Academic Affairs Committee Meeting — Minutes (112th Session)

Meeting Minutes/Summaries

3/9 This is the contact of IT people that I wrote down in our GBM:

Tech services and support contact Scott.Spencer@jhu.edu Louie@jhu.edu Graham@jhu.edu

• Reach out to freshman senators to find what next steps they’d like to pursue regarding CUE2 on behalf of their graduating year

Arrihant:

• Added questions asking whether students are aware of wayfinding apps used to find new paths on campus

Jackie

• Long conversation with tech services - difficult for cross campus and dual degree students comes from FERPA and systemic tagging. Records in registration must make sure that no information is shared.
  • Vice provost Mithani is dedicated to having a new system replace sis in 2027. However, the university is replacing their financial system, so it probably won’t happen.
• Lots of Jackie’s classes don’t have tags, but have to get special consideration to be tagged.
• SIS is capable of a lot, but there’s a lot of flexibility since they own the program until it’s gotten rid of.
  • Only way dual degree students can register is if they made a special cohort in SIS.

https://forms.office.com/Pages/DesignPageV2.aspx?subpage=design&token=00337c37d96e449d86773369c20d417e&id=OPSkn-axO0eAP4b4rt8N7KsPQcTNjyZNsaWyFWXgMbdUN1RBSzRDT1VTRlNZVDI4QzJERkE2R081WS4u

3/3 Meeting

• Slide 1
• Progress slide:
  • Ameena Mithani – reach out to talk to SGA
    • Registrar – chair of classroom advisory committee
  • Samples of furniture as supposed to be tested by students
  • New energy behind integrating the campuses - no proposal. Dean Rowe cluster of meetings last spring. Sis and tech is all student affairs (involved in to those but not part of the resolving process (Dean Rowe) haven’t heard anything since last spring)
  • Chaired by Rachel Hernandez l. Articulating student success plan. Peabody students are
  • Identifying and removing barriers.
  • New SIS will take a few years
• Our work:
  • Student course manuals – CTEI
• Kevin’s update – responses mostly from Dean Rowe:
  • Dean Falk mentioned that communication of FA could be improved
  • Dean Falk mentioned being in talks with CLE to make sure every class is tagged correctly
  • Dean Rowe: there was a miscommunication with admission and misleading students about FA was not intended
    • There was a timing mismatch
  • Dean Rowe acknowledges the confusion of old system mixed with new system and students to which FA applies to should care particular care to make sure to check correct catalogue
  • Catalogues are published July 1
  • Dean Rowe mentioned that they don’t have control over website content for departments – asked them to update sites
  • Dean Rowe mentions that there has been a challenge to everyone up to speed on CUE 2
    • Faculty, advisors, updating website
  • Dean Falk said that tagging info was sent to departments → dpt tagged classes themselves → tags returned to Dean Falk → given to IT
  • Corrections to tags will be retroactively applied to current students – whatever it is sorted out to next year (25-26) that tag will be retroactively updated
    • “Things fall through the cracks” because many places are responsible for tags
    • Faculty board came up with credit allotments.
  • There was confusion of how process was worked and how to degree plan → but 4 yr plan was planned to make it so that even those with blank slate (no summer, no AP, no intersession, etc.) can still double major
  • Some of the stem departments had undertagged (everybody had done FA2) → in the winter, tried to fix undertagged to create “more breathing space”
  • Dean Rowe says she doesn’t want the students to feel like just because they’ve fallen back one semester, then it is unrecoverable
  • Dean Rowe intends to send out email update to students when retroactively course tags get fixed
    • This is an ONGOING and tedious effort
  • Actively minimize and fix errors when caught
  • Dean Rowe prefers communicating directly with Dean Rowe than contacting the departments for student complaints
  • “If you hear something let us know”
  • Kevin follows up those with specific double major accommodation issues and those who engaged with him with trouble with FA
  • Double major accommodation mapping was about if it was possible, but the feeling of being constraining was not taken into account
    • Dean Rowe acknowledged variables on part of the students that would make them feel like double majoring is contraining
  • Dean Rowe says that there is a vast (36-72) requirement gap between different majors
    • Rules of what is double counted and what is not is overseen by Dean Rowe’s office
    • Dean Rowe has no authority to change the plan itself – it is higher up than her
  • Dean Rowe mentions that we are early into this system
    • Says there has been hyperspecializaiton at Hopkins
    • Only 1/3 of majors graduate with 2 major – so doing 2 majors was not a foundational part of a new credit system
    • Constraining students was not the goal, but having all the many possibilities was not considered either
    • Idea behind FA:
      • Alumni feedback – job market trends → #1 thing is versatility (think broadly across ideas = breadth which is separate from hyperspecializaiton – aka a major)
      • This new curriculum is tailored to help students pivot if their goals change and have soft skills
      • Idea: discomfort helps you grow
      • Pedagogical thought has gone into the FAs
      • Traditional buckets (humanities, social science, etc.) was not how school wanted the students to view classes
        • Not department “own” an FA – can be found in any department (maybe except FA 3)
  • Who is affected most by new system “Doing different majors in different ways”
    • Some major double count FA and major requirements more
    • The number 15 is not arbitrary → leads to disruption of status quo
      • Was not part of conversation about why 15 credits
      • 9 is not meaningful
  • Dean Rowe: push faculty have courses as many courses as long as appropriate
  • Dean Rowe: students are welcome to petition or wrote complaints – encourages them to write to their office
    • There will likely be no revote – because we don’t know; maybe in the future this will pan out more positively (replanning tool, talk to advisor)
    • The beginning is “overwhelming” and there is “many boxes” → if we button up undertagging → then this will feel different
    • Faculty governing body will probably not reverse their decision now
      • There is a lot of data and studies into making this plan
      • The plan was made in best interest of current first years (entry year 2024)
  • Dean Rowe says that there is no guaranteeing that if students choose any major(s) then they’ll finish in 8 semesters
  • 90% of students are designed to finish in 4 yrs

