October 24, 2007
TO: Honors Program Committee
Pamela Bathurst, Chair
Mary DuPree
Torry van Slyke, Chair, HSAB
Rick Edgeman
Stephan Flores, Director
Pat Hart
Mark Warner, Assoc. Director
Howard Peavy
Eric Aston
Sandra Reineke
Cheryl Wheaton
RE: Minutes of meeting held October 22, 2007
The meeting was called to order at 2:35 p.m. with the following members present: Pamela Bathurst, Mary DuPree, Rick Edgeman, Stephan Flores, Pat Hart, Sandra Reineke, Torry van Slyke, Mark Warner, and Cheryl Wheaton.
Stephan Flores opened the meeting by asking for approval of the minutes of the October 15, 2007 meeting. Rick Edgeman moved, Torry van Slyke seconded that the minutes be approved as distributed by email to all committee members. Pamela Bathurst called for a vote; approval was unanimous.
AGENDA ITEMS
1. GPA and course requirements for good standing. Stephan Flores distributed to committee members a proposal that addressed changing the current cumulative GPA to remain in good standing in the Honors Program from 3.2 to 3.3, as well as retention criteria regarding completion of honors course work. The proposal follows: A member in good standing of the University Honors Program must be registered at the UI, maintain a 3.3 cumulative GPA, and complete a minimum of three graded honors credits in the first semester, and at least six graded honors credits by the end of the second semester; thereafter, students must complete, on average, one honors course every second semester. Mary DuPree made a motion to accept the proposal, with Torry van Slyke seconding the motion.
Discussion followed, beginning with comments by Stephan. He stated that although two committee members had expressed support for a retention GPA as high as 3.5, he was reluctant to make adjustments to program requirements whose consequences he was unable to justify and to predict. Although there are various criteria in many other honors programs, some with cumulative GPA requirements at 3.5, he felt that 3.3 would best suit this program criteria. He also observed that there is a portion of students in the program who need an extra nudge to more fully experience the curriculum offered. This would be accomplished by requiring the student to complete a certain number of credits during the early part of their membership. There are many students who take one or more courses in their first semesters but as they move further along into their majors, scheduling and the curriculum become more difficult to balance so the requirement moves back to averaging a course every other semester.
Pamela Bathurst asked if all courses in the curriculum are three credits to which Stephan explained that most honors courses are three or more credits. Exceptions to that would be the Interdisciplinary Colloquium and other upper division courses which have carried fewer credits and have been offered pass/fail. Students are encouraged to take what they can at that point to be able to stay active in the program. He also emphasized that students may take more than one three credit course during the first and second semesters.
Pat Hart wondered if a student’s study abroad would be affected by the revised requirement. Stephan explained that students are given study abroad credit (3 credit minimum) once the university has received verification of the student’s grades. Rick Edgeman asked if there might be something such as journaling that might be provided by the student. Overseeing such an activity would fall to the responsibility of the director. Mark Warner emphasized that students currently are not hindered in their program participation by being on study abroad. Stephan added that although living and learning elsewhere is not always transcripted, if the UI accepts the work then the Honors Program accepts it as well.
Rick stated that in making the changes he felt there were four things to be considered. Program size, retention, quality, or perceived quality were all important aspects to be examined. Stephan observed that quality is represented through grades received and the curriculum provided by the institution must be worth experiencing and be able to produce a mutuality amoung students and faculty from engaging in that curriculum. As a community students benefit and participation in the program definitely enriches the first year experience.
Mark noted that people who don’t immediately get involved with the curriculum often fall away fairly quickly. The new policy would sharpen the retention rate in that respect. Stephan pointed out that for the size and number of members in the program the class enrollments are a bit high and it will lessen the stress for some classes where 22-25 students would be a much more appropriate number than the current enrollment limit of 30.
Stephan stated that, in addition, by raising the current index number he felt that the quality of the program will be increased. Limited course offerings will also be reduced. Torry van Slyke agreed with that and felt that those who don’t participate should be made inactive in the program as soon as possible. He supports the higher GPA and, although he didn’t participate in his first semester, now wishes that he had done so.
