Resources

Meeting Minutes

QEP Development Timeline

A successful Quality Enhancement Plan is a five-year plan that must focus on the environment supporting student learning and on learning outcomes that accomplish the mission of the institution. Nashville State broke the process into three phases. Phase one was a college-wide “Topic Formation” and was completed in January 2016. Phase two is “Design” in which a committee of faculty, staff and students work to formulate a clear QEP designed to improve student learning based on institutional needs. Finally, phase three is “Implementation” which will begin upon SACSCOC approval of the plan and will incorporate measures to assess plan outcomes over the five-year cycle and make changes as necessary. Click on the links below to find more detailed information about each phase.

Timeline

In the summer of 2015, the President of NSCC charged Faye Jones, the Dean of Learning Resources, to develop a team to lead a campus-wide effort to decide on the topic for the Quality Enhancement Plan.

The dean formed a committee consisting of faculty and staff representing the following areas:

  • Michael Kiggins- English, Humanities, and Arts
  • David Markwell-Social and Life Sciences
  • Laurie Swanson-Business Technologies
  • Michelle Lenox-Computer Technologies
  • Jessica Rabb-Math and Natural Sciences
  • Brian Curtis-Satellite Campuses
  • Helen Kunkel-Staff Assembly
  • Tassany Henderson-Administrative Assembly

As often happens, meeting times conflicted with some members’ ability to attend meetings. Therefore, two more faculty were added from EHA and SLS to ensure representation:

• Marla Perry-Social and Life Sciences

• Laura Orr-English, Humanities, and Arts

Once Fall 2015 classes began, the committee asked each of their areas to send topics for a plan that would improve student success. After eliminating duplicates, the committee sent a survey of the suggestions to the entire college. While the committee expected the winnowing process to take several surveys, it turned out that there was a great deal of agreement among the College about the top five projects that would be beneficial:

  • More structured advising
  • Developing college-level study skills
  • Improving reading comprehension and following directions
  • A mandatory freshman orientation
  • A freshman experience course

The committee then polled students, focusing mainly on students who were currently in Composition 2. Since they had already been through a semester of college, the committee wanted to focus on what those students felt would have been the most beneficial to them as beginning college students. The survey was sent to all composition instructors on all campuses.


At the same time the committee held open forums on each of the five topics. They were located on the Nashville campus, but broadcast live to all campuses. Prior to each forum, the chair also sent out links to other community colleges who had chosen the topic for their QEP to allow the campus community to learn of various ways the topic had been handled. Each open forum session had the following components:

  • The need
  • Advantages/disadvantages
  • Ability to assess success

After each session, the committee sent out a summary to the college and solicited feedback from members who had not been able to attend. At the same time, other stakeholders were polled for their opinion, including the Executive Committee of the Development Board and several divisions’ advisory committees.

Based on this feedback, the committee surveyed the College one more time, asking to choose from among the five topics and also asking if there should be a combined topic. Student responses were almost evenly split between Developing College-Level Study Skills and Structured Advising. Faculty and Staff responses favored a focus on Study Skills and the Freshman Experience Course.

After a final meeting, the committee decided to recommend the following QEP topic: Focus on Helping New Students Succeed in College through effective advising and instruction in college-level study skills. The topic was modified over time to include additional first-year experiences to make the end goal of student success more likely. The Topic “Improving Student Success through the First-Year Experience” was approved by the President in January 2016.

In February of 2017, a steering committee was created to oversee the development of the QEP “Improving Student Success through the First-Year Experience.” The President of NSCC charged Sarah Roberts, the Dean of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, to chair the committee.

The dean worked with the Faculty Senate and formed a committee, consisting of faculty, staff, and students, representing the following areas:

  • Emily Bush – Coordinator for Instructional Library Services
  • Shelley Gross-Gray – Director of Online Learning
  • Paul Hayslip - Student
  • Carol Martin-Osorio – Dean of Students
  • Scott McRoberts, Faculty, Art
  • Jennifer Paulk - Faculty, History (Satellite Campuses)
  • Harlan Pease – Faculty, English
  • Marla Perry – Faculty, Sociology
  • Jessica Rabb – Faculty, Biology
  • Flora Setayesh – Vice President for Institutional Effectiveness
  • Clinton Stephens – Student, SGA President
  • Danielle Swartz –Koufman - Professional Advisor
  • Bryan Thomas – Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs
  • Ted Washington – Associate Vice President for Planning and Institutional Research
  • Julie Williams, Dean of Social and Life Sciences

Through discussions, reviews of literature, and the involvement of several committee members in system-wide completion academies, the committee settled on a list of five individual experiences that make up the formative pieces of the first-year experience. Those experiences are: New Student Orientation, the First Year Experience course (NSCC 1010), Academic Advising, Career Planning, and opportunities to reflect on personal growth in a meaningful way.

Five student-learning outcomes were developed to track progress of students through the first-year experience. They are as follows:

As a result of a successful completion of the first-year experience at Nashville State students will:

  1. Create a personalized academic plan that includes college-level math, English composition, and 9 hours in the focus area in the first academic year.
  2. Describe connections between degree choice and ultimate career choice after an interest inventory (Kuder).
  3. Differentiate resources available to students through Nashville State to support student success.
  4. Articulate connections between their courses and their ultimate academic goals.
  5. Reflect on their personal growth as a result of their education.

The steering committee worked through the summer of 2017 to develop a budget, a marketing plan, write assessments to track student data regarding student learning outcomes, and to generate a formal assessment plan. Campus contacts were appointed for each satellite campus so that a faculty member and a staff member from each site serve as liaisons for the dissemination of information to all sites.

Several assessments were piloted during the summer of 2017 and all assessments will be taken to scale during the fall of 2017 semester. The QEP narrative will be submitted for approval to SACSCOC in mid-September for a formal review by an On-Site Committee to begin on October 31, 2017.

The Board of SACSCOC will take action on the Nashville State Quality Enhancement Plan during their meeting in December 2017. Nashville State will be officially notified of their decision sometime during the spring 2018 semester. At the point of approval, the QEP will transition from the planning phase to the implementation phase and will be led by a full-time faculty member, designated Implementation Lead. The responsibilities of the Implementation Lead will be to manage the plan and to ensure that changes are made to improve the plan over time, with the help of an Implementation Committee comprised of faculty, staff, and students. The following bullet points provide a brief outline for phase III of the QEP:

Beginning in May 2018 and then each following December and May, continuing until the impact report due in 2023, the Implementation Committee will:

  • Review data from all assessment methods (quantitative and qualitative)
  • Analyze data and form conclusions regarding student learning
  • Perform an intentional review of data analysis to determine if an update to plan implementation is warranted, carefully documenting the process
  • Track the effects of any changes made, should data analysis lead to changes

2023 – QEP Impact Report due to SACSCOC