By Brandon Fey, Editor-in-Chief
NSSE Report
President Bob Iuliano opened the meeting with a presentation on a recent report from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE).
The report measured the engagement of surveyed first-year students and seniors at Gettysburg and compared those from other schools. Iuliano stated that this year marks the first time the College is either on par with or outperforming every group of compared institutions in all categories. Students were surveyed on topics including their interaction with faculty, extracurricular involvement, and “high-impact learning practices” (research, service learning, study abroad, internships, etc.), which every surveyed senior reported completing at least one.
“What you’re seeing here [the College’s positive survey results] is increasingly being reflected in rankings as a whole,” said Iuliano. “The work that we’re doing is being seen and being understood and being reflected in broader rankings.”
Support Staff Update
Provost Jamila Bookwala spoke about support staff reorganization that occurred over the summer. Several departments and programs have been combined, and support staff who work with more programs have received salary increases commensurate with their positions and years at the College, as well as the title of academic operations assistant.
The Provost’s Office has compiled a list of tasks for which support staff have stated they wish to no longer be responsible. The list has been shared with department and program chairs. The office is also working on a list of links to be posted on its webpage with information about how faculty can manage some of the inherited tasks. Bookwala requested feedback on how the support staff transition can be improved going forward.
Bookwala also said that in response to past requests to improve faculty communication with her office, she will be holding weekly office hours beginning later this month. 20-minute increments will be reservable for individuals and small groups via an online link.
Center for Student Success Updates
Dean of Academic Advising and Student Success Josef Brandauer gave a presentation on recent changes at the Center for Student Success (CSS).
Brandauer emphasized that the faculty are encouraged to work with his center. He said it is most helpful if instructors use Navigate to report all kinds of student concerns, as the platform is used by several campus offices and there is an option on the platform to refer students to the CSS. He also requested that all students receive progress reports during the semester, as only 12% of students received any last semester. Students can only see their own progress reports and cannot see any other reports or concerns filed by a faculty member.
He also said that the CSS has begun working with incoming students to build good skills from the beginning of their academic careers, as opposed to being a purely retroactive service for students who are struggling. The center held study skills sessions for over 300 incoming first-year students in their first-year seminar courses. There have also been changes to Kuali access and navigation, and course drop forms have changed from paper to Kuali.
He then added that student accommodation requests have been mostly processed, and reminded faculty that they can also accommodate students without a verification of accommodation letter, though such an accommodation would need to be made for all students. He also discouraged allowing AI note-taking due to accuracy and privacy issues.
AI Inititative
Director of Artificial Intelligence Initiative Richard Russell spoke about plans for managing artificial intelligence at the College.
He said that after talking to students at outreach events in the College Union Building, most students are against the use of AI on campus, though he argued that it is a reality that ought to instead be engaged with and managed.
Russell explained that the College is currently in the first of a three-year AI program, which is focused on “learning and exploration.” The program has organized over 30 workshops this summer and plans to hold more in the January term and next semester.
He is working on a document for faculty that discusses ways to teach with and without AI to be released soon.
In addition, each department and program will have one faculty and student AI coordinator to articulate academic values in respect to AI to help inform school policy. There will also be an Imagine Gettysburg AI kickoff event on Wednesday Sept. 30 in the Plank Gym to encourage student perspectives.
Writing Center Updates
English professor Christopher D’addario and English lecturer Melissa Forbes reported new plans for the Writing Center.
D’Addario began by mentioning that there had been a committee of faculty and administrators to discuss the expansion of the Writing Center last spring. There is interest in making the center the hub of all writing activities on campus for students and faculty, beyond its current focus in writing tutoring.
He said that he and Forbes want the center to support all students and faculty in their writing as opposed to just students who are struggling. This would include support in writing for academic publications and fellowships applications.
Planned changes also include more specialized tutoring for specific classes and departments, and a consulting model with students specialized to help students in different kinds of writing.
Forbes added that changes will be part of a three year evolution, which includes applying for grant money to remodel the space and semester-long training for student consultants with different specializations.
She also spoke about her interest in providing pedagogical, professional and AI-specific support and resources for faculty. The changes will also include career-centered workshops that include club partnerships and outreach events to teach about the continued relevance of writing skills in an AI world.
In addition, the center will run a three-semester program to help develop inclusivity in writing.
The Writing Center is in the process of hiring three writing fellows to conduct research on student and faculty perceptions of the center by conducting interviews with students and faculty.
Faculty Governance Committee Motions
History professor William Bowman, introduced two motions on behalf of the Faculty Governance Committee. He stated that both motions had been formed out of the work of a faculty governance review commission from several years ago, on which Bowman had also served.
Bowman contextualized the propositions by speaking about a declining number of faculty at the College and stating that many retirements and resignations have remained unreplaced. He cited this trend as the principal impetus for the motions.
The first motion was to reduce the number of faculty appointed to the Events Planning and Coordinating Committee (EPACC) from four to three.
The second motion was to eliminate the Student Enrollment and Retention Committee (SERC), transferring its responsibilities to the Student Life Committee. Vice President of Enrollment and Educational Services Robert Schwartz would also be made a sitting member of the Student Life Committee.
Bowman argued that the SERC currently consists of two faculty members who lack voting power; the motion would provide for more holistic and efficient conversation on the topic of enrollment and retention.
He added that he had received an email from English professor Joanne Myers that questioned whether faculty would still have a role in enrollment and retention, to which he replied that the faculty does not currently have a role through SERC, and probably does not have any more power in the Student Life Committee.
Computer science professor Todd Neller commented that he believes that eliminating one person from EPAC is insufficient, and the entirety of EPAC out to be eliminated. Per his experience on the committee, he said that it is not worth its budget and the funds ought instead be divided among academic departments that he described as “already stressed.” He added that the committee already encourages departments to co-sponsor events and this work can be done informally as opposed to through proposals and proposal review processes.
