Goal 1.3 Committee Report

Committee Members:
Chair: Steven Tyrell - Associate Dean: Student Affairs Office
Co-Chair: Donna Eddleman - Director of New Student Orientation and First-Year Experience: Student Affairs Office
Laura Benzendahl-Bulleit - Academic Adviser: Civil Engineering
Mary Durfee - Assistant Professor: Social Sciences
Dennis Hagenbuch - Director: Physical Education
Jeremy Hendges - Undergraduate Student Government: Student Representative
Corinna Nelson - Inter Resident Hall Council: Student Representative
Angela Schmidt - Inter Fraternity Council: Student Representative
Shannon St. Cyr - Memorial Union Board: Student Representative

Charge

The committee was charged to evaluate the nature and value of the undergraduate education at Michigan Tech in the arena of student life. Student life at Michigan Tech includes activities related to both the classroom experience and to social and cultural opportunities. Within the scope of these two, sometimes intersecting, paths, the committee was charged to determine the impact of the institution on sustaining and enhancing the student life at Michigan Tech. See Attachment 1 for a more detailed explanation of this committee’s charge and responsibilities.

The committee has evaluated how well the University is meeting the projected targets outlined in the University’s Strategic Plan. The committee has also addressed the five North Central Association (NCA) criteria.

Definition of Student Life

Student life is a somewhat nebulous term at Michigan Tech. Unlike other campuses, the University does not have a department or division of student life. Student life is discussed at Tech in four broad categories that tend to overlap a bit. They are

1. student-services;
2. student organizations;
3. experiences of individual students interacting in a variety of social, political, and cultural settings; and
4. faculty and academic-support-staff interaction with students outside of the classroom.

The NCA Goal 1.3 Committee focused on undergraduate student life at Michigan Tech. An analysis of the five criteria is divided into two sections:

1. Student-Services which discusses a and elements of d above and
2. Student Life which looks at elements of b, c, and d above.

A variety of departments serve students in a multitude of ways. In a soup-to-nuts fashion, Student-Life services range from food services to the library, from advising to judicial affairs. Student Life also incorporates the meaning of the "student experience" with how students interact with each other in the University community on a day-to-day basis. Student Life includes participation in student organizations and attending student activities and campus events. Student Life is also an expression of what the student experiences outside of the classroom, yet it is related to the academic success of the student. Examples include everything from academic advising to a faculty member talking with a student at lunch about a topic from a class earlier in the day.

Student life is described by some as educational and an opportunity for students to learn about themselves and others around them. Student life is also described by others as how one can personally find release from the pressures of everyday academic life. However, most students seem to describe student life as an opportunity that includes both of these broad educational and personal-development attributes.

In order to assure adequate attention to both student-services and student life, the Goal 1.3 Committee separated its review of the five NCA criteria into a Student-Services section and a Student Life section. A review of the five criteria under the realm of student-services will occur first; then a review of student-life issues in respect to the five criteria will occur thereafter.

Student-Services

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 1: Purposes

The area of Student Life received little attention from the University prior to 1988. However, in recent years more emphasis is being put on student-life issues by the University and by many individual departments on campus. Attention to these issues is broader than that found in the 1988 NCA Self Study [6.2A1, pp. 54–60], which emphasized student-services but was largely silent about student life. The University Mission and Vision statements now at least suggest the climate for student life that Michigan Tech hopes to achieve. The Mission Statement says "the University will strive to promote diversity, creativity, leadership and teamwork and to educate all of its students to meet the changing needs of a global, technological, diverse and environmentally sensitive society." The University Vision echoes these images with statements like "the University should be a student enriching organization; a leader in promoting diversity, creativity, leadership, and teamwork." It calls for a university community where faculty, staff, and students integrate their strengths to create a rewarding and challenging educational environment [2.1D2].

One can see efforts on the part of University constituencies to promote the characteristics discussed in these statements. Numerous departmental vision statements talk of leadership; programs sponsored by Educational Opportunities, student-run programs like Winter Carnival and Spring Fling, the Fine Arts curriculum, and the diversity brochure published in the Admissions Office all illustrate Michigan Tech’s efforts to make its mission and vision a reality. The University recognizes the crucial role it plays in the lives of students and the reciprocal role students play in the life of the University. Students are not merely necessary to justify the existence of the University; students reflect and contribute to the very community desired by the University. This study assesses how well the University is meeting its stated goals for student life.

In attempting to find evidence to support the goals and vision of the University, one can examine the programs and services that the University provides to service students. It is apparent that opportunities for leadership development exist through the cooperative efforts of the Office of Student Affairs and various campus constituencies [2.6C, 3.7A, and the minutes of Alpha Phi Omega]. Programs like Winter Carnival, in which students devise and develop snow statues, skits, and teams for various sporting events, is an effective example of student development at work. The co-op program that exists on the Michigan Tech campus and the traits which are developed as a result of these opportunities continues to support the University initiative [2.6H6.b].

Survey results indicate that involvement in clubs and organizations provides a venue from which students can aspire to gain those traits noted in the University’s Vision Statement and Mission [6.2B3; Student Organizations Survey]. The preamble of the Constitution and By-Laws of Student Organizations also illustrates the support and focus such organizations have on "governing ourselves in a righteous manner and developing greater spirit of progressive leadership..." The Office of Residential Services also provided opportunities for student development as part of a residential community and in conjunction with the judicial system that is in place. The existence of programs such as Peers Offering Wellness Education and Resources (POWER) and Peer Academic Leaders create opportunities for students to develop as valuable members of the community [2.6H11, 2.6A4, and 2.6F2]. These and other student organizations are advertised through the various forms of media available on campus, including organizational web pages, orientation mailings, campus publicity in the residence halls and the Memorial Union Building (MUB), the first-year newsletter, The Lode, Daily Bull, and the electronic display system.