3/2 Meeting

• Jackie: mid fall: panel for dual-degree students where admin are there + students can share feedback (Admin brought it up).
  • Dr. Noemi Crespa Rice

2/23 Meeting The Academic Affairs meeting focused on organizing branded study events to increase awareness of the committee and provide resources. Amy proposed hosting study hours in alternative study spaces like Mudd, Hodson, or the library annex. The team discussed the logistics, including funding, timing, and collaboration with mental health resources. They also considered the study space survey, debating between constructing new spaces, renovating existing ones, and redelegating current spaces. The survey will include questions about study space availability, preferences, and accessibility, aiming to gather data on student needs and potential improvements.

• Finalize the plan for the "Academic Affairs Hosted Study Events", including the specific date, location, and activities.
• Create a funding bill for the study events to cover costs like snacks and supplies.
• Reach out to Tim to discuss booking event spaces and collaborating on the study events.
• Finalize the survey on study spaces, including adding a question on preferred locations for reallocating existing spaces.
• Determine the process for distributing the study spaces survey to the entire student body.

2/16 Meeting The meeting discussed several key points: an email to Dean Martin about student concerns regarding four-year plans and overloading classes, with a response expected by Tuesday. An email to Dr. Brown about phone charging stations and textbooks was drafted. Kevin proposed creating more genetics sections due to high demand and long waitlists. The team also discussed the need for more quiet study spaces, especially for freshmen, and suggested running a survey to gather data.

