Present:
Bob Szafran, Chair
Piero Fenci
Doyle Alexander
Mike Legg
Roger Bilow
DawnElla Rust
Florence Elliot-Howard
Lauren Scharff
Absent:
Pat Spence
Marty Turnage
I. Old Business
A.Committee Chair, Bob Szafran, briefly reported items discussed in theAdmissions Requirements Forum held Monday, April 19, in the Regents'Suite A, and reviewed handouts given to the committee members. Hewill include links to the web site within the body of messagesdelivered to the listserve.
B. Linksto reports and handouts used in the meetings facilitate accessibilityto promote ease of access in discussion of the admissionsrequirements.
C.DawnElla Rust reported that the student surveys are beingdistributed. She will be responsible for receiving of the facultysurveys. When the gathering of the faculty surveys is complete, theywill be distributed evenly to each committee member to review.
D. PieroFenci distributed surveys to the Student Government Association (SGA)and will pick up completed surveys on Monday, April 26.
II.New Business
A. Thecommittee's main objective for both the faculty and student surveysare to collect additional input regarding admissions requirements.The committee seeks input from a cross-section of students andfaculty but realizes that neither survey will result in a trulyrandom/representative sample of impressions and reactions.
B.Students, who have been given the survey, seem to have two distinctresponses. Those who are aggressive about change (raisingrequirements) and those who don't care and don't really know what theadmissions requirements are right now.
C. In acontinuation of last meeting, three other committee members weregiven an opportunity to explain their current views onadmissions.
1. Onecommittee member observed that in her own history she had experiencedgreater academic quality at a small institution with easy admissionstandards than at a large institution with tougher standards. Shefelt that she does not want admission standards at SA raised a lotbecause the educational key is not admissions but rather what happensafter the student is admitted. If admissions requirements are raised,funding for scholarships must be increased.
2. Onecommittee member observed that he had been at larger institutionsthan SFA which were much more supportive of student educational needsthan SFA is. There is more than just admission standards involved increating a solid academic climate! We find "weak" students at alllevels of instruction and the perception of weakness may be arelative judgment - relative to the other students in the class. Hedoesn't understand why weare considering a raise in admissionstandards right now since we are not overcrowded with students -- theusual reason for an increase in standards. He is suspicious of thevalidity of SAT/ACT scores.
3. Onecommittee member felt that raising admissions standards would trulybe a good thing although it should be done incrementally. She feltthat current admission standards don't serve our students well. Thelow standards send a message that not much will be required ofstudents. Some good students are frustrated by weak students slowingdown what is learned in the classroom. Faculty are discouraged anddemoralized by the academic ability of students yet they arereluctant to flunk as many students as they feel deserve to flunkbecause of the university's emphasis on retention. Faculty morale islower now than it was in the past.
D.Committee members discussed ways their departments were dealing withspecial preparation and extra assistance to help students besuccessful in their majors.
E. Bobfocused on several questions posed to the committee. They included:1) Is any change needed in the admissions requirements at all? 2)Should there be changes to the first-time freshmen admissionsrequirements? 3) Should there be changes to the transfer students'admissions requirements? 4) Should there be changes to the specialadmissions programs? 5) What miscellaneous items should be discussedin the report?
F.Discussions ensued regarding the first question. (Is any changeneeded in the admissions requirements at all?) Committee membersdiscussed reasons why the admissions requirements should be changed.The following statements were voiced in supporting raisingadmissions:
1. Raiseadmissions requirements while including a review process selectionfor students who are ineligible
2. In areview process, look at a variety of criteria
3. Raiseadmissions requirements to counteract attrition rates
4.Support faculty by accepting a higher caliber student
5. Adecrease in enrollment could occur by approximately 10% from raisingadmissions requirements
6. Agradual increase in admissions requirements is a possibility to beconsidered
7. Testscores are basically a good guideline for admissions requirements andused to complement other criteria
8.Raising admissions requirements would be good for SFA, and toaccomplish this strong administrative support would benecessary
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30a.m.