The Admissions Office further supports the initiative for student development by providing potential students with information about clubs and organizations in its News & Views publications. This literature is supported and gains credence by the occurrence of an Organizations Fair during orientation week. The first-year experience efforts that occur on campus further support the initiatives of the University to assist students in gaining those characteristics outlined in the Vision Statement and Mission of Michigan Tech. Efforts to assist students through early intervention efforts in conjunction with University faculty, "Managing the Maze" seminars, programming efforts, and work with probationary students, are evidence of a continued focus on student development. It is apparent that the stated philosophies by which the University operates are consistent with those that serve to direct and motivate many of Michigan Tech’s programs and services, thus creating a mutual interest on the part of all parties to attempt the realization of these common goals.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 2: Resources

Student-services is defined as any office that provides direct service to students or interacts with students on a frequent basis. Although the list of offices included in this study is not exhaustive, it represents a clear majority of offices who have the most frequent contact with students. Student-services reviewed in this study include University Images, Career Center, Admissions, International Student-Services, Degree Audit, Transfer Student Office, Affirmative Action, Accounting, Cashier, International Programs, Educational Opportunity, Alumni Relations, Student Development Complex (SDC) recreational services, MUB Ticket Office, President’s Office, Provost’s Office, Facilities Management, Dean of Graduate School, Distance Learning, Telcom, Cultural Enrichment, Library, Counseling Services, Registrar, MUB Food Service, Residence Halls’ Food Services, Financial Aid, Tech Express, MUB Manager’s Office, Bookstore, Public Safety, Student Affairs, Intramurals, Residence Life, Residential Services, departmental learning centers, computer labs, language lab, and students’ academic major offices.

Since 1988, student-services has made significant improvements in how they organize human, financial, and physical resources relative to improving the quality of student life at Michigan Tech. Examples of progress include:

Program Organization Issues

• Implementation of "grades by phone" led to increased convenience to students (Registrar).
• Student transcripts, once in a paper form, are now under an electronic format. This allows for greater efficiency in the management of student records. Students can also pick up free copies of "unofficial" transcripts from the Registrar. This program instituted as a new service for students (Registrar).
• Implementation of BANNER program has made it easier for staff to develop reports in the preparation of financial awards for students (Financial Aid).
• The University recently established itself as a Direct Lender. The initiative will go on line Fall, 1997. It will allow students to obtain loans directly from the institution; thus making it more convenient for students to meet the costs associated with attending college (Financial Aid).
• Admission’s recruitment materials include issues that identify what prospective students should expect in student life at Michigan Tech [7.5J, News and Views #3].
• Retail Operations reorganized its unit and enhanced the quality of service in its University Images (formerly known as the Pro Shop) (Retail Operations).
• Educational Opportunity has provided a variety of enriching programs for students that include the "efficacy" program, sponsorship of the Black Student Association retreat, and coordination of the Parade of Nations (Educational Opportunity).
• A new department established close to the last NCA review, Cultural Enrichment, coordinates a variety of fine- and performing-arts programs for the campus community. The department also works closely with student-entertainment organizations such as the Student Entertainment Board, Memorial Union Board, and Sound and Lighting Services. Cultural Enrichment also supervises the new computerized ticket office in the MUB. This improved service has made it easier for students to obtain tickets for events in the Houghton and Keweenaw counties areas (Cultural Enrichment).
• Distance-learning students now have a Student Handbook that is customized to meet their particular needs (Extended University Programs).
• Students now have all types of opportunities to improve their telecommunications needs, including but not limited to, dormnet, voicemail, pager services, cable TV in the residence halls, and a designated residence halls’ movie channel (Telcom).
• Library circulation and search activities have gone on-line with the purchase and implementation of the Voyager system (Library).
• A peer-educational wellness group, POWER, has been instituted since 1988 as an "on-the-road" educational program for student groups, greek life, and residence-hall floors (Counseling Services).
• The establishment of the Tech Express card, a one-stop services card that allows the student to use it as a meal card, vending card, debit card, and building-access card. This new program was established to increase the accessibility of a number of financial services to students (Tech Express).
• The University’s Public Safety officers were armed in order to protect them in situations all too common in a local community that is becoming less and less isolated from the rest of the world (Public Safety).
• The residence life component of the program was centralized in 1995. The University improved the RA selection and training process, and it initiated programming models in order to create an educational environment in the residence halls that is consistent with the rest of higher education (Residence Life).
• The campus has seen the introduction of student-coached Learning Centers since 1988. These centers provide effective peer-education in the areas of writing, chemistry, physics, math, biology, and engineering (Humanities, Chemistry, Physics, Math, Biology, and Engineering).
• The campus has upgraded student health services with the establishment of the new clinic at Sharon Center in Houghton. Plans are underway for building a new health center on the campus property in the near future (Student Affairs).

Human Resources

• The University hired a new Director of Admissions and centralized the coordination of transfer, freshman, and international admissions under one office. This recent reorganization will increase the effectiveness of the recruitment effort (Admissions).
• The University established and hired new Director of International Programs. The office is dedicated to providing students with an opportunity to develop their skills as global citizens (International Programs).
• The food-service programs in three residence halls have recently been centralized under an Associate Director of Dining Services in order to improve the quality of dining services across campus. The department will offer an additional meal plan option for the Fall 1997 (Residential Services).
• A Director of New Student Orientation and First Year Programs was hired in order to focus on the preparation of new students and augment their success in later years in their collegiate career (Student Affairs).
• The Office of Student Affairs was reorganized in 1994, with the assignment of responsibilities along a functional approach. This increased the efficiency of the varied services provided by the department (i.e., scholastic standards, discipline, greek life, student organizations, ADA-related issues, student-leadership development, personal academic counseling, etc.) (Student Affairs).
• The University hired an Associate Director of Residence Life in 1995 as a means to coordinate the development of an educational and positive residence-hall living program (Residence Life).