• Send email to Dean Martin about student concerns regarding 4-year plans and overloading classes
• Follow up on email sent to Dr. Brown about registration forms, potentially adding a line to the email
• Reach out to HSS committee about potential collaboration on a mental health and academics event
• Investigate options to increase section sizes for high-demand courses like biology and computer science

2/2 Meeting The meeting discussed several key updates and issues. Attendance was noted, with some absences marked as unexcused. Group availability for meetings was reviewed, with a preference for 6-7 PM. Updates included the need for lecture hall renovations, particularly in Remsen and Maryland, and the formation of a committee to address these issues. Wi-Fi expansion in lecture halls was mentioned, with a pilot in Hodson Hall. The implementation of e-portfolios for Whiting School of Engineering students was detailed, including requirements for ethics pieces and independent design projects. The group also discussed the removal of overloading options for Krieger students and the need to advocate for its reinstatement.

• Schedule meetings with Kevin and other group members to discuss their current projects.
• Send an email on Monday about installing phone charging stations in major lecture hall atriums.
• Collaborate with the Whiting School of Engineering on the data collection and analysis.

12/19 Deans Check in

– Dean Falk mentions that he is interested connecting us with CTEI director Mike Rees

• Tarini mentions that we can make an announcement to GBM
• Share emails and names w/ Dean Falk

– Classroom advisory meeting – meeting was cancelled by rescheduled for January

• should classroom advisory committee present to SGA/should SGA reps come?
• Tarini and Stone haven’t heard back in a while
• Classroom advisory committee either will present to SGA or invite SGA as a guest to their Class advisory committee meeting
• Next meeting: Jan 27 at 1 PM is next meeting
• Remsen 1 and 101 discussed by request of SGA
• Marian Conel - business office of provost
  • ***Want to attend SGA meeting in January – FOLLOW UP with Stone**
  • Ameena Mithani (send email)
• Planning to replace seats in remsen 1 and 101 (after winter break share plans with SGA)
• There was a survey sent out for upgrading WiFi infrastructure in dorms and lecture halls

– WSE update:

• Faculty senate discussed changes with respect to changes to CUE2
• Jennate Wiesen and Dean Falk – change requirements for entry year 25 and after; some changes to policy will affect CURRENT students
  • Research for credit (more credit sign ups) and customized academic learning
  • Currently: can do research for credit, but has to be assessed by faculty (from anywhere – even if nominally the mentor, but no actual one)
    • New: if faculty member is not overseeing the work, then change to S/U
    • If a Hopkins faculty member is actually assessing the work - that could be graded
  • Customized academic learning : independent study, and research for credit
  • Dean Falk: difference in approach in CUE2 between WSE and KSAS: WSE will have a portfolio and that
  • Changes at once/continual rollout: effective Fall 2025
• More rigorous process for registration - faculty member and student have to determine learning goals and how they will be assessed
  • Research for credit is under control of WSE, not departments

– Curriculum committee meeting

• Dean Falk – will send out a list of CUE2 changes on Dec 19, to review for meeting in January
• CAL - independent study, research for credit

– Tranini mentions the major fair

• Dean Falk is open to idea of helping WSE students choose their majors
• FYS version for WSE: Design cornerstone (for students to tell apart majors) or discussion based (deep dive in academic topic)

11/23 Committee meeting

• No current meetings - we need to know what to talk about with them.

• Starting with interdivisional registration is easier to start - fixed within a year rather than a few.
  • Work with IDR and SEAM. SEAM is better at the moment - are they more competent or are they better?
  • Stacy Cooper @ Peabody - cross-campus faculty and staff work groups. (student life, scheduling, financial aid, recruitment).
  • Potential other contacts: Steve Stone, Paul Matthews??
  • Haven’t really met much, and maybe convince them to meet more. Talk with Rachel Hernandez and Jessy Martin.
  • Focusing on SEAM is a good idea.
  • Really want meetings with all four committees - have student representation.
• Losing points not in canvas class - scheduling issue.
• Follow up with the Peabody registrar’s office (Dean Matthews?)

Meeting Notes

10/16 Committee meeting

The meeting discussed the new Krieger School of Arts and Sciences website and the foundational abilities system. Dean Rowe indicated that the current system was not designed to prevent double majors, contrary to student perceptions. A petition to abandon the Q2 system was proposed, emphasizing the need for negotiation from a strong position. The group debated the feasibility of overloading and reducing credit requirements. They also discussed creating a course manual similar to Princeton's and improving the experience for Peabody dual-degree students. The importance of gathering student feedback on foundational abilities and Q2 was highlighted, with plans to survey freshmen.

