Student Academic and Financial Affairs Committee
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Present: ††Wang (Library), de Catanzaro (Library), Allen (ChBE), Das (SGA, IWC Rep), Pikowsky (Registrar), Tovey (ISyE), Lober (SGA), Bafna (Exec. Board Liaison)
Visitors: Kohn (Provostís Office, Enrollment Services)
Note: All action items in these minutes require approval by the Academic Senate.
1. Reta Pikowsky presented members of the committee with procedures related to excused absences that were approved in 2008. The copies were presented for two purposes.† The first being to make all members of the Committee aware that there were procedures approved in 2008. The second being to have Committee members review the procedures and determine if there are any changes that need to be made at this point in time. If so, a revised document will be presented to the Committee for approval at an upcoming meeting.
2. Academic year 11-12 athletic schedules were reviewed with some brief information presented by the Registrar in regard to how these schedules are developed.† The schedules were also reviewed in light of the 2008 procedures document.† The following observations, questions, and follow-up items were identified from this review.
∑ Reta Pikowsky will schedule a meeting with Registrarís Office staff and GTAA staff to talk about the travel schedules, and excused absences, and related issues to make certain that we have a clear picture of all the appropriate considerations.† At that time, they will also review the 2008 procedures document and talk about where any issues might lie with the various teams and the number of excused absences that are needed.
∑ The 10-day maximum of excused absences was discussed in light of NCAA requirements as well as Tech policy.† The Registrar reported that she was not aware of a specific number of maximum days of missed/excused classes in the NCAA Division I Manual, but stated that she and her staff would review it again to be sure and also check in with the Compliance Office in the GTAA.† It was also noted that GTAA staff would also be aware of a stated maximum if one existed.† In the absence of an NCAA Division I maximum, it would be a matter of institutional policy in regard to how this is handled.
The Committee also discussed excused absences when the teams are
traveling to get a sense of how many days would need to be missed, depending
upon when the competition takes place.
The Committee also discussed excused absences when the teams are not traveling, but are asking for part of the day or the whole day in preparation for an evening competition, for example.
∑ The amount of time that is needed regardless of whether travel occurs or not will be discussed further in future meetings.
∑ The Committee also noted that it would make sense to note on the actual travel letters the maximum number of days that an individual student can be excused from class.† This is another topic that will be discussed with the GTAA staff and the Registrarís Office and reported back to the Committee.
∑ It was noted that the process varies, depending upon whether we are dealing with a team sport (football) versus an individual sport (golf) due to the fact that there may be just one student-athlete traveling rather than the whole team.
∑ The Registrar will work with GTAA staff to prepare brief descriptions on the two types of travel schedules so that the Committee members can better understand the difference between baseball and tennis, for example.
∑ If the team or team members make it to a regional or national tournament, the maximum days allowed on an excused absence could be adjusted.† It would make no sense to allow the student-athletes to reach a tournament and then not be able to attend it as an excused absence.
∑ The Committee members agreed that if there is a need to prepare a revised travel schedule, which would need a quick turn-around, an email vote would be pursued.
∑ GTAA staff will be involved in all related discussions due to their expertise and insights they will have into the excused absences that are needed.
3. Dr. Paul Kohn, Vice Provost for Enrollment Services, began what will likely need to be a series of presentations and discussions on recruitment, marketing, and financial aid. The following were areas that he touched on briefly, in preparation for more in-depth discussions at future meetings.
∑ Pattern of applications
∑ Size and composition of the freshman and transfer incoming classes for Fall 2011
∑ Legacy applications
∑ State-wide pathways for transfer students but no recruitment plan
∑ 80% of transfer students from Georgia
∑ Group that has been formed to consider recruitment issues and strategies
∑ Work in recent months to overhaul UG Admissions web site
∑ Interest in pursuing a CRM solution to improve communication with recruits & applicants
∑ Work to model decisions by students leading to regression analyses
∑ Mention briefly of financial aid resources and how competitive we are or not, or appear to be, in comparison to our peers
∑ Stressing our role and the role of others in serving as ambassadors in urging students to apply now to Tech and not wait until the essay is further polished or a retake of an exam can occur.† The earlier the application process is completed, the better for the student
4. Dr. Paul Kohn, Vice Provost for Enrollment Services, updated the Committee on the Competitive Admissions Policy.† The policy was revised in 2007 and is now under consideration for additional changes.† Committee members were provided a copy of the current policy from the General Catalog and asked for their input on some suggested changes. If the changes are to move forward, they would have to be approved through the Provostís and Presidentís Offices, then through SAFAC, and then through the Academic Senate.