Physical Resources

• Counseling Services moved to the Hamar House. The service is now centrally located on campus and in a location that can maximize the degree of privacy that is required by this type of program (Counseling Services).
• The MUB was remodeled and opened in 1988 with an interest to best serve the campus community (Memorial Union Building).
• The Bookstore has more that doubled its size since the re-opening of the MUB in 1988 (Bookstore).
• The Office of Student Affairs was enlarged and remodeled to support the addition of the New Student Orientation program (Student Affairs).
• Public Safety was moved to a larger and more central location on campus in order to improve its delivery of service to the campus community (Public Safety).
• The SDC has new equipment in the weight room and a climbing wall as a part of its effort to offer improved service and additional programs to students (Student Development Complex).
• Since 1988, the University has seen a great increase in the number of computers and computer services available to students (Information Technology).

All of these changes in staffing, programmatic issues, and physical space have clearly enhanced the quality of student-services and demonstrates the institution’s commitment to improve student-services. These changes also occurred during a time when student-services went through some organizational changes (see Attachment 2 for more details). Although departmental self-study reports argue for reorganization of reporting lines in student-services, the key issue seems to be a need for greater coordination of student-services units [2.6H6.d and 2.6H11]. Student-Services is loosely organized under a number of campus entities, thus coordination among the units is more happenstance than guaranteed. Although departmental self-studies report a concern with understaffed units, the institution has demonstrated progress in addressing understaffed units in several areas of student-services. It is important to note that the number of student-services positions has increased since 1993—largely due to the support received out of the 1% reallocation process. Student-services may offer the ideal location for experimenting with Michigan Tech’s organizational structure. By trying to centralize operations in this area, the University might well encounter considerable resistance in non-academic units, but at least the effort would enable the institution to simultaneously build stronger links between student-services units and ultimately improve how physical, human, and financial resources are organized in this area.

Satisfaction surveys were sent to faculty, staff, and students in order to allow their constituents to evaluate student-services. The comments in the surveys indicate that student-services have progressed in the last five years, but they have yet to satisfy all constituents [6.2B3, Student Services Survey; 6.2B4, Faculty Survey; and 6.2B7, Staff Survey]. The Goal 1.3 Committee Student Services Survey also indicates significant variance in student satisfaction among departments. Some of the recommendations of the Total Quality teams in student-services have led to the improvement of students’ satisfaction with student-services. For example, the Line Elimination in Student-Services team’s effort led to students spending less time in line registering for classes and paying their bills at administrative offices. These efforts and others demonstrate the University’s desire to evaluate and improve how we organize our human and financial resources.

Departmental self-studies in student-services areas provide limited information on how financial and physical resources are organized in order to enhance the quality of student life at Michigan Tech. The expenditures in student-services per FYES shows that Michigan Tech is in the bottom half of its class with its benchmark institutions (1991–1993) [2.1D2, A–6]. The addition of new positions in student-services in recent years indicates the institution’s attempt to address this disparity with its benchmarks.

In the last twenty years, student-services around the United States has become a highly demanding and professionalized career program. Unlike the 1960s, middle-management and upper-management staff commonly have academic degrees in programs such as student personnel administration, higher education administration, and student development and counseling. Management is also well-versed in the policies and practices indicative of a 1990s student-services administration program. Departmental self-studies did not indicate whether the qualifications and expertise of administrative personnel were appropriate to the degree of responsibility assigned to job duties inherent in the field of student-services today. However, Michigan Tech has begun to do national searches to fill key student-services positions so that incoming staff will have perspectives and professional training uncharacteristic of staff in the past. We recommend that this practice continue in the future. It would seem to be helpful to evaluate programs and services that were consistent with national standards acknowledged in student-services’ Council for the Advancement of Standards. This quality-focused organization serves as an effective benchmark for student-services programs around the country.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 3: Accomplishments.

The departments on campus which provide services to students (e.g., accounting, financial aid, residential services, counseling services, etc.) are delivering what they say they will deliver. Many of these departments have made significant progress toward their goals.

The Career Center has been very proactive in maintaining its excellent placement record despite a downward trend in recruiting. Out-of-town job fairs, an alumni telethon, and video interviewing have been instituted within the last five years as innovative ways to increase the number of students who obtain summer, co-op, and full-time employment offers. They have also increased the number of staff in the Career Center, expanded their hours of operation to include some evening hours, and increased the number of seminars offered as ways to expand the programming and services available to students [2.6H6]. Over the past few years, the Accounting and Registrar’s Offices have both instituted procedural changes to make their services more efficient [2.6H1, 2.6H6]. A number of these changes, such as allowing students to develop their own schedules and notifying students of the status of their financial-aid loan checks, have resulted directly from the implementation of the BANNER7 system [2.6H1, 2.6H6]. Services to students with learning disabilities have been enhanced in recent years. The Office of Student Affairs has begun assisting these students to ensure that appropriate accommodations are made to provide for the students’ comfort in the learning environment [2.6H11].

Since 1988, the Office of Student Affairs has initiated two major changes to the scholastic-standards rules. In the Fall of 1990, new rules were implemented which outlined criteria for good academic standing. These criteria were again updated in 1993 and 1994 in conjunction with the implementation of the BANNER7 system. The 1993–94 revisions allowed the Student Affairs staff to detect and intervene in a more timely manner with students who are experiencing academic difficulty [2.6H11].

In an effort to decrease the number of students who drop courses well into the academic term, a new drop policy was created in the Fall of 1995. This new policy allows students to drop a course within the first 3 weeks of the quarter without that course appearing on their transcripts. Courses dropped during weeks 4 through 6 will show up as a "W" on the students’ transcripts. This policy was created with the intention of decreasing the number of students who sign up for courses with no intention of completing that course. According to the Office of Student Affairs, the number of students who have dropped courses has decreased since the new policy went into effect. It is predicted that this new policy will lead to more timely completion of course work and subsequent earlier graduation with some of our students [2.6H11].

