.
Expand renewable energy infrastructure
Lowell said in terms of short-term goals, we successfully
completed the commission of the biomass yesterday. Longer-term goals include an
understanding of the changing definition carbon neutrality. We need to think about a holistic
carbon community and look at our behavior and culture and how day-to-day
activities impact our footprint. We
need to think about a carbon community instead of being carbon neutral. This
includes our residence hall environments and our curriculum. We are looking to add more renewable
resources by adding a second wind turbine and want to get more sophisticated in
working with the demand side management along with the supply side. Maddy said this strikes her as an
opportunity for potential UMM undergraduate and faculty research including an
opportunity to attract investments, grant funding and gifts.
Lowell said there have been preliminary conversations to
determine the research potential of these initiatives—we are a grid
parallel research site which is very desirable to some
companies like Honeywell, for example.
Jacquie added that these initiatives are in our strategic plan—the
element of our mission tied to land grant status. This combines our sense of purpose with
sense of place and it tied to the region that will benefit from it. Andy asked if there are new
initiatives for outreach into the community for education, i.e., the
turbine. Lowell said there is a
non-profit wind organization called Windustry that has put together a team of
technical colleges and has asked us to train the trainers. This will bring in national
exposure for us. Additionally, we
may submit a proposal to the DOE for grant that looks at creating a database of
chemical properties of biofuels. Bart asked if we are at a
point where the initiatives are paying for themselves. Lowell said we are still a few years
away; however, cost avoidance is probably more important.
Carbon College
Bart asked if this will require more resources or will it
be self-sustaining. Jacquie said
the hope is to put together a business plan to allow it to be
self-sustaining. She does not
want to start something that doesnÕt bring us what we think it should. She has been charged to look
aggressively at new revenue sources without state funding as stated in the
Financing the Future Report and the Carbon College concept will let us try to
be entrepreneurial while using our special niche.
Other priorities from the Blue Ribbon Task Force
Bart said the task force identified three areas as high
priorities: resource allocation
review; e-learning outreach initiatives; curricular initiatives and he would
like to talk about the role of CRPC in these areas. Does this group want to be informed of
the metrics or have a role in assisting in the creation of metrics? Margaret said she would want to know if
there was already a model. The
selection of indicators is very important to not overtly disadvantage one
program or another. Is this
time sensitive? Does this
dovetail with program initiatives?
Martin asked about the projected outcomes of those initiatives. Pareena thinks there is an overlap with
program review and resource allocation review, but the latter will be much
broader and will include all area of the campus, not just academic areas.
Jacquie said there are five strategies that shape the
charge that she was given from the Financing the Future Report and those are:
The idea behind the resource allocation review was that
the group would meet and make recommendations that should come
back to CRPC. Other administrative
and governance groups will also be involved.
New initiatives
Jacquie also reported that a One Stop student services
building has opened on the TC campus.
Jill Beauregard, Clare Dingley and Colleen Miller visited the building
and are very excited and eager to explore whether this is a model that could
work for us. The model is not one of co-location but a model of individuals who
embody those functions and are able to help students immediately without
sending to three or four different offices. Cross training allows staff to make
decisions on the spot that will hopefully have a positive impact on
students. Jacquie would like to
give Jill, Clare, and Colleen the charge to review the model and make recommendations. She wondered how this small group
might connect with others on campus in terms of governance. Bart thought it is good for CRPC to be
aware of the process and should become involved when resources are
affected.