Minutes to Be Recorded by Barb Dolan

MOCC Agenda Thursday, October 18th, 2007 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm, CST 605-773-2325; password: 1725# Minutes to be recorded by Barb Dolan

Main Agenda:

1. Introductory items:  Role call Present: Sandy Anderson, Matt Aschenbrener, Barbara Dolan, Rose Hansen, Sharon Kienow, Sharon Sopko, Pam Thomas, Don Ticknor, Trudy Zalud  Agenda modifications None  Approval of minutes from September 20th meeting Approved

2. Technology Update: Don  Visitor database I introduced the concept at a recent UDA meeting; the group will brainstorm options after the Web Advisor conversion.  Other Upgrade to Web Advisor 3.0! Please refer to email sent earlier today. As a system, we experienced hardware problems on the 17th. These affected both Web Advisor and FTP. The problems were resolved by the end of the day. The old version of Web Advisor (2.0) is still running. We are able to concurrently run both versions in production. This enables us to test the new version in production, which is a significant asset. Campuses are testing 3.0 in both test and prod; however, prod testers are limited to very few. The test account is available to all who are interested; testing is highly encouraged. Although the workflows of 3.0 are similar to those of 2.0, the appearance of 3.0 is very different. Those students and faculty who struggle with technology in general will struggle with this transition in particular. Consequently, numerous calls to the help desks are anticipated. This upgrade is extremely important: eventually, the current version will be unsupported. We need Datatel to trouble shoot for us – as a result, this transition is essential. Testing is underway. As problems are identified, they are submitted to RIS and addressed centrally. The spreadsheet speaks to known issues – most are not serious. An exact date for the transition is not presently known. The goal is to go live prior to October 29th when pre-registration starts. As always, communication will be critical. USD is constructing an informational message that delineates and explains the changes. Upon

1 completion, I (Don) will send this information to MOCC; the content could be tailored for utilization at other campuses. Web Advisor is a widely used tool. Luckily, however, this upgrade will not require extensive formal training of end users. On my first attempt, I easily navigated the new version. The URL will change. The old URL will still work; it will point to the new.

3. Immunizations!  Non-compliance figures: current as of Oct. 16th at 9:00 am:

University: Non-compliant students: Today at 10:00 am: BHSU 49 38 DSU 34 17 NSU 3 3 SDSMT 3 1 SDSU 24 13 USD 5 4 Total: 118 76

By 12:30 pm, the total had dropped to 68. The starting figure was 687; this reduction represents tremendous progress! Please acknowledge and thank your immunization “go to” people!  Timeline: Key dates and procedures:  Thursday, Oct. 18th: Deadline: Students must demonstrate compliance with BOR policy (ie, submit evidence of immunity to all three diseases).  Friday, Oct. 19th: Deadline: Universities must enter all relevant immunization codes into Colleague.  Friday, Oct. 19th at 5:00 pm: Final non-compliance report: Carla will generate this list of students and distribute to the campuses via the UDA’s.  Monday, Oct. 22nd and Tuesday, Oct. 23rd: University follow-up: Each campus will conduct final review of non-compliance report, make decisions on administrative withdrawal, and complete AW processes.  Wednesday, Oct. 24th: AW report: Carla will generate a report that identifies non-compliant students who were and were not administratively withdrawn. This information will be submitted to Dr. Shekleton. No concerns were expressed.

 Final audit of temporary waivers and permanent exemptions: early next week. The first audit (conducted the week of Oct. 1st) was productive; it illuminated several issues and inspired meaningful discussions. The audit has proven to be a good addition to our operating procedures for immunization compliance.

2  New legislation: Both MOCC and the immunization subcommittee voiced questions and concerns. These issues were compiled and submitted to Dr. Shekleton; he asked for permission to distribute this information to SAC. The members will launch discussion at their upcoming meeting. The meeting was held yesterday (the 17th). If any MOCC member should hear feedback from his/her SAC rep, please apprise Trudy.

4. MCR #33: Catalog assignment – audit report from Rose The default catalog has not been changed yet. Following this critical transition, Rose will provide a comprehensive report. A recent audit revealed that 1000+ students will require catalog clean-up. Reminder to campuses: ESC will address first-time freshmen. The individual campuses must assess catalog assignment for transfers, regental transfers, and readmits.

5. Non-standard programs – module reports The AR module had a very preliminary discussion. Pam will share more details in the near future.