An area of student services which is difficult to evaluate is academic advising. Academic advising at Michigan Tech is decentralized, with each academic department being responsible for advising its own majors. A few of the departments such as Civil and Environmental Engineering, Mechanical Engineering/Engineering Mechanics, and the School of Business have a full-time professional staff member who is responsible for academic advising, while most other departments assign faculty members to the task of academic advising. It has been suggested that faculty in the departments which have full-time academic advisors have little or no contact with students and student groups. However, this was not found to be the case. A draft report prepared by the Advising Improves Retention Total Quality Education Team indicates that in most of the departments that have a full-time, professional academic advisor the advisor often refers students to individual faculty members when they have specific questions with regards to careers or graduate school. Students also seek advice on their own from faculty members other than their assigned academic advisor. A survey conducted by the NCA Goal 1.3 Committee shows that approximately 17% of the students surveyed most often use a faculty member as their primary advisor for academic concerns or questions [6.2B3, Student Services Survey]. As further evidence that faculty are indeed involved with student groups, of the 140 student groups registered with the Office of Student Affairs, 66% of all advisors listed are Michigan Tech faculty.

It is encouraging to see a few departments list effective academic advising among their departmental goals [2.6A8, 2.6B1, 2.6C, and 2.6A6]. However, none of the departmental self studies address the effectiveness of their current academic advising structure, and only one department, the School of Forestry and Wood Products, listed contributions to advising as being a consideration in merit salary adjustments. Some measure of the effectiveness of academic advising at Michigan Tech can be found in the Quality of Student Life Survey conducted by Goal 1.3 Committee. This survey shows that students rate their advisor’s knowledge in their major and other departments as better than "good" (3.3 on a 4.0 scale). In the same survey, students gave a lower rating to both the time spent with their advisor and the support services offered by their advisor, 2.65 and 2.83, respectively.

Because of the decentralized nature of academic advising at Michigan Tech, the University has recognized the importance of having Academic Advisors maintain effective communication with a variety of University constituencies with regard to changes and updates on institutional policies and procedures. The Academic Advising Manual has undergone two revisions in the last three years to improve the quality of communication between these constituencies and Academic Advisors. In addition, the Office of Student Affairs has begun to host workshops periodically so that greater understanding and communication can occur between policy makers and Academic Advisors.

The 1997 Staff Survey conducted by NCA Goal Committee 5 and the 1997 Faculty Survey conducted by NCA Goal Committee 2 show that the faculty and staff of Michigan Tech believe that the University is providing quality service to the students. However, the overall effectiveness and quality of these services has not been measured. The majority of the non-academic departmental self studies list the services provided to the students but do not address the effectiveness, quality, or participation rates of these services. It may be that assessing the effectiveness of the service is more than merely stating the number of students who take advantage of the service. It is recommended that the non-academic departments adopt assessment plans similar to those being adopted by the faculty in the academic departments.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 4: Continuous Improvement.

The ability to evaluate the quality of student life from an assessment and planning perspective is rather limited. Two factors impact the institution’s ability to evaluate the quality of student life.

1. Assessment activity is relatively new to the University. Although forms of assessment activities exist on the academic side of University life, assessment of student-services and student life was practically non-existent before 1991 [5.4B; 2.6H10; 6.2B3,CIRP surveys; and 6.2B3, ACT Survey]. A current concern associated with these assessment activities is that they primarily reflect new-student information, with little attention given to what impact the institution’s programs and services have had on the quality of student life thereafter. Attention to student outcomes has begun on a limited scale over the past two years with support from the Provost’s Office and the Office of Teaching, Learning, and Faculty Development.
2. A few departments have conducted surveys (Student Affairs, Admissions, Career Center, etc.) on student satisfaction, yet no correlation exists between these surveys and program planning. Another concern illustrated in departmental self studies is that units may view themselves as primarily customer-service agents, thereby limiting their educational effectiveness [2.6H10]. Student academic achievement, external to the classroom environment, needs to be assessed by student-services. Research and student opinion supports the notion that learning occurs outside of the classroom [Boyer, 1987; Pascarella, 1991; 6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey]. Future student-services assessment and planning activities need to demonstrate how this learning occurs outside of the classroom, especially in view of the University’s Mission.

The first piece of evidence that the University is committed to addressing obstacles related to student life and student-services is the strategic planning document. A review of non-academic departmental self studies shows the need for closer study of the relationship between finances, facilities, and the utilization of human resources in program delivery in each student-services unit. The strategic planning process, orchestrated out of the Provost’s office, has encouraged non-academic departments to begin thinking about their relationship to University goals. Student-services’ initiatives are now building stronger links to the strategic plan. However, student-services units need to work on linking their planning activities to University assessment activities. As noted earlier, the Council for the Advancement of Standards program can help units assess the quality of their service and assist in evaluating the relationship between programmatic initiatives and University goals.

The University has added a few staff positions over the last five years as budgetary constraints have allowed, yet more staffing resources are needed if the University is to fully realize its mission and its goals outlined in the strategic plan [2.6H11, 2.6H6.d]. Funding issues are not limited to staffing matters. Institutional commitment to fund programmatic costs has decreased in some areas [6.2B3, Intramurals Office Report to Goal 1.3 Committee] and increased in others through the establishment of fees such as computer fees and an orientation fee. In comparison to benchmark institutions, the University still resides in the bottom third of institutional dollars that support student-services and student-life activities [2.1D2].

Program funding in areas of student-services has tapped into both off- campus resources and University resources external to student-services [2.6H11, 2.6H8]. The solicitation of off-campus funding to support programmatic efforts is clearly an opportunity in the future. It raises the question "Who can best fulfill the function of external soliciting in the future?" One possible answer is the maturing partnership between student-services and Institutional Advancement. Programs such as LeaderShape and the student-leadership banquet, currently funded by campus resources—academic departments, student-services, and student groups, will need external financial support in the future if they are to survive.

