Skip to main content
Retention Council Minutes

RETENTION COUNCIL

Tuesday, October 05, 2010: 10.00 – 12.00 noon
280N York Lanes

Attendees: John Amanatides, Jeffrey Ball, Ronda Bessner, Robert Bishop, Cherie Bova, Jennifer Bramer, Paul Brienza, Mauro Buccheri, Glenn Craney, Joseph De Souza, Joanne Duklas, Rosanna Furgiuele, Debbie Hansen, Chantal Joy, Sue Levesque, David Leyton-Brown, Polly MacFarlane, Don Murdoch, Praveen Muruganandan, Jennifer Myers, Mark Robertson, Garry Spraakman, Lynda Tam, Stanley Tweyman, Marc Wilchesky, Mark Wilson, Peter Wilson, Josephine Campanelli Zeeman

Guests: Kawa Ada, Ian Crookshank

Chair: Rob Tiffin   Co-Chair: Norma Sue Fisher-Stitt  Note Taker: Suharshi Perera

  1. Review of notes from August 30th Meeting
    There were no additional items to add to August meeting notes.

  2. Residence Life Programming
    • Chantal Joy, Ian Crookshank & Kawa Ada gave a presentation on Residence Life Programming.
    • Following factors were taken into consideration while creating the new Residence Life Programming Model; past programs, models at other universities, student input, White Paper, discussion with stake holders (College Masters), CAS standards & relevant literature
    • Three Strategic Seeds of residence wide programs:
      • Academic Success & Career Planning
      • The College & Campus Connection
      • Personal & Community Development
    • The six branches of house programming: Academic Success & Career Planning, Internationalization & Global Citizenship, Leadership & Life Skills, Diversity & Social Justice, Health & Wellness & Community Building & Outreach
    • Assessment Plans & Tools: Student Voice survey, Program Specific Evaluations, On-the-spot assessment & Paraprofessional Feedback.
    • Percentage of international students in residence is about 20%. Students from GTA consist of 71% of the residence population.
    • What makes GTA students live on campus à Convenience, Parental Advice & Positive Experience
    • Residences are not filling up. There are about 300 empty beds. Residence can be an important aspect of future students’ lives. Residence students are offered more skill building & leadership opportunities than students living in the “Village”.
    • York retention data indicates that residence students are more likely to stop out from University than commuter students. This can be the focus of a future discussion.
    • Learning Objectives can be defined by students or colleges. Outcome should be specific to activity. There also has to be a balance between what we are offering and what students need.

  3. Fall Co-Curricular Week (FCW)
    • Fall Convocation Impact - There might be a positive impact if the result is that  more faculty are around to attend events. What is the impact on people who are engaged in both FCW & Convocation? Currently dates are booked until 2014 with convocation occurring Wednesday, Thursday & Friday of co-curricular week. Is it possible to shift the starting date of the convocation to Thursday? If members have any concerns/suggestions they can contact Norma Sue or Rob.
    • Many of the events during FCW that require pre-registration are full. Two promotional videos featuring students have been posted to the FCW website. Other promotional activities: Posters, Banner in Vari Hall, Face book, You Tube & Twitter
    • A session evaluation form will be distributed. This should be given to students at the end of the session. After the FCW these forms should be submitted to Norma Sue Fisher-Stitt, Rob Tiffin, Brian Poser or Don Murdoch.
    • According to last year’s stats, sessions offered at the Career Centre were very popular. Advising sessions did not attract many students.
    • How to evaluate Faculty participation?
    • Faculty should be encouraged to promote FCW in class. Chairs & UPDs are to be asked to make announcements regarding FCW & Faculty participation.
    • Faculty of Fine Arts has introduced a passport system with prizes to increase student involvement during FCW. Mentors were told to contact mentees and remind them about picking up Passports.