Action Items

• [ ] Reach out to Emily Waters and invite her or Eliza Waters to a GBM to discuss the foundational abilities requirements.
• [ ] Compile data from freshmen on their struggles with fulfilling the foundational abilities requirements.
• [ ] Reach out to financial aid and facilities departments to discuss free or reduced-price resources and campus infrastructure, with Deans Falk and Rowe included on the emails.
• [ ] Explore the possibility of creating a dedicated "academic opportunities" board, either physical or digital, to centralize and promote various academic programs and fellowships.
• [ ] Review and finalize the survey questions on the foundational abilities requirements to be sent out to freshmen.

Outline

New Krieger School Website and Foundational Abilities Discussion

• Speaker 1 introduces the new Krieger School of Arts and Sciences website for undergraduates, which launched last week.
• Speaker 1 mentions that Dean Rowe indicated the current foundational abilities system was designed to allow students to double major, but this is not the current student experience.
• Speaker 2 discusses starting a petition to abandon the Q2 system, emphasizing the need to negotiate from a position of strength.
• Speaker 3 notes that Dean Falk and Dean Rowe had conflicting views on the Q2 system, indicating a disconnect between the administration's intentions and the current implementation.

Differences in Q2 Implementation Between Krieger and Whiting

• Speaker 1 highlights the differences in Q2 implementation between Krieger and Whiting, noting that Whiting is more flexible.
• Speaker 4 mentions that Dean Falk believed the system was designed to prevent double majors, while Dean Rowe believed it should allow for double majors.
• Jazzlyn Fernandez suggests fighting for overloading as a solution to the foundational abilities requirements.
• Speaker 2 emphasizes the need to play hardball and negotiate from a strong position to achieve a better undergraduate curriculum.

Potential Solutions and Next Steps

• Jazzlyn Fernandez suggests overloading as a potential solution to the foundational abilities requirements.
• Speaker 2 agrees and emphasizes the need for short-term and long-term plans to mitigate the effects of the current system.
• Speaker 4 suggests advocating for more fundamental changes, such as reducing the number of credits required for each foundational ability.
• Speaker 3 proposes inviting Dean Falk or Dean Rowe to a GBM to discuss the foundational abilities and gather student feedback.

Course Manuals Initiative

• Speaker 1 introduces the idea of creating a manual similar to Princeton's, which would include student feedback and resources for courses.
• Speaker 1 explains that the initiative was initially proposed by Dean Falk and Dean Rowe and is being considered by the Center for Teaching Excellence.
• Speaker 1 asks for volunteers to help with the project, and Speaker 3 and Jazzlyn Fernandez express interest.
• Speaker 1 mentions that the initiative would involve assembling a team of students to write course entries and possibly recruit SGA members for feedback.

Peabody Dual Degree Students and Registration Issues

• Speaker 1 discusses the challenges faced by Peabody dual degree students in registering for Homewood classes and obtaining degrees.
• Tarini Basireddy explains the procedural and policy issues that affect Peabody students' registration.
• Speaker 1 suggests reaching out to the deans and the registrar to understand the current status of the dual degree program and to push for improvements.
• Speaker 3 emphasizes the need to make the administration aware of the issues and to involve Peabody students in the conversation.

Financial Aid and Facilities Resources

• Speaker 1 mentions the need to reach out to financial aid and facilities to discuss free or reduced-price resources and campus infrastructure.
• Speaker 1 suggests including deans in the emails to financial aid and facilities to ensure a response.
• Speaker 4 asks about the possibility of taking over a physical board in Gilman tunnel for academic opportunities.
• Speaker 1 proposes creating a physical and online board for academic opportunities, which would be managed by SGA.

