-
Title
-
Eng
Administration: President's Office: Academic Program Planning 1968-73, Various Memorandum
-
Identifier
-
Eng
1971-07_Administration_1A34_02_02
-
Source
-
Eng
1971-07
-
Eng
1A34
-
Eng
2
-
Date Created
-
Eng
1971-72
-
extracted text
-
. .._ /o
RE:
Future Academic plans for minority people at TESC
In response to Provost Barry's inquiry abat the feasibility of a Contemporary
American Minorities type program for 1972-73, a meeting was held on 12, April,
1972. The entire mino~ity community, administration, some faculty and other
interested persons were invited and attended that meeting.
There was much of the spirit of co-operation and teamwork expressed in
that setting and many ~neral and significant ideas received direct, straightforward discussion. Among them were these:
1.
The minority community feels no need to repeat the CAM program in the
curriculum at TESC. We recognize the fact that the CAM program,
in spite of its successes, l·Tas a band-aid to cover a very large wound,
that is the absence of minority concerns in the remainder of TESC's
academic progrBI:l. In its stead, the minority community called for the
complete, systematic inclusion of the minority experience in all
programs where relevant and faculty sensitivity to the needs and concerns
of minority students. This will not only cover up the wound as did the
band-aid, but will attempt to heal it. Furthermore, the minority community
sees a need for programs to offer more ad better opportunities for minority
students to develop the necessary skills to further their educational goals.
1972~73
I
0
I
2. Everyone present recognized that the kinds of programs called for i~
the preceding paragraph will be possible only if the college hires adequate
numbers of well-trained non-white faculty members. In addition, a high
priority should be placed on securing minority administrators. To get the
appropriate numbers of good people, the college should begin each year's
minority personnel recruitment drive early, it should tap into all
available sources of minority candidates (including present minority
staff and students), and i t should offer competitive salaries and work
conditions. In particular, the community feels that the next academic
dean and the next Board of Trustees member should be minority people.
3. The participants felt that projected goal of a 25% minority st11dent body
can be reached only by means of greater recruitment efforts based on the
necessary appropriation of funds to make that goal a reality. In
addition to the discussion of these general ideas, some specific commi~~ents
Olympia. Washington 98505
made by those present anticipated some results to be expected in the near
future. These expectations are 1.) that there will be no CAM-type
program in the 1972-73 offerings; 2) that the designers of the offerings
for next year will actively work to include minority concerns in their
projected programs and to provide skill development opportunities for
minority students; 3) that the college seek to hire additional minority
staff for 1972-73; 4) that there will he another meeting before the end
of the Spring quarter to determine our progress toward these goals.
3. We thought this was a good meeting based on the proper spirit of
cooperation and working together, which is part of the Evergreen concept.
We have full faith that our trust and commitment will not be betrayed.
.f1-~ s..
!"a ('c ,
,
~ID1
THE EVERGREEN STATE COLLEGE
April 5, 1972
MEMORANDUM
All Students in CAM Program
Pete Steilberg
David Brown
Carl Brown
Ken Donohue
Don Humphrey
*Jerry Burke
Larry Stenberg *Merv Cadwallader
*Les Eldridge
Charles Teske
Jose Arguelles
Ken Paull
Carmen Valdez
Elena Perez
Frank Guthrie
Rick Rico
Francisco Tello Carole Hunter
Kathy Baseden
Charles Hunter
Perry Newell
Roberta Newell
To:
Edwina Dorsey
Alice Douglas
*Darrel Phare
*Medard Delgado
*Lem Stepherson
Don Parry
*Tabo Chuku
Ken Harden
*Joe Rodriguez
Fifi Chu
Jim Breiler
David L. Hitchens
John Moss
Russ Hauge
Charles Nisbet
*Rudy Martin
Cruz Esquivel
Arturo Gonzales
*Jim Foresman
Keith Williams
Walter Fitzgibbon
Gail Tonaka
-,..-~~7'"--i.._oiliii!II.J
From:
David G. Barry , Vice President and Provost\))
Subject:
Planning for 1972-73----differences in academic program format
new patterns of response:
eed for
(
During the present year the academic area had
program directed specifically at one
aspect of the plurality o
erican society. It was titled Contemporary American
Minorities. Rudy Martin was Coordinator. This extremely important program had many
successes. It is my understanding that both on the basis of student interests and
faculty interests, the program will not be repeated in its present form in 1972-73.