One final note, we can identify examples of how student-services and academic programs are already linked. International Programs to study abroad, for example, offer a ready-made link to the academic side. The University’s policies on scholastic standards and academic integrity are other examples of how student-services and academic units are working closely together. The institution benefits from these important linkages via increased coordination of services and a better means to serve students whether it be to study abroad with an academic focus built into the experience or to effectively weigh a decision to reinstate a student because staff have a holistic picture of the student’s academic and non-academic performance. Other successful programs on the non-academic side might more readily be linked, over time, to the programs of the academic departments through the investigation of these types of linkages.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 5: Integrity

The institution has invested significant resources in the demonstration of integrity in its practices and relationships in recent years. Most notable are the due process issues now guaranteed for students in the revised student code of conduct and in the new academic-integrity policy. In addition, students’ abilities to exercise their academic freedom and the institution’s compliance with NCAA regulations are examples of the institution’s commitment to develop an educational environment that supports the exchange of intellectual dialogue and advances the quality of student life.

Student Code of Conduct

The student code of conduct was revised substantially during the 1994–95 academic year. Student leaders, hearing officers, the Dean of Student Affairs, and University counsel spent a considerable amount of time revising the document so that regulations would be clearer to students. Students were also concerned with the lack of clarity of the judicial processes and the potential outcomes of discipline hearings. The new student code of conduct, the Student Rights and Responsibilities in the University Community document, provides for initial conferences with the student charged, hearing choices, a range of sanctions for each regulation, an 11 point "rights of students accused" document, and clearly written regulations. The hearing process also emphasizes the educational potential of a discipline program, a philosophical approach that was given limited consideration before 1994.

Academic Integrity

Litigation in higher education has seen an increase of cases in the area of academic dishonesty. The crux of the matter has been that students cannot be denied educational rights in absence of due process. Most institutions have had to revamp their cheating policies over the last eight years in order to minimize the potential for litigation. Simultaneously, faculty and students at the University clearly expressed their concerns over the cheating policy that existed up to 1995. The Fall of 1995 saw the implementation of the new cheating policy, titled the Academic Integrity policy, passed by the Senate in the Spring of 1995. Students, faculty, and staff collaborated on the development of the new policy. The policy has clearly stated definitions on issues such as cheating, plagiarism, inappropriate citation and unauthorized study aids. As a parallel to the new student code of conduct, students charged with academic dishonesty are afforded the same due process rights as other students charged with non-academic integrity violations. As a result of this new policy, students and faculty have noted their increased satisfaction with how academic dishonesty is being addressed on campus. Students who see others cheat now feel they have an avenue to lodge a complaint. Students charged with academic dishonesty have stated that the hearing process is fair, particularly emphasizing the importance of a "third-party" review in decisions related to academic dishonesty. Faculty have commented that their concerns have been equally listened to in the adjudication of academic dishonesty cases; they also expressed the importance of an objective "third party" in the review and decisions related to incidents of academic dishonesty.

Academic Freedom

As an institution of higher education, the University guarantees the right of academic freedom to both faculty and students. Students have every opportunity to engage faculty in discussions over course content without repudiation. Students on the Goal 1.3 committee describe a collegiate environment where faculty seem to invite student commentary on courses and where faculty demonstrates little in the way of disparaging remarks when students make evaluative comments. One could conclude that this positive exchange is a byproduct of the inquisitive and driven nature of our students coupled with the dedication of a faculty committed to see their students succeed in their respective programs. However, such an exchange could not occur if faculty did not feel students were afforded the same protections of academic freedom as they have as faculty.

NCAA Compliance

One of the clear challenges in higher education is the administration of athletic programs with regard to compliance with NCAA regulations. The athletic department has provided steady direction in applying compliance standards since 1988. The department has designated a staff person as a compliance officer in order to manage the responsibilities relevant to NCAA regulations. In addition, each coach is required to take a "coaches certification test" each year. The test determines whether the coach has been in compliance from the previous year. Coaches must score 80 or higher in order to be eligible to recruit for the following year. Over the past five years, no one has scored below 80 and some coaches have achieved perfect scores. Plans are also underway to install a new software package, called "compliance assistance software," which will allow the department to monitor issues related to compliance such as eligibility and financial aid and will help coaches increase their efficiency in complying with NCAA regulations. Finally, integrity is exhibited by the institution with the active role the President takes in NCAA issues. The President has been actively involved in attending NCAA national conventions and very supportive in assisting the department in addressing NCAA regulations.

University Publications

University communications and documents portray an image of Michigan Tech that is not representative of the actual practices and climate of the school. When looking at the brochures and information that promote the school, the depictions of campus are not always accurate. Brochures offer few pictures of snow or people moving around on campus. For example, the Undergraduate Catalog has eight outdoor photos, but only one small picture depicts any winter activity [1.3A]. Although no publication must be completely representative of the amount of snow Houghton receives each year, a better balance can be achieved between student life activities throughout the year and depictions of student life in University publications.

Student Life

This second segment in the Patterns of Evidence section titled "Student Life" will review criteria 1–5 in the area of student life that is, in most instances, separate from the earlier discussion on student-services.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 1: Purposes

One area in which that the University states its purposes frequently is in recruitment activities related to encouraging prospective students to attend Michigan Tech in the future. Many academic departments send recruiting materials to these prospective students. However, departmental recruiting literature rarely includes "student life" information in their materials. We recommend that academic departments include student- life opportunities in future recruiting efforts.

A review of the academic departments’ self studies indicates that efforts to enhance the quality of student life are more apparent with some departments than others [2.6C]. According to a review of publications and self-study documents, it is not clear how academic departments evaluate existing programs and initiatives to determine if goals related to student life are being met. It is obvious that graduation rates can determine the effectiveness of the institution in graduating educated individuals, but how effective Michigan Tech has been in developing creative, diverse, team-oriented leaders for the future is not as apparent [Student Attitudes and Development Report, Assessment Council Plan 1996]. Thus a stronger bridge needs to be built between the academic experience and the student-life experience which will embody the tenets articulated in the Mission and Vision Statements.