6. Usage of social security numbers in common processes and forms – module reports Sandy: the registrars don’t have any forms that require social security number. The transcript request allows either Colleague ID or Social Security number. Rose: the admissions module has eight forms that require social security number. I will send these to the group. Pam: AR is just beginning to pull examples together. No forms require documentation of social security numbers; however, some reporting functions do. Sharon: Clearly, financial aid administration involves use of social security numbers…FAFSA and beyond. Two such examples include NSLDS (National Student Loan Data System), which allows us to determine whether a student attended school elsewhere and received financial aid, and COD, which enables tracking of Pell grants. In essence, social security number is the key to student records. In some internal instances, the use of social security numbers could be avoided – for example, award letters. But again, access to social security numbers is critical. If we don’t get this information on the front end, then we may miss something – especially at the prospect phase. Also, many Colleague reports specific to financial aid include social security number. Barb: We received a request from Residential Life to feature ID photos of the staff members on the intranet. This is stored with social security number, so logically these two elements would go together. The ID card system that BH and SDSMT use together still includes the social security number. Have others worked with this? Don: USD has separated the two. Only the Colleague ID number is featured on the student photo ID.

3 7. Processing calendar:

Oct. 19th to 31st:

19 Final report that identifies students who should SDA be administratively withdrawn 15 thru Jan First day IPEDS work file can be created. UDA 24 RIS will run a new list for Dr. Shekleton; this will SDA encompass administrative withdrawals, serving as a comparative reference for the list of non- compliant students. 18 RIS File Maintenance 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. RIS 23 Update of Federal Cohorts completed prior to ?? mid term extract. 24 Mid-Term Extract frozen RIS - Biying 24 Batch update of CPG1, CPG2, CGE1, CGE2 and SDA prereg CGET restrictions for those universities that did not notify SDA. 25 RIS File Maintenance 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. RIS 26 Mid Term Date 26 MI Flag updated only for 2007FA RIS 28 Update WA site on the Student Schedule results RIS form with 'No matter what day of the week Registration/Orientation/Start Date is on, classes for that day of the week scheduled for 4:00 PM or later begin at 4:00 PM.' prereg 29 First commitment letters run for 2008SP ESC

Done at time of registration - needs to be part Add 2007FA and 2008SP to GAWP (Graduation of pre-reg 29 Web Application) RIS processing Early Registration for Spring 2008 and Fall 10/29- 2008. There is no early registration for Summer 11/16 2008 at this time. prereg 29 MI Flag updated only for 2007FA RIS 30 SDOS Auto-Email Closed RIS SDOS 31 Perkins cash on hand balance as of October 31 Financial needed for submission via FISAP Aid corrections/updates - due by December 15.

Nov 1st – 15th: Colleague data copy from PROD to TEST RIS 1 First commitment Letter for 2008SP sent. ESC/ Commitment Letters sent daily (ESC) and Universities decisions processed by universities. 1 RIS File Maintenance 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. RIS

4 NSLC 2007FA Midterm Submission with deadline of 11/2. This provides one day per FA/Registrar 1-13 University to submit Midterm submission. Modules 2 Mid Term deficiency grades due from faculty Check for any invalid grades (DEF) in the mid- RIS 2 term grading fields 2 MI Flag updated only for 2007FA RIS Deficient academic progress status information 3 available for students. Registrars Last day to add restrictions that hold AR/Registrar 5 registration s Last date to end old advising restrictions 5 (CADV) from prior semesters UDA Last date to enter advising restrictions for this term (if you require students to meet with their advisor prior to early registration) for students 5 for whom you are the home university UDA Universities must set 2008FA sections to Registrars pending if they are not permitting early 5 registration for that term prereg 7 2007FA last day to drop/withdraw with a refund Registrars of 60% (Return to Title IV point) 8 RIS File Maintenance 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. RIS 12 Veteran's Day Holiday All 14 Board of Regents FACT Book Financial Aid Financial Information due. Aid 15 RIS File Maintenance 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. RIS

Module comments:  AR: Pam AR is working on some updates, and the group plans to incorporate more dates into the processing calendar. Examples include SDePay and FACTS payment plan. We hope to make this tool very comprehensive and useful to campuses and other modules.  FA: Sharon Larry Youngren sent a list of key dates to the Financial Aid module, and we discussed them extensively on our recent call. As a result, we have some questions for AR. The initial run of BILL is scheduled for Dec. 1st, but XRST is not posted until the 10th. What are the implications of this delay? Pam: the reason for the lag is to allow last-minute clean-up before the real bill is posted. Sharon: last year, the dates were Dec. 2nd and 8th – does this present a concern for financial aid? Pam: BILL moves charges from the holding to the AR account. Any changes effected between the 1st and the 10th will be incorporated into the posted bill. Sharon: please refer to email sent earlier today. Note the attachment, specifically the purple section from December. The group decided to move those functions listed for December 26th, 27th, and 28th to a start date of Jan. 4th. Since final grades aren’t due until

