SACS QEP Development Committee
March 5, 2012
Attendance: P Stam, M. Marshall, B. Bliss, L. Elmer, L. Lock, B. Sanderson, C. Relihan, R. Burt, and D. Stoeckel.
1. Minutes from 2/27/2012 approved.
2. Review of draft administrative hierarchies for the Career ePortfolio Program
- a. M. Marshall and C. Relihan shared their ideas of the administrative hierarchy for the new career ePortfolio program.
- i. Discussion over the differences between the hierarchy if the program is placed as a direct report to the Provost or as a program within the Office of University Writing (OUW).
- ii.Discussion among the group about what resources (i.e., personnel and space) would be required if the Career ePortfolio program was placed within the OUW.
3. R. Burt developed a draft budget for the Career ePortfolio program.
- a. Two budgets were shown. One with the Career ePortfolio program as a direct report to the Provost, and the other as the program as a part of OUW.
- i. Discussion let to incorporating programs outside of the OUW into the Career ePortfolio program. Those programs being the Career Center, Biggio Center, IMG, and the MRDL.
- 1. The committee agreed to place costs associated with units outside the OUW in the Expand existing units budget line.
- ii. The committee reviewed a document by C. Relihan titled “Service provider Notes”. This led to a discussion over how to determine how many students per program would participate in the Career ePortfolio program.
4. The committee decided to work on the draft action plan and delegated tasks:
- a. L. Lock and P. Stamm will work on the Assessment section
- b. M. Marshal will work on the administrative structure based on the placement of the Career ePortfolio program within OUW.
- c. R. Burt will discuss budget issues with D. Clark
- i. B. Bailey will inform R. Burt of an estimate of costs associated with software licensing.
- d. B. Bailey will write up FERPA issues/questions to submit to AU legal counsel.
- e. C. Relihan will review old materials on AU compliance with the SACS oral communication standard to determine if there was anything of usefulness in them.
- f. D. Stoeckel will speak to D. Clark about placing Committee documents (i.e., draft action plan, budget, implementation time line, copy of the original proposal, SLO’s, and definitions) on the OneHub site currently being used for another project.
Last Updated: Dec. 26, 2012