In trying to determine whether Michigan Tech constituencies understand that the University values student life, it is difficult to find a definitive answer. Academic-department self studies do not emphasize the student-life component in their discussions. However, the evidence suggests that academic departments support the actions and activities of students [6.2B3, Organizations Survey; minutes from Graduate Student Council; 7.5E]. Some examples of academic support of student life include the Future Car project, the existence of academically related organizations like the Society of Women Engineers, and the Wildlife Society, and the orientation courses offered within departments that focus some parts of class time on life-skills issues and concerns. The value that is placed on the life of Michigan Tech students is supported by programs which ranged from the lifestyle options in the residence halls, to the Future Car project, and the concrete canoe competition. Furthermore, activities external to academic departments, such as Winter Carnival, Spring Fling, and K-Day illustrate opportunities for leadership, creativity, diversity, and teamwork. The involvement of students in the development and delivery of these programs can only serve to promote the Vision, Mission and thus, the purpose of Michigan Tech.

Many of the brochures from the Admissions Office demonstrate a commitment/interest in producing quality students who benefit from the education and experience they receive at Tech. However, documentation to support this commitment/interest is not substantial in recruitment materials found in academic departments. Survey results indicate that some clubs and organizations feel a connection, a coalition of sorts, with the Michigan Tech community while others feel estranged from the University’s purpose and Vision [6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey; 6.2B3, Quality of Student Life Survey]. Furthermore, it is not apparent how well informed students are of the resources available that could serve to enhance their university experience. Survey results [6.2B3, Quality of Student Life] indicate that one third of the Michigan Tech population had not had any interaction with the Career Center. Since over 50% of those sampled were in their junior year or higher, one needs to ask if students are aware of all of the services available to them?

Unless the Vision and goals of the University are embodied in the plans and practices of every organization and each individual within the institution, they will fail. Naturally, no institution achieves perfection in transmitting goals; the continuum from no transmission to perfection is wide. Michigan Tech, however, is, at present, middling on this continuum. Staff and student surveys and the departmental assessments all indicate that the desired values have not tinged all the University’s operations with respect to student life. Departments are only just beginning to consider student life outside the academic work as important, and student knowledge of services and opportunities for the improvement of student life is patchy.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 2: Resources

Student life is active at Michigan Tech. Student groups are busy planning and implementing activities throughout the year. University traditions such as K-Day, Winter Carnival, and Spring Fling are campus holidays that are centralized around student life. The students are motivated to develop and coordinate exceptional programs for their peers and the greater community. Many University departments also assist in the development and implementation of these programs. This connection is sometimes fostered by the advising role some faculty/staff take on with student organizations. In other cases, departments simply enjoy assisting wherever they can in the implementation of these programs. One of the long standing examples of departmental support is Facilities Management’s role during Winter Carnival. The department dedicates countless personnel hours to the removal and delivery of snow to groups constructing snow statues. In addition, University-sponsored services such as the golf course, Mt. Ripley ski hill, MUB bowling lanes, and the highly participatory intramural program are examples of opportunities for students to enjoy recreational programs and socialize with each other. Finally, the healthy environment of the Keweenaw peninsula lends itself to all types of outdoor experiences for students. All of these factors contribute to the quality of the student-life experience at Michigan Tech.

Unlike benchmark institutions, the University sponsors social and educational programs in the residence halls and on campus in only a limited fashion. This disparity may be due, in part, to the relatively low number of staff assigned to support and coordinate student-life programs. Although Residence Life, New Student Orientation, Student Entertainment Board (SEB), and the Memorial Union Board have provided opportunities for social and educational programs over the last 3–5 years, no comprehensive coordination of student events exists at the institution. The issue of coordination also lends an argument for better monitoring of student-life programs.

This lack of coordination results in student groups scheduling against each other for limited space to conduct major events in the MUB, the SDC, and the ROTC building. Student groups also need assistance in finding meeting-room space and additional space to conduct events on campus. Some areas of the campus restrict student use, and may be better utilized if student organizations gave more consideration for campus space use [6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey; 6.2B3, Facilities Managers Survey]. The University has increased space for student-life programs in some areas of campus and minimized access to space in other areas. For instance, the residence halls have more study lounges and the Library has more places to study. Meeting-room space has diminished for student groups in the MUB as new student-services have been installed in this facility. Social space is much as it has been since 1988. The addition of the new Performing Arts Center will hopefully provide new social space for some groups in the performing-arts sector of student life. Social space is also limited to residence-hall students. A commuter social space is practically absent on campus. It will be important for the University to determine how we can provide additional social space for our students in the future.

Student activities at Michigan Tech are predominately self-initiated by student organizations. Each year, 100 to 160 recognized student organizations sponsor events that range from social activities, educational workshops, recreational events, and community-service projects to fund-raisers that support organizational programs. The University has compiled little or no data over the past ten years to track this activity. This tracking activity is far more common at the benchmark institutions and other state institutions in Michigan. For example, the Union Programming Board staff at Michigan State University monitors student-led projects and provides training where needed. As stakeholders continue to study how institutional resources are expended, the necessity to account for the value of programming efforts with a tracking system will be increasingly important.

Students who responded to a 1996 survey indicated that a majority of programs focus on the social and recreational aspects of student life [6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey]. These activities are generally considered important to personal development of social skills and team skills. They also help reduce individual stress for many of the participants; however, the University has not assessed the quality of the interactions that occur during these programs. Thus, the University has no way of knowing if what students are doing is important to the students’ success at the University. Student groups also sponsor programs that are educational. Programs such as substance-abuse awareness, stress management, time management, study skills, and relationship issues are noted as important to the students’ success at Michigan Tech and to their development as individuals in our society [6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey]. Any measure of the Institution's success in influencing student development is absent. It is generally not known how the University influences student development beyond anecdotal descriptions.