5 Dec. 27th and minimum progression will be run on the 2nd, doesn’t this make more sense? Sandy: yes, it does. Keep in mind – we are doing everything one whole week later than last year. Sharon: we need to continue our conversations related to frequency of home location update. The module wants to make sure that it is run weekly. For certain, it should be run on Friday, Jan. 4th. That will position us to apply aid on the 6th. The FA module wants to run XATR on Jan. 7th and 8th. Pam, does this work for AR? Pam: Yes. However, here is the caveat: if anything falls apart, we will not have refund checks. I was hoping for a built-in cushion. Following discussion, the AR group ultimately voted for a drop-dead date. Any help from FA will be greatly appreciated. Sharon: last year, Jan. 12th was attached to off campus location mailing – financial aid was listed as the responsible party. We did move the date to the 14th. However, shouldn’t AR assume responsibility? Pam: that function doesn’t apply to BH. Any checks that remain unclaimed following fee payment are mailed on the subsequent Friday. After that, additional checks are mailed weekly. For our Ellsworth students, a financial aid representative comes up to campus and takes the checks for disbursement at their fee payment. Unclaimed checks are returned – we double check them and mail from here. Most likely, this function is connected to UC students. Sharon: Should the responsible parties include both FA and AR? Pam: it’s certainly a collaborative effort, so that would be fair. Sharon: what about electronic direct deposits? Should those deadlines be incorporated into the calendar? Pam: this is a moving target. Adding those dates is probably impossible. Students will see a disclaimer that speaks to a lag between requesting electronic transfer of funds and campus activation of this option.  Registrars: Sandy Registration for spring and fall of 08 starts on Monday, Oct. 29th. The functions listed for Nov. 5th should be moved to Oct. 26th. I noticed this and notified Carla (see attached email). On Nov 2nd, mid-term deficiency grades are due from faculty. These will be available to students on the following Monday. For December, all dates look good to go. Fall semester ends one week later than last year. As a result, grades aren’t due until Dec. 27th. Everything else hinges on this; we can’t do anything until we have final grades. Processing time between semesters will be tight. Regrettably, we will experience even tighter time frames in the future.  Technology: Don The mid-term extract will be frozen on Oct. 24th. All related clean-up must be completed prior to that deadline. Federal cohorts must be updated by the 23rd. Also, there is a lot a

6 work to be done prior to pre-registration, such as application of gen ed and pre-gen ed restrictions. Sandy: For Nov. 1st, the calendar states “Colleague data copy from production to test.” Will that actually happen? Don: I will follow up and find out. Sharon: the Financial Aid Module considers this a good idea. That will give us a full year of disbursements in test mode.  Admissions: Rose on Oct. 29th, the first commitment letters for spring of 08 will be generated. With this process, we are asking students to commit to a home location. We run the report daily, and letters are sent twice weekly. In total, each student receives three letters.

University comments? None

8. MOCC structure Trudy: As the group is aware, there have been on-going conversations related to the future of MOCC. The scope of discussion has expanded, giving rise to this central question: how does MOCC add value to the regental mission? To be clear, the posed question is not “Do we serve a purpose?”, but rather “Do we add value?” There is consensus that MOCC was vitally important in the immediate aftermath of the student project…but what about now?

Don: Prior to the formation of MOCC, there was a disconnect between the academic side of the house and our side. Now there is a greater understanding of challenges that each side faces. We have a good dialogue between MOCC and AAC; that is a significant benefit that would be lost with the dissolution of MOCC. To summarize, MOCC definitely adds value to the regental mission!

Rose: From the ESC perspective, MOCC involvement is valuable. The links of communication serve us well. I’m not sure about whether our ESC contribution is useful to MOCC. From the Admissions Module perspective, I don’t know whether MOCC involvement is useful; each campus is very independent due to the fierce competition factor. Still, MOCC keeps everyone on the same page. This is important.

Sandy: I agree with Don. Historically, there was an obvious disconnect between academics and our side of the house. MOCC involvement doesn’t always feel like progress; still, the discussion is critical. Without MOCC, we would be out of the loop. MOCC confers knowledge; I can relate when topics are mentioned on campus.