Survey for Freshmen on Foundational Abilities

• Speaker 1 and Speaker 4 discuss the questions for a survey to gather freshmen feedback on the foundational abilities and Q2 system.
• The survey will include questions about awareness of the foundational abilities, their impact on academic freedom, and the difficulty of creating a four-year plan.
• Speaker 1 and Speaker 4 debate the wording of certain questions to ensure they are unbiased and effective in gathering useful data.
• The survey will also include a free-response question for students to provide additional feedback.

Finalizing the Survey and Next Steps

• Speaker 1 and Speaker 4 finalize the survey questions, ensuring they are clear and unbiased.
• The survey will be sent to all freshmen and Student Affairs for feedback.
• Speaker 1 emphasizes the importance of gathering data to present to the administration and faculty.
• Speaker 2 raises concerns about the lack of academic qualifications of the person who wrote the Q2 report, emphasizing the need for faculty input.

Strategic Recourse and Faculty Involvement

• Speaker 2 suggests passing a resolution to the accrediting agency if the foundational abilities are not in the students' interest.
• Speaker 1 emphasizes the need to focus on short-term and long-term improvements rather than complete abandonment of the system.
• Speaker 2 expresses personal concerns about the pedagogical impact of the foundational abilities and the need for faculty involvement.
• Speaker 1 suggests speaking to faculty to understand their perspectives and gather support for potential changes.

Deans Meeting 10/15

CUE2:

• Engineering foundational abilities has not changed
• KSAS requirements should not affect anyone before entering 2024
  • There’s an option for exceptions if there are any oddities with course catalog
  • Who to contact: Erin Rowe Eliza Waters from Kriger
  • Instead of distribution requirements, now there is general education requirements
• Dean Falk says the object of the change was that students should be broad, if they are in liberal arts school. Enforces breath
• Dean Rowe entered the meeting
• Dean Rowe mentions that now there is a dedicated website for undergraduate education
  • All the FAs listed on the website
  • Semester in DC is listed
  • Global migration and refugees (theme for Spring 2025)
  • Difficulty double majoring with FAs with CUE2 question:
    • “Not intentional and definitely possible to do all those things”
    • System is designed to let students double major
    • There is “diversity” in where you can find FAs
• CC Amynah Mithani, Dean Rowe and Dean Falk in facilities email
• Student affairs student success plan with deans, registrar, Rachel Hernandez and Tiffany Hernandez
• One university issue - Peabody dual degree students (application to homewood) - Dean Rowe hasn’t heard of any follow-ups.
• Dean Rowe and Dean Falk don’t have any oversight on seam. They know there is an issue.
• Part of the issue is that Peabody classes are scheduling for 4 hour blocks 3-4 days a week but the registrar sees it as a course overlap
• Part of the reason to get permission is to make sure that there really isn’t a conflict.
• New energy behind it - those bconversation are happening centrally.
• They’re process not policy issues -application to become a dual degree student
• Paul Matthews from Peabody
• Reach out to Provost Hernandez
• Upperclassmen have to submit registration requests first - where do Peabody students (JCAP meeting)
• Course manual updates – Dean Falk
  • Engage center for Teaching Excellence and Innovation has looked at implementation
  • Student affairs is happy to fund this
  • Tarini mentions that within AA there is no overwhelming interest
  • Course Evaluation Guides – discontinued in 2006
  • Principedia initiative – is an outline of what information to collect for courses
    • These include successful students sharing their insights
    • Imbursements are on the table
    • Based on structure of Princeton’s course evaluation
    • Dean Rowe shares the document for us to give our edits
• Dean Rowe
  • Mentions that there are major T-shirts

Meeting Notes

Wednesday, October 9

The meeting focused on updates and initiatives related to academic affairs. Key points included findings on Hopkins' grading policy changes and the decision-making process, with relevant documents shared for archiving. Discussions covered the need for better support for incoming freshmen, the impact of covered grades, and the decision-making power of the Homewood Academic Council. The group also addressed issues with lecture hall facilities, suggesting a survey to gather feedback. Concerns about the new foundational abilities requirements were raised, highlighting the challenges of meeting the new credit distribution and the need for proper tagging of courses to avoid student overwhelm.