  4. Updates from Sub-Committees
    • Advising
      • The Advising Goals in the White Paper include the following:
        • Establish a Holistic approach to student advising & support
        • Establish a Coordinated Advising Program
      • It is the intention of the Advising Sub-Committee to accomplish the following tasks during the 2010-2011 academic year.
          1. Identify the needs of Academic Advisors from different Faculties. (Meet Advising Goal (a))
            Expected Outcome:
            • Advising Sub-Committee will identify the Gaps that currently exist.
            • To fill the Gaps, Advising Sub-Committee will prepare adequate training and development that meets the needs of different types of advisors on campus.
          2. Identify the students’ advising needs and expectations in every phase of the student life cycle at the University with consideration to students’ different learning & personal styles. (Meet Advising Goal (b)
            E xpected Outcome:
            • Knowledge of the students’ life cycle will help Advising Sub-Committee determine the touch points whereby “advising” would be recommended in order to be “proactive” rather than “reactive”.
            • By identifying the ‘stress points’ in the first year and beyond, this will help build a stronger connection between student and his/her learning experience at York University. (eg. Student will know when to connect with Financial, Learning Skills, Writing, Career and Personal Counselling support)
          3. Establish standards & expectations for all advisors. (Meet Advising Goal (b))
            Expected Outcome:
            • Establishing standards and expectations will help the various people who have this aspect in their job description perform in a way that ensures consistent messaging to the student. (i.e. Faculty Advising Centres, Faculty and Staff Contacts within departments, librarians, peer mentors, College advisors, Masters)
            • Professionalizing the Advisor Role
          4. Identify best practices when working with technology in advising.
            Expected Outcome:
            • Based on findings, Advising Sub-Committee will decide what opportunities exist to develop for 2010-2011.
    • Data & Resources
      • committee has met once to develop terms of reference
      • focus is on developing a holistic research agenda for the Retention Council   over the next several years in support of goals
      • identify gaps in research
      • longitudinal data will allow us to see what initiatives are working best
      • Executive Committee can be a vehicle for discussion of what we want to achieve and what research/data are needed to achieve goals
    • Faculty
      • Learning Commons Workshop Sub-Committee includes faculty, librarians, learning skills experts, writing instructors and provides a vehicle for information sharing; it is suggested that this group serve as the Faculty sub-committee for 2010/11
      • the goal is to increase faculty involvement both generally and in targeted areas of the curriculum
      • TYP provides an example of coordination and collaboration between several areas of student support and services
      • link to career opportunities/preparation
      • the Learning Commons group is exploring the possibility of holding a workshop on how to do group work; another upcoming session will focus on the Honours thesis and can include UPDs
    • Peer Mentoring
      • first meeting scheduled to identify desired outcomes, what peer mentoring means
      • an important step will be preparing an inventory of what is already in place in this area (e.g., in FFA, Health, LA&PS)
      • review of student leadership training best practices
      • will draw on student mentors for student voice
      • may develop key components of peer mentoring with opportunity for Faculty customization
      • mentoring will be important from a recruitment perspective
      • When a Peer Mentoring model is developed it can be shared with Senate ASCP which will encourage buy in.
    • Students
      • First meeting scheduled for October 22.
      • there are a number of complex components and the committee plans to focus  first on the transition to university, leaving the broader student experience and student space, etc. for future discussions
      • Executive Committee agreed with this approach
      • committee will review what is already being done re. transition (e.g., Red Zone, virtual communities) and how to build on/expand it, and may survey incoming students for feedback (in consultation with Glenn Craney)
      • what synergies and communities can be created when students are on campus for academic advising over the summer?
      • need to inform students about opportunities for support as part of advising
      • what should be communicated to students in advance of the advising appointment?
    • Year to Year
      • committee has met and its current focus is on the Fall Co-Curricular week
      • efforts are being made to get the word out to students about the purpose and benefits of Co-Curricular week, e.g., through e-mails, Y-file, and a video
      • Series of emails has been distributed & two promo videos have been shot. They will be posted on York YouTube & will be linked the FCW website.
      • work is being done on the web site to make it clearer and easier to navigate
      • will include a checklist for students on their progress and resources to address their concerns (with links)
      • broader media release re. Co-Curricular week suggested
  5. Other Business
    • “ Good neighbours guide to student tenants” pamphlet will be distributed in the “Village”
    • Learning Commons opening will be on October 20th.

Meeting ended at 11.30 a.m.