Sharon S: Again, my role is different. I represent groups of students – distance learners, non-traditional students, etc. Without MOCC, I might not have the opportunity to provide input and advocate for these students.

7 MOCC keeps UC on the radar screen. It also creates a channel of communication. I learn what is going on within the system; as a result, I stay informed and am able to share this knowledge with colleagues at UC.

Matt: I agree with Sandy and Don. MOCC has a good relationship with AAC. That connection is the biggest asset that MOCC brings to the table. MOCC enhances communication, both external and internal. At SDSU, we have a Colleague group that meets bi-weekly; all modules are represented. We discuss agenda items from the calls, as well as other issues. MOCC provides information from behind the scenes that facilitates conversations within our Colleague group. Sharon K: MOCC is very valuable. We address system issues that demand decisions and follow-up action. Immunization compliance is a great example of this.

Pam: MOCC is incredibly useful – dialogue between the two sides of the house is of critical importance. At BH, we used to have a committee such as Matt described. It was phased out, and we have felt its absence. Surely, the system would miss MOCC as well! As I pondered our value, the immunization situation came to my mind – just as Sharon mentioned. MOCC provided a venue for discussion of something new. Our diversity is an asset. It enables discussion to move ahead more quickly and efficiently. MOCC establishes a clear cut route of information dissemination: membership establishes pivotal point persons to share information and provide feedback. This structured format – as opposed to simply trusting, which is very loosely structured – provides assurance of effective communication. Round table discussion is essential – after all, we don’t know what we don’t know! The current group is dynamic; we are doing a great job!

Barb: Yes, we really are a valuable group. The strong linkage between us and AAC ties everything together.

Trudy: I am a strong proponent of effective organizational communication; MOCC promotes and enhances communication within the regental system. As a group, we increase awareness of issues, changes, etc. and promote two-way communication. We serve as a liaison between the activity councils (particularly AAC) and the modules – also the campuses. We are problem solvers: we anticipate issues and brainstorm solutions. In doing so, we involve a variety of individuals with expertise in key areas. Finally, we take on the projects that don’t logically fit elsewhere. All of these elements create value for the system.

Thoughts regarding MOCC structure:

Don: We have nine members. Trudy, Sharon S, and Rose belong in a separate category of membership. That leaves six for regular rotation. We

8 could rotate two each year or three every two years. However, one situation that we want to avoid is rotating the same modules/campuses every time. We need to establish who has the final say-so on membership. It shouldn’t be totally in the hands of the universities. Also, we need to maintain our balance of representation – every campus and every module.

Sandy: We need historical reference, but we also need new voices and different ideas. I agree with Don - we need to retain our balanced approach. We also need to establish who will make the final decision on rotation of members.

Sharon S: A rotation system is necessary, but very complicated.

Matt: I recommend a lifetime appointment. Any other approach will be tough to implement and maintain.

Sharon: We need a blend of historical perspective and fresh ideas. There must be a way to accomplish this! Every university has a slightly different structure. It will be difficult to maintain uniform representation.

Pam: I’m not sure there’s really a rotation problem. Why can’t we embrace this approach: if someone really needs to leave, assess the membership at that time and effect the change?

Matt: I agree with Pam; she makes a solid point.

Barb: Yes, is there really a problem with membership rotation? Maybe we should just address problems as they arise.

Matt: What if we establish three-year terms and then a campus vetoes the process of vacating a MOCC position?

Trudy: As I reflected on the matter, I brainstormed options similar to those presented by Don. However, I later realized several limitations inherent to this approach.

Bottom line: two main viewpoints have emerged: formal rotation (for example, rotate three members every two years) and informal rotation (membership is evaluated when the group is confronted with a critical incident). No consensus was reached; the group will continue deliberation.

Next step: Trudy will construct a value statement for presentation to the BOR.

9. Next meetings: Friday, November 16th and Thursday, December 13th; both meetings will start at 1:00 pm (CST). Trudy will schedule the calls and send out the details via email.

9 Supplemental Agenda:

1. MCR 26A Paul, Ranny, and Trudy are debating some finer details and verbiage. Upon completion, the MCR will be distributed for consideration.

2. Grading proposal At the last AAC meeting, Sam chose to focus discussion on the NG grade. Trudy will follow up with Sam to determine the next planned step.

3. Other?

Happy Halloween!!!