Action Items

• [ ] Share links to the Higher Ed document and Princeton report referenced by Moses.
  • https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/06/01/should-colleges-shield-freshmen-themselves-hiding-first-term-grades-their
  • https://www.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/documents/2017/05/PU_Grading_Policy_Report_2014_Aug.pdf
    • Quote on JHU: "Several peer institutions have used covered grading (MIT and Johns Hopkins) or pass/fail grading (Caltech and Swarthmore) in the freshman year. Each policy has subtle differences, but the basic idea is to report only pass/fail grades on the transcripts for the first semester of freshman year. Similarly, the earned grades do not count towards the student’s overall GPA. 'Covered grades' mean that the students themselves and authorized university personnel have access to the actual grades. At some institutions, the students may request that their actual grades be sent to potential employers. Interestingly, Johns Hopkins recently voted to repeal a covered grading policy because the policy created several significant academic problems. For example, in sequential courses, the students were often underprepared for the second semester, presumably because the first semester 'did not count.' Grades provide strong incentives to work hard, even to freshmen."
• [ ] Follow up with Brittany Brown and Stone about the lecture hall repair initiative and potentially establishing a student committee to assess the needs.
• [ ] Develop survey questions related to academic resources, lecture hall facilities, and the foundational abilities curriculum.

Outline

Updates on Previous Meetings and Recording Notice

• Danial Nabizadeh informs the group that the meeting will be recorded for note-taking purposes.
• Speaker 1 outlines the meeting structure: brief updates from everyone followed by work time to complete tasks.
• Speaker 2 shares updates on reading various reports and manuals related to programming languages and university publications.
• Speaker 2 mentions finding information about Hopkins' grading policy changes and a report from Princeton on Hopkins' changes.

Discussion on Grading Policies and Freshman Support

• Speaker 2 discusses an article from Inside Higher Ed about better ways to support incoming freshmen and the negative effects of covered grades.
• Speaker 1 confirms that the decision to change the grading policy was made by the Homewood Academic Council, not administrators.
• Danial Nabizadeh thanks Speaker 2 for the helpful information and mentions archiving the links for future reference.
• Speaker 2 shares additional information about Hopkins' detailed justification for reinstituting the test requirement for admissions.

Halloween Cabling Survey and Lecture Hall Issues

• Speaker 1 proposes creating a survey for the Halloween cabling event to gather feedback on lecture halls and academic resources.
• Speaker 1 mentions an email sent to facilities about lecture hall issues, but no response has been received yet.
• Tarini Basireddy offers to help with the survey and mentions forming a cohort for dual degree students.
• Speaker 1 and Tarini Basireddy discuss the challenges and progress of the dual degree cohort initiative.

Textbook Costs and Open Access Textbooks

• Speaker 5 suggests exploring the use of Open Access textbooks to reduce textbook costs for students.
• Speaker 1 agrees and mentions the possibility of adding questions about textbook costs to the survey.
• Speaker 1 discusses drafting an email to the financial aid office to understand why some students are not receiving enough money for textbooks.
• Tarini Basireddy brings up the cross-campus scheduling PowerPoint and asks for feedback on revisions.

Student Demographics and Admissions Policies

• Speaker 2 inquires about the discussion on changes in student demographics and admissions policies from the previous week.
• Speaker 1 explains that the discussion was mostly limited to an email and that admissions is closely monitored.
• Speaker 2 mentions legal letters sent to universities regarding data preservation for legal reasons.
• Zachary Bahar and Tarini Basireddy discuss the impact of the Supreme Court ruling on student applications and the need for outreach programs.