Finally, Stephan pointed out that priority registration offers another built-in retention factor.
Pamela called for a vote on the motion on the table; motion passed unanimously. Rick questioned the use of "thereafter" in the revised criteria, however after clarification of its intended meaning the committee moved on to the next agenda item.
2. Admission index criteria. Stephan asked the committee to refer to a previous handout (enclosed) given to the committee titled "University Honors Program" which contains data compiled to show and explain various sets of criteria applicable to the program. Flores pointed out that students in high school with a cumulative GPA of 3.7 and a composite SAT score of 1250 meet the minimum index and are sent information and invited to apply to the program. He then proposed moving to an index number of 84 and gave data to support the move. In fall 2006 there were 81 students with 81-84 indexes who were not in the program; there were 15 students, again with index numbers between 81 and 84, who were in the program. Combined, there would have been 95 students who would not have been invited to join the program if the current index was moved to an 85. The average GPA of new freshmen in the program was a 3.93; those not in the program was a 3.90. The average ACT was a 29; for those freshmen not in the program it was a 26. A hundred points separated the UI freshman from the UHP freshman on the SAT scores. Rather than settle on an 85 index, however, Stephan explained that after examining the different scores and high school GPAs used to establish the index (with greater weight placed on the high school GPA), he arrived at a minimum index of 84. This then would not exclude students who achieved an SAT of 1250 with a high school GPA of 3.8 or those who scored a 28 ACT composite score and had a 3.79 GPA.
Rick asked if a distinction was made between weighted and unweighted GPAs, to which Stephan responded that the unweighted GPA was used by the university as well as the honors program. Pam observed that weighting the test scores more heavily might level the playing field a bit. Stephan further explained that the program had gradually moved from using just one of the criteria (high school GPA or test scores) to the use of all three in establishing the index number. He also emphasized the use of the essay as another criteria in the selection process. When asked, Mark Warner responded that quantitative criteria are used first, then qualitative (the essay) to determine whether a student is eligible to join the program. Stephan remarked that some students with acceptable quantitative criteria simply don't have sufficient writing skills for the program. Rick wondered if there were any disadvantaged students, those who might not be considered because of language barriers. Both Stephan and Mark cited the essay as a means to determine whether a student's writing skills were sufficient, with Mark pointing out that many of those international students who apply spend an extra amount of time polishing their written work. Stephan read an excerpt from the 2007 annual report regarding the program's diverse curriculum serving a variety of student needs and interests.
Torry observed that there really wasn't much of a jump between an index of 81 to 84. Rick countered that it wasn't much of a jump but that there wasn't much room in between those numbers. Stephan also added that there wasn't enough data provided from the national testing center to use the writing scores on the standardized tests as part of the qualitative criteria for program consideration.
Rick then made the motion, with Mary DuPree's second, to adopt the new minimum index number of 84. Pamela called for the vote; unanimously accepted.
3. Upcoming conversations with Honors Faculty, Department Chairs, Associate Deans. It is the intention of the director to gather several honors faculty together to gain information about their experiences in the program and to have at least one member of the Honors Program Committee present in these meetings. More information will follow.
4. Speaker to be determined for 2008 Honors Convocation. Stephan invited committee members to gather names, to include those of colleagues or others known to the committee members, as possible Convocation speakers. Stephan would like the committee to think about speakers for perhaps the arts (music and theatre), cognitive psychology, and other areas of the humanities and social sciences.
4. New business/new agenda items. Mary DuPree requested that the discussion of more upper division, subject specific courses be placed on the agenda in response to Torry van Slykes’ comments at the previous meeting.
Next meeting will be held on November 5, 2007 at 2:30 pm in the Wellspring Room.
Meeting adjourned at 3:34 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Cheryl Wheaton
cc: Douglas Baker, Provost
Don Crowley, Chair, Faculty Council
Karen Guilfoyle, Chair, Committee on Committees
Doug Adams, Faculty Secretary
Jonathan Gaffney, ASUI President
Special Collections, Library