COTA-Advisory Council Minutes
Meeting notes 10/4/07
Members in attendance: Doug Couch, Cindy Fiedler, Artie Fowler, Hillary Fuhrman (DHE ex-officio), Melissa Hattman, Sarah Larson, Kandis Smith (COTA ex-officio), and Yvette Sweeney
Members absent: Jamie Carpenter, Rita Gulstad, and Bruce Miles
Guests: B.J. White (DHE Program Specialist)
The meeting minutes from the 7/17/07 meeting were accepted as presented.
Hillary Fuhrman presented the formal letter of endorsement from COTA. It was agreed that the statement that appears on the DHE website was acceptable. The statement reads:
The COTA-Advisory Council (COTA-AC) is to act as an arm of COTA. Its primary role is to review proposed revisions and initiatives to statewide transfer and articulation policies and to assess, evaluate, and provide feedback on the feasibility of implementation of said proposals. Additionally, the Advisory Council will bring forward to COTA any issues or emerging trends that will effect the transfer of students and/or post-secondary credits between institutions in this state.
B.J. White (DHE Program Specialist) assisted the committee with accessing and reviewing the newly designed COTA-AC web page. To access the page, go to www.dhe.mo.gov, click the Information for Students bullet under Academic Affairs, then click on the Transfer and Articulation bullet under Institutions, then click on COTA-Advisory Council on the COTA page. The direct URL is http://www.dhe.mo.gov/cotaadvisorycouncil.shtml. There was discussion regarding links for desirable information on the COTA-AC and other DHE web pages, so that interested parties can access information regardless of how they enter the site. It was agreed that this was a good idea and would be pursued. Appreciation was expressed to B.J. for his outstanding work.
There was additional discussion on how to achieve an e-mail address for the COTA-AC. B.J. White is working on a solution and will inform the group of his progress on this issue. Cindy Fiedler asked if this e-mail address would also allow interested parties to submit their names for membership and voting privileges. She requested that this be available throughout the year, so that membership information could be kept up-to-date and be inclusive of all interested. Hillary Fuhrman suggested that a drop down box with subject list request be added. Suggested subjects included:
- Questions for COTA-AC
- Add a name for voting/membership
The COTA meeting notes from September 26, 2007 were reviewed. (It was noted that there were no COTA 2007 minutes on their web page. B.J. White indicated that it was an oversight and that they would be added). Established that a Save the Date e-mail had been generated by DHE regarding the Transfer and Articulation Conference on January 30, 2008 at the Holiday Inn Executive Center in Columbia, Missouri. The ballroom capacity is 200 people and allows for three breakout rooms. It was suggested that Kandis Smith request a member of the U.M. System office collect RSVP’s and funds for the conference. She indicated that she would inquire if this was acceptable.
It was suggested, based on room capacity and previous attendee lists, that targeted individuals from DESE be invited, who would then share with interested parties the conversation and direction of suggested work groups that would be formed at this conference. It was also suggested that we eliminate the fourth track of the conference (Ask K-12 what they would like post-secondary to address regarding student preparation and transfer issues) since the conference venue is not large enough to handle additional attendees. We will look for a venue that allows for growth next year.
Discussion of the feedback shared by COTA on the suggested themes and goals of the conference resulted in a conversation regarding the AC role in conference planning and their ability to solicit subject-area experts. It was recognized that the conference needed to move forward from the initial discussion started in January, 2007. Also noted were the time constraints of a one-day conference. It was agreed that the original timeline would need to be modified to allow subject area specialists to present to break-out groups, bringing attendees to a common and current understanding of the three issues (P-20 initiative, grade level expectations, curriculum alignment issues and entry level competencies; general education and proprietary institutions, conversion systems and challenges in transfer both directions; best practices in articulation, fulfilling a general education category instead of requiring that a transfer course must equate to a course offered by that institution (without 42 hour block) reverse articulation work with career programs, recognizing certificates/diplomas/various associates degrees). It was also suggested that conference attendees be given sufficient information on the three tracks prior to conference registration so that size of each breakout presentation (room capacity) could be anticipated and work groups formed. It was suggested that work groups should be arranged to include a variety of institutional types (two year, four year, and public, private, proprietary).
It was suggested that the conference timeline be altered as noted below:
9:00-9:15 Welcome and introductions
9:15-10:30 Back to basics, common definitions, current issues and trends*
10:30-10:45 Break
10:45-11:30 Subject-Area Expert presentations
11:30-12:00 Breakout session 1: Small group formation, discussion of information presented, and formulation of questions for lunch session discussion
12:00-1:15 Lunch and question discussion from Breakout session 1
1:15-2:30 Breakout session 2: Small groups reassemble and discuss questions from lunch and how to work together over the next year to move forward on their issues. It is acknowledged that this period will be formative, groups will work on communication strategies, how they are going to move the issue forward, who will accept responsibility from their institution for active participation, and how the group will present progress at this conference next year on assigned topic.
2:30-3:00 Feedback from breakout sessions and closing remarks (next steps)
We need to ensure that the focus of the conference is clear and that year-long action projects are expected.
Cindy Fiedler mentioned that there was a great deal of discussion among the two-year institutions prior to the passage of the AAT regarding curriculum format. She mentioned that the four-year counterparts may need time to have these same types of conversations. Should we include a concurrent session for them? Melissa Hattman mentioned that MACTE was meeting on 10/4/07 and these institutions should have had this opportunity at that meeting.
*At the conference last year, each institution stood up and prefaced any comments with a statement such as “I believe I come from a transfer friendly institution”. Perhaps part of the conversation during the trends session could be a discussion of how this is gauged. How is it defined? Do we have a transfer friendly state (intra-state transfer and out-of-state transfer)?
COTA-AC needs to move forward with the division of topics and labor to plan the conference.
Minutes submitted 10/12/07 by Yvette Sweeney