Lecture Hall Repairs and Facilities Initiatives

• Danial Nabizadeh and Speaker 1 discuss the initiative to improve lecture hall facilities and the need for student input.
• Speaker 1 mentions a meeting with deans to discuss lecture hall repairs and the possibility of forming a student committee.
• Danial Nabizadeh suggests using tabling events for data collection and mentions the J games as another opportunity for surveys.
• Speaker 1 and Danial Nabizadeh discuss the approval process for surveys and the importance of student feedback.

Foundational Abilities and General Education Requirements

• Kevin Xu raises concerns about the new foundational abilities and general education requirements, particularly for STEM majors.
• Kevin Xu explains the challenges of meeting the new requirements and the limited ability to double count certain courses.
• Zachary Bahar and Speaker 1 discuss the broader implications of the new system and the need for proper tagging of courses.
• Kevin Xu suggests collecting data from freshmen to understand the impact of the new system and identify potential solutions.

Survey Questions and Data Collection

• Speaker 1 provides a document with survey questions for collecting feedback on lecture halls and foundational abilities.
• Kevin Xu and Tarini Basireddy discuss the importance of tagging courses correctly to avoid student overwhelm.
• Speaker 1 emphasizes the need to address current issues to prevent them from affecting future students.
• The meeting concludes with a discussion on next steps and the importance of ongoing communication and data collection.

Meeting Notes Wednesday, October 2

The meeting focused on organizing initiatives and addressing various academic issues. Molly Kuzma was provided with a folder for Academic Affairs tasks. Danial Nabizadeh and others discussed the need for better lecture hall infrastructure and the potential for tabling to gather student feedback. Jacquelyn Slade updated on cross-campus scheduling problems, suggesting a meeting with Dean Martin to identify feasible solutions. The group also discussed financial aid concerns, particularly regarding textbook costs, and planned to send an email to the financial aid office for clarity. Additionally, the need for better communication with administrators about CUE2 and e-portfolio implementation was highlighted.

Transcript

https://otter.ai/u/WP9tWjUQjcfvMzaQsUdmuadBTeQ?view=transcript

Action Items

• [ ] Jacquelyn to create 1-2 slides on major cross-campus scheduling issues to discuss with Deans Falk and Rowe.
• [ ] Amy to reach out to Naz and Stone about the process for inviting administrators to GBMs.
• [ ] Tarini Basireddy to draft an email to the financial aid office about textbook costs and resources, and coordinate with Dean Falk on it.
• [ ] Bring up the idea of having someone speak about CUE2 during the meeting with Deans Falk and Rowe.
• [ ] Tarini Basireddy to check in with Stone about the Dar’s initiative to add pilot sections for biology.

Outline

Attendance and Initial Discussion

• Molly Kuzma asks about attendance and mentions she missed the meeting where initiatives were assigned.
• Tarini Basireddy explains the attendance policy and offers Molly the initiative list.
• Tarini Basireddy shares a folder link for Academic Affairs and advises Molly to share it with herself to avoid losing it.
• Danial Nabizadeh suggests pinning the spreadsheet link to the Teams chat for easier access.

Lecture Hall Infrastructure and Educational Outreach

• Tarini Basireddy announces a need for volunteers to work on lecture hall infrastructure, including identifying broken furniture and study areas without electricity.
• Danial Nabizadeh inquires about the announcement made at the end of the General Body Meeting (GBM) regarding the Education Commission.
• Tarini Basireddy clarifies the announcement, mentioning the Center for Educational Outreach and their work on STEM kits for Baltimore City public school students.
• Jacquelyn Slade confirms the Zoom link for future meetings and discusses the need for a recurring calendar invite to avoid absences.

Email Issues and Absence Tracker

• Tarini Basireddy discusses issues with their Hopkins email due to firewall restrictions and requests a Zoom link from Danial Nabizadeh.
• Jacquelyn Slade mentions the absences tracker and the need to fix the form for accurate tracking.
• Tarini Basireddy explains the form's structure and clarifies that excused absences do not affect removal from SGA.
• Jacquelyn Slade and Danial Nabizadeh express confusion about the form's columns and their meanings.