There are many reasons for this trend of events. They are reasonable and understandable.
As we look forward to the academic year 1972-73 without such.an academic program, we
must remind ourselves that new students will be coming to the campus. Many of them
will be minority students who might be interested in some of the experiences which
the CAM program provided this year. In the absence of such a program we must ask
ourselves how some of these important personal and academic experiences can be made
available in other ways and in all areas of the College.
I am asking you toattend a meeting in which at least some of the issues involved can
be discussed. The purpose of the meeting is to clarify points of view on student
needs, to understand how the CAM program met them, and to exchange views. Most
importantly, we must raise levels of understanding to assure responsiveness to the
new circumstances we will face next fall. Through interchange and group discussion
it is my hope that we can increase our awareness of some of the problems that new
students will face next fall. The goal here is not to recreate a CAM program but to
explore how critical student needs can be met through new approaches and forms.
Many of these questions have been discussed in President's Council. I was asked to
bring you together to pursue them. The list of invited persons is in no way inclusive.
I have merely invited persons that I know are concerned about the questions. Those
persons names with an asterisk I am asking to come prepared to speak to these isaues in
relation to their areas of responsibility and experience to get the discussions moving.
This is ~ ~ priority meeting. We will look forward to seeing you there. We need
your counsel on areas where change will be needed.
The meeting will be:
DGB:rs
cc:
President's Council
PLACE-DATE--TIME---
Board Room
April 12, 1972
7:30 p.m.
THE EVERGREEN STATE COLLEGE
March 16, 1972
M E M ,0 R A N D U M
~~
Barry~//
To:
Deans
From:
Dave
Subject:
Planning for Minority Education
Insofar as there will not be a basic level CAM program please take whatever
action is necessary in program review to assure that Affierican minority considerations are dealt with in those general programs where historically on
many campuses it has been the pattern to "exclude them." These groups and
their cultural considerations have always been a part of the American History
and Culture yet for any of a number of reasons have too often been excluded.
I urge that you meet with Minority Faculty and students if that will be helpful to discuss this aspect of program planning. This was discussed in
President's Council on 3/14/72 and considered to be an item of top i:nportance
on which action should be taken as qui:::kly as possible. Please follow ~hrough
and keep me informed.
DGB:rs
cc:
President's Council
Coordinators
TO: Deans, Coordinators and Facult~/ ~
From: Davi.d G. Barry, VP & Provost ~~
Subject: Academic Planning as it pertains to CJ
Minority education and concerns.
April
15, 19 72
Following through on discussions at the Presidents Council, I called a meeting
on April 12 to provide opportunity for minority students, faculty and administrators
to consider the meaning of the fact that there will most ll'l<.ely not he a CAM program
offered in academic year 1972-73 due to lack of student interest and faculty interest.
The meaning obviously was .that alternate considerations :<ad to be made. I expressed
myself to this point on March 16 as seen above. The meeting on April 12 was not
designed to be totally inclusive cf ail interests. It was de3igned tu bring needs
and interests into general discuBsion, That goal was accomplished and next steps
must now be taken to carry the discussions forward to asdure that in all aspects
of campus planning, academlc planning and student affairs that minority needs and
interests are appropriately considered. More small group general discussions are
needed to enable further planning. I am pleased to see that the academic deans
have already begi.ln to carry these discussions forward in the Alpha, Beta and Gamma
Group sessions. I ask that you respond to thj_s leadersi:lip and work toward assuring
that Evergreen is truly an inclusive academic comn1unity based uron co~mon human
considerations which at the same time respects and providESplenty of room for individuc:l
and group differences and intares~G.