Student-life offerings during new-student orientation have increase since 1994. With the hiring of a staff member to focus on orientation and first- year experiences for new students in July 1996, some of the goals outlined in the University Strategic Plan have been realized. These activities are commendable. As the University continues to explore the relationship between new-student orientation and first-year programs coordinated in academic departments, it will be important to decide the nature of this relationship with respect to delivering quality first-year student programs.

The University, like most public institutions, allocates limited financial resources to student activities. Most sponsorship of student activities is subsidized with the use of the student activity fee, by student organizations’ fundraising activities, or through University allocation to specific programs [2.6H11, 2.6H10]. It is clear that a number of student-sponsored activities could not have attained success over the past ten years without the support of offices such as the President’s, Provost, Dean of Students, Educational Opportunity, and Cultural Enrichment. The student-activity fee funds a narrow majority of recognized student groups. In recent years, more groups are soliciting student-activity fee support from the Undergraduate Student Government (USG), whereas it is unknown whether this increased interest in the student-activity fee will depreciate the overall quality of student sponsored programs. We recommend that the USG initiate a comprehensive examination of the distribution and impact of the student-activity fee as it relates to use, delivery, and quality of activities sponsored by student groups. In addition, the University can also play a role in assessing how it can support the on-going development of student life and student activities at the institution. By understanding that all budgetary redistribution decisions are sensitive to any constituencies affected, the institution is encouraged to continue to add programmatic dollars and identify new space for student life as it heads into the next century.

Students have indicated that involvement in student activities help them attain academic success [6.2B3, Quality of Student Life Survey], — primarily as an outlet for stress reduction and re-energizing themselves towards their academic endeavors. We also recognize how socialization at these events can strengthen individual communication skills.

Socialization is a key component to student learning and student success. Opportunities for students to socialize among their peers and with faculty and staff is varied. Examples of social traditions include "dance club" events held in the MUB and the F’all Nighter, K-Day, and Spring Fling. However, the University presents only limited opportunities for students to socialize with faculty and staff. It may be important to begin establishing new University traditions such as all-campus semiformals where students, faculty, and staff can come together to socialize and strengthen the bonds that enrich the meaning of University "community." If we acknowledge students’ perception that alcohol consumption is a problem, one could easily conclude that students would benefit from additional opportunities to socialize with each other in situations where the consumption of alcohol was not the primary focus of the event. [6.2B3, Quality of Student Life Survey]. More University-financed, student-sponsored events may alleviate this problem. The activities of the SEB and the Memorial Union Board, which sponsor an array of cultural events, are examples of the potential success more social events could have at the University. Other campuses have "all-campus programming boards" to address these concerns; however, no such structure exists at Michigan Tech. We recommend the University institute a student-directed "programming board" whose primary purpose is to provide on-going social opportunities for Michigan Tech students.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 3: Accomplishments

In reviewing University publications and departmental self studies, it is evident that the programs and services associated with student life are delivering what they say they will deliver. Of particular interest are the growing number of student-life programs initiated since 1988 within the Office of Student Affairs [2.6H11]. All areas within the Office of Student Affairs (Office of Judicial Affairs; Office of Residence Life; Office of Leadership, Activities, and Greek Life; and Office of New Student Orientation and the First Year Experience) have made definite progress toward their goal declared in their Vision Statement as "...to create the best possible environment for the professional and personal growth and development of students." Examples of programs and services offered in the area of student life in response to the above goal include, but are not limited to, the establishment of the Leadership Institute, 24-hour availability of residence hall staff, a heightened role of residence-hall governance, residence-hall-government retreats, workshops for Greek organizations on risk management and alcohol awareness, the development of the Team Effectiveness Challenge Course, an expansion of Omicron Delta Kappa’s Leadership Week, the creation of the Director of Orientation and the First Year Experience position, and the addition of Orientation Team Leaders for orientation week [2.6H11, 2.6H10]. The number and diversity of these student-life programs seem to indicate that the University is working toward realizing its mission to promote diversity, creativity, leadership, and teamwork.

The Athletic Department and the Physical Education Department have made many improvements in the past few years which affect both athletes and non athletes. Improvements have been made to the facilities that are used by students and student athletes and the Athletic Department has instituted a number of entertaining programs to increase student awareness in and involvement with the athletic programs [A2.6H4]. Student attendance at varsity sporting events continues to play an important role in student life. As is typical of most universities which offer varsity sports, attendance at these events promulgates a great amount of school spirit for all members of the university community. Student participation in the intramural program continues to be strong, with the participation rates being similar to those of benchmark institutions. Of particular benefit to student athletes is the PE110 Individual Athletics course which is required of all freshman varsity athletes. This course, now in its 6th year, was developed by the Physical Education Department to help student athletes adjust to the demands of both their sport and college life. Topics covered in this course include, among other things, time management, study skills, stress management, nutrition, motivation, sports psychology, and where to go on campus for academic help. An increase in the overall GPA of student athletes in recent years may be seen as an indication that the Individual Athletics course is in fact helping the student athletes to become successful in their academic pursuits. The Director of Athletics notes the significance of the fact that the collective GPA of the athletes has been above the all-campus GPA for at least the past three years. For example, as of Winter quarter 1996/97, the cumulative GPA for the athletes was 3.15 — compared to the all-campus cumulative GPA of 3.05. This is a statistic which is rather uncommon in athletics at institutions of higher education but a positive accomplishment for Michigan Tech Athletics.

The departmental self studies indicate that students participate in the programs and services provided by the various departments. Students have many opportunities to become involved in organizations and events sponsored by academic departments. These organizations and events provide excellent opportunities for students and faculty to interact. Student organizations within the academic departments are usually affiliated with a nationally recognized professional organization such as the American Society of Civil Engineers, the American Chemical Society, the Society for Technical Communication, and the Wildlife Society or are nationally recognized honor societies such as Phi Sigma National Biological Honor Society, Pi Tau Sigma Honorary Mechanical Engineering Fraternity, and Tau Omega Pi School of Technology Honor Society. Some academic departments also contribute to the enhancement of student life by including students on departmental committees, such as the Student Faculty Conference Committee within the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering. Many academic departments also host awards banquets to recognize students for their academic achievements or extracurricular involvement within their departments.