Cross-Campus Scheduling and Academic Affairs Initiatives

• Jacquelyn Slade updates the group on her meeting with Dean Martin regarding cross-campus scheduling issues.
• Tarini Basireddy asks Jacquelyn to identify specific issues to address in cross-campus scheduling and suggests breaking it down into feasible steps.
• Jacquelyn agrees to create a list of issues and set up a meeting with Dean Martin for more detailed discussions.
• Tarini Basireddy requests Jacquelyn to prepare a PowerPoint presentation for the committee and Dean Falk and Rowe.

Financial Aid and Textbook Costs

• Tarini Basireddy plans to send an email to the financial aid office to understand the process for textbook grants and budget readjustments.
• Danial Nabizadeh and Tarini Basireddy discuss the challenges students face with textbook costs and the need for better financial aid resources.
• Tarini Basireddy mentions the possibility of tabling academic affairs initiatives and gathering feedback from students on lecture hall infrastructure.
• Jacquelyn Slade confirms she will send the PowerPoint presentation to Tarini Basireddy and Danial Nabizadeh.

Dean's Meeting Preparation and E-Portfolio Initiative

• Tarini Basireddy and Danial Nabizadeh discuss the upcoming Dean's meeting and the need to prepare for the discussion on financial aid and textbook costs.
• Amy Xu asks about inviting someone to speak about Q2, and Tarini Basireddy suggests discussing it with the deans first.
• Omar Gharib inquires about the meeting agenda and suggests creating a form for it.
• Amy Xu shares her confusion about the e-portfolio implementation and seeks guidance on her role in SGA.

Final Remarks and Next Steps

• Tarini Basireddy reassures Amy Xu to follow up with the e-portfolio board and seek guidance on her role.
• Danial Nabizadeh asks for clarification on e-portfolio, and Tarini Basireddy explains it as an online platform for creating an online resume.
• Tarini Basireddy ends the meeting, reminding everyone to send their notes and follow up on the discussed points.

September 25, 2024

Key points:

• Tarini reiterates Stone’s point that there should be something done regarding the old, broken furniture and other general nonfunctional things in lecture halls
  • Tarini proposed getting involved with this initiative
• Discussed student complaints around CUE2
• Zachary mentioned that double majoring in physics and CS requires less courses that it used to in the past
• Amy wants to invite Deans for WSE, and if possible KSAS, to a GBM to discuss an overview of CUE2 for the benefit of senator and the executive branch of SGA
• Moses also wants to invite a guest speaker to GBM for a discussion on CUE1 and it’s propagating effects into University’s current academic policy with CUE2
• Because of strong support of initiatives to overhaul CUE2 or get more explanations on how it works, Tarini wants to form a designated Teams chat to continue the conversation
  • Tarini wants the conversation on CUE2 to be discussed more at length at a later AA meeting
• Danial mentions that previously freshmen grades were covered
  • 2 strategies on how to approach the topic: talk to the Deans first and if they approve gather data from the student body; or do the reverse of mentioned strategy
• Jacquelyn seems to have asked Stone, SGA president, to bring up Homewood-Peabody cross campus registration initiative in the meeting of exec. with President Ronald J. Daniels
• Meeting end

September 11th, 2024 Dean Meetings debrief by Tarini

• ECE is going to split to EE and CE
• Course manuals not going ahead; why? No faculty stewardship; proposed alternative: graduate student do it
• Program of study tags: new degree audit going out
  • Follow-up: ask if want any students test it or give input
• More free stuff!!!
  • No free textbooks 🙁
  • Alternative: if spending > estimated cost → consider rebate program
    • Budget readjustment request form is less known within student population
• Computer science
  • Demand for courses is difficult to project
  • Some classes got canceled

September 18th, 2024

• Goal for today: everyone puts their initiative in a spreadsheet in Google Drive:
  • File path: Academic Affairs → Meeting Minutes → Academic Affairs Initiatives Spreadsheet - INTERNAL