. 1
February 28, 1972
MEMORANDUM
To:
Willi Unsoeld, Chairman, DTF on Progr
From:
Dave Barry, Vice President and Provost \
Subject:
DTF on Program Review
A DTF chaired by Willi Unsoeld is planning for a period of program
review, self-analysis and general "stock-taking" to determine where
we are in our programs at this moment in time.
The DTF has initiated its work already. I am adding suggestions here
focusing on general area possibilities for review. They relate to
areas where there will always be room for improvement but in which
we need to "take stock" now. Some overlap with the excellent list
of questions for Coordinated Studies already entered into the discussions by the DTF.
General Administration
Provost's Office
How effective has been the inter-action with the Faculty Liaison
Committee and with the Student Facilitators?
What else can be done to assure communication, consultation and
general program coordination?
What communication or service of an inter-institutional nature
is needed?
Deans
How well are meetings going between them and their respective
groups?
How can the Deans of Groups better determine faculty and student
needs?
What guidance is needed by coordinators, faculty and students
in their individual groups?
How well defined have been the Desk Assignments? Should any be
eliminated or fused? What new Desk functions might be appropriately
considered?
Coordinated Study Groups
How were the Covenants developed and how can they be made more
effective?
-2How well did the Faculty Seminars work toward improvement of seminar
leadership and improvement of teaching?
How were student reactions generated, received, reviewed and
integrated into program planning?
How did the Groups relate to each other?
ships be improved?
How can these relation-
How was the record of faculty and student achievement set down?
How closely did it follow the guidelines of the DTF on student
evaluation and records? How can this be improved and made more
effective and meaningful to the student? What do these records
show about the quality and challenge of the learning experience
provided?
Contracted Study
How satisfactorily were the contracts defined, drawn and accomplished?
What have we learned from workloads and readiness for Contracts
responsibilities on the part of both faculty and students?
Can we find ways to improve on counseling and determination of
student readiness for Contracted Study?
If this aspect of program is to grow, how will guidance be given
to faculty new to this mode of instruction?
Cooperative Education
•
How satisfactorily has this aspect of program been integrated into
the general academic planning?
After one quarter's experience, what ways can be found to improve
and strengthen ioint-planning?
Faculty as Inter-disciplinary leaders
How effective has the seminar leadership been? We have had many
successes, I know, but we no doubt still have much to learn.
How do we improve seminar leadership? How do we prepare the new
faculty for these responsibilities? Have the "Seminars on Teaching" been
satisfactory?
How will faculty be reassigned to new programs? We are committed
to faculty serving in new programs and to preventing programs from
becoming courses and small departments.
How will we fulfill on the faculty resolution that no faculty person
shall report to the same Dean for more than two years? This question may be early for consideration but ~v-e must begin to plan nm-1.
Counseling
How closely have the faculty been able to work with the Counseling
Office?
-3What is needed to strengthen the role of faculty in their counseling
responsibilities?
How can the Counseling Office a nd faculty be of greater mutual
assistance?
How effectively have students' needs been met?
What can be learned from the exit interview records?
Admissions and
~egistration
What have we learned about our first steps toward development of
an admissions policy and criteria that have meaning for the
admissions criteria and policy?
What problems have been experienced in attempting to fulfill on
the recommendations of the DTV on Student Evaluation and Records?
What new problems can we now recognize after one quarter's
experience?
Student Facilitators
How do we convince all students of the importance of their role
as facilitators?
How can we improve the effectiveness of their role?
Communications in general
How do we find a way to reach agreement on some unit of time that
can be committed to inter-group and to institutional responsibilities
(DTFs, general sessions, etc.)?
It would be helpful if you would publicize your program and meeting
schedules and invite members of the community to participate in the
discussions particularly on questions that may relate to their areas.
