Quality Enhancement Plan

QEP Meeting Minutes 2/6/2012

QEP Meeting Minutes
February 06, 2012

Members Attending:  Dr. Brian Brabham, Dr. Lem Taylor, Dr. Chrisann Merriman, Dr. Kathy Wood, Dr. Jacky Dumas, Dr. Hollie Stanton, Dr. Christie Bledsoe, Jeff Sutton, Kathy Harden, Dr. Trent Terrell, Dr. Barbara Dalby, Dr. Tammi Cooper, Dr. Kerry Owens, and Dr. David Chrisman, Dr. Joey Tabarlet, Dr. Janene Lewis.

  • Status briefings
    • Preproposals submitted to date– there are 8 but 2 of them are only a couple of lines. 
      • Merriman asked if she should look at them and has volunteered to do so.  It was suggested that if she looks at the pre-proposals and replies to those who have submitted pre-proposals that are too short, she breaks confidentiality.  Terrell said that the guidelines are clear about the length requirements.  Brabham said he would send out another email regarding pre-proposals and the need to follow the guidelines and we will otherwise not try to fix any poor attempts at a pre-proposal right now.
      • Harden said she’d gotten a question from someone who asked about her looking at a writing attempt.  She asked if she should do that.  We discussed this.  If ideas are almost identical, should we pair them up now or wait to see if they are similar later and can just join each other in the final writing?  Bledsoe suggested that we keep them separate now because the writers might use the same idea but with different areas of research behind the idea. 
    • Writing Team – Wood said that she is still collecting summaries from committee members but has not started writing yet.
    • Full Proposal Guidelines Team – they are still working on this.  Stanton will head up the writing of a rubric for judging the full proposals.
    • Facebook utilization – we haven’t gotten many friends yet on Facebook.  Sutton said he will put all 1200+ students on it with friend requests.
    • Pre-Proposal scoring – the scoring team is headed up by Bledsoe.  It will include Tabarlet, a student and a staff person.  They already have a rubric but the team must know how to score so everyone is on the same page.
  • Discussion Items
    • Methods to publicize pre-proposals selected for full proposal development – we discussed the best way to do this.  Some other schools have used the website to do this.  The question was asked about how big an impact this had on scoring.  No answer to this.  We could use time before chapel starts to put the info on the chapel screen.  We could do an e-poster, perhaps of the QEP process.  After some discussion, it was decided that the website is the best place to publicize.
    • Timeline for publicity of pre-proposals
      • Staff assembly is on Mar 22 – could tell that group then. 
      • By Mar 15th all the pre-proposals have been reviewed and the ones we will go with for full proprosals have been selected.  These can then be put on the website.
      • The people writing full proposals will then have May and over the summer to write.
      • Cooper said that we need to make a big deal out of those who are chosen.  The final one that is chosen to be our QEP topic should then REALLY be a big deal.
      • Places/times for promoting the final QEP topic:  welcome week (moving into the dorm), freshman seminar in the fall, website.  The pre-proposal link for the QEP is on MyCampus right now and is getting lots of traffic.
  • Miscellaneous
    • A question came up about making sure our final QEP topic is well supported by the most current data.  Cooper said that some of that information would come from the Student Satisfaction Survey.  She did not anticipate that the new data we get will change all that much from the previous but we will look at it anyway.

Submitted by Kathleen Wood