DGB:rs
cc:
Faculty
Budget Heads
GUIDE"LINES '<!OR PRELU1INARY
?ROGl~\M R~ORT,
MARCH, 1972
He n~·H~d to find out what -vm are do.tn;5 in Cooriinated St•1dies. H'e :l!Sv need.
to c0~<1t':i.le factual an.i interpretive documentation as u 'leginning reco:.:-d for
self-evaluation. rhe follmdng guid~li:tes ~dll .rr.ovide essential informat:f.on
to all•Yn comp~:d.sons about what we are exfJe .i-encing in .::oilllilon, 'IJ.ow wa differ
'.n th~ \my He -reapo,..,d to Clramon problem>, and vrhere we rmcceed o-r fcil.
It te;;w1 menbnrs differ in posit.irJn or appro'lch to probl.e~ns, hon~'=l·:ly indicat1a
1-1hat those d::tfferem!e.J have b.3eiJ.. Is it possi.hle for each Coord:l.na.ted Studia3
gronp to have. its report f;o thGi · respective Dean by ~larch 3? In any case,
n•J J..at;z..· thun ~!arch 6.
1.
In ~1hat r.vaya and :Eor what reaons has it been necessary or desi.rable. to
depart from the catalog desz~iption of the program?
2.
~·,bat
3.
ls luppening in the se~:1.i11at·3? \fnat is ·Jeing learned~ accompl1shec1,
improved? H<'lY is attcnda.1c •? Hhat is ycur scheduling ._,f ..::en:f.nars,
uoth ho-w l.arge and hmv ofte•1'? A't'e you v:i.de.otaping them?
Are you generall9 satisfied. 1;dth th.: books chosen for seminar discussic·n?
~ere thes~ b~oks selected?
How
4.
Uhat !=lpecial proble:ns are you havit~g with skill develoiJlnen.: such as
::e'lding and H~iting und ho~, are you hardiine, them?
5.
tfuat
~dnd
of facnlty >em:tna:ca do you have? Have they helped you come
as a w-ork:tng •Jroup'? Are you ·;..ideotaping? How mu:!h time 1.s
3~;, :=:1t in housekeeping compr.t"ed to i::!.me ia book discussions?
t;)get~-8r
6,
lihat k1.nds of te,lching methods other than seml.nars have you been using?
effective have th.Jy beenl
7.
Whe.t I:;.;.nd of e•:ra. Luet:l.on 'coces£' have you developed:
facul~:y'?
of total progrilml
8.
\~!at
9.
Wha':.: abo11t i •d hidual moraLe, se:ninar morale, and program moral:;?
of
a=e you doing about stuJent p9rtfolios?
10.
~fu.1t
11.
what is
12.
of .ltt;td2.:nts?
do you see
·~orking
'lS
me.j -n: stude·1t concerrts wit:h thC' progra1n?
except"ion')lly
Is the total prc;p:am a
c~ohesiv'=~
'Hhy?
Wl'lat has been a L.op?
~fuy?
coherent and progressive tench:fngIf not, whet needs l:c he do·..:1e t.o improve
If yes, congratul..ltions i
learning-working
thE! situation.?
we:~~-~
exp~rience?
2cw
THE EVERGREEN STATE COLLEGE
February 2, 1972
ME M0 R A N D U M
TO:
Faculty
FROM:
Merv
RESULTS OF PROGRAM PLANNING
STRAW BALLOT NO . 1
Ballots distributed 1-20-72-------------1082
Ballots returned 2-2-72------------------245
QUESTIONS
N.
1972 ROUGH
PROJECTION
171
684
1.
I will be back fall quarter
2.
Maybe, maybe not
57
228
3.
I doubt that I will be back
17
68
4.
I want independent contracts
87
348
5.
I want off-campus internship
34
136
6.
I want a group contract
55
220
7.
I want coordinated studies
90
360
837 students have not returned straw ballot #1.
6 faculty have not returned straw ballot #2.
MLC:ej