In 1993 a new academic department, the Department of Fine Arts, was created on campus. The Department of Fine Arts offers students the opportunity to participate in activities related to visual arts, music, and theater. Students who participate in these activities have the opportunity to interact with faculty, staff, and the community. By enhancing the campus cultural life and complementing students’ academic curricula, the activities sponsored by the Department of Fine Arts have a positive impact on the quality of student life at Michigan Tech.

With more emphasis being placed on outcomes assessment, some academic departments have begun to include student input in the assessment process. The proposed assessment plans for the Departments of Chemistry and Social Sciences call for annual meetings to be held with the students for the purpose of reviewing the Department’s assessment outcomes and progress [2.6B2, 2.6B11]. Likewise, the assessment plan for the Department of Physics calls for an exit interview to be held with each student upon graduation [2.6B9].

Alcohol and other substance abuse is endemic to institutions of higher education. Since the 1988 NCA Self Study, the University has instituted a number of proactive measures to minimize alcohol and substance abuse. The University-recognized K-Day was revised as an alcohol-free event. Sponsorship of on-campus events where alcohol is consumed is regulated by University policies that minimize alcohol abuse. It is also important to note and applaud the Greek organizations for revamping their off-campus social functions over the past five years from "keg events" to BYOB events. Their efforts have clearly impacted upon diminishing substance abuse at off-campus events. One would think that these efforts would diminish student-related counseling issues related to alcohol and substance abuse. However, Counseling Services has experienced an increase of referrals from discipline staff on incidents related to alcohol and substance abuse. A close analysis of this rise in referrals leads to the conclusion that this increase does not imply an increase in substance abuse but improved reporting and intervention efforts between residence hall staff, Student Affairs, and Counseling Services in addressing incidents of alcohol and substance abuse. Counseling Services has also established a liaison relationship with the residence-hall staff in part to increase awareness of issues related to alcohol and substance abuse [2.6H11]. What these administrative efforts point to is the realization that alcohol abuse is not on the rise. Instead, and unfortunately, the issue seems to be that alcohol abuse may have been a greater problem with students than what was believed five to ten years ago. Finally, in compliance with federal regulations defined in the Drug Free School Act, the institution sends a policy statement to every new student each year stating the institution’s polices related to alcohol use and abuse.

The University is represented by a wide range of student organizations that range from academic societies, media-related groups, performing arts, advocacy, social, service, and recreational clubs. The activities available to students in and out of the classroom are many and varied [1.2C; 7.5J, News & Views #3]. These activities, along with the many and diverse programs and services offered, help to enhance the quality of student life. Yet, little is known of the quality of these experiences or even the student participation rates in these experiences. By responding to outcomes-assessment information in the future and addressing issues of concern in the area of student life, individual departments who work closely with student organizations can help student leaders enhance the quality of student life at Michigan Tech.

The activities available to students in and out of the classroom are many and varied [1.2C; 7.5J, News & Views #3]. These activities, along with the many and diverse programs and services offered, help to enhance the quality of student life. Even the issue of student fees (i.e., student activity fee, lab fees, computer fees, etc.) opens the door to a serious debate by the students themselves on the kind of student life they would like to have. If the main goal of the students is to acquire a degree with as little cost to themselves as possible—even at the expense of a better quality of life—then perhaps the lack of amenities here is acceptable. But an extended debate, along with votes to impose new fees, led by student organizations would help the University achieve its stated goals for students. Moreover, the self-imposition of fees could come with stronger rules for consulting students on decisions about their lives.

Patterns of Evidence–Criterion 4: Continuous Improvement

Funding levels to sustain or enhance student life (i.e., student activities, leadership development, student-recognition programs, administration of student life, etc.) are struggling at this time. Responses from students indicate they spend a considerable amount of time fundraising to support their activities [6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey]. One conclusion may be that their efforts to raise funds adversely affects their ability to focus on the primary educational goal that the activity intended. Student leaders also speak to the minimalist approach they must take to the implementation of activities due to financial or facility constraints.

Much credit needs to be given to the student body for bearing this responsibility. However, one can conclude that students should focus more time on the educational value of the planned activity than worrying about acquiring financial and physical resources to conduct the activity. Any coordination of University resources should fall on the shoulders of the institution. The absence of institutional coordination is a particular weakness to the viability of student life in the future, especially as the number of student groups increases and the student population diversifies [2.1D2, 5.4A, 2.6H11].

One important aspect of a successful planning process is conducting ongoing planning activities that involve representatives of all constituencies. It is apparent that student involvement in decision-making and planning activities is critical to the quality of student life. A review of student publications and student-survey data indicates that the institution has not always involved students in the planning process [6.2B3, Quality of Student Life Survey; 6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey; Lode issues; and Daily Bull Sheet issues]. However, in recent years, the University has begun to increase student involvement in University affairs.

Students are involved in decision-making in some discrete areas of campus life. Examples include student involvement on University Senate committees, participation in new-hire searches, the review and restructuring of the student-discipline system, the development of the academic integrity policy, and participation in some academic departmental activities [2.6B1, 2.6B6, and 2.6H11]. In other areas, student participation in decision-making has been met with resistance by faculty and staff [6.2B3, Student Organizations Survey; Lode issues; and 6.2B3, Memorial Union Board Report to Goal 1.3 Committee]. Some faculty and staff units have addressed improving the quality of service in their own units and have asked students to provide them with feedback in focus-group settings (Advising, Registration, and Admissions TQE teams) [5.4A]. It might be more enlightening to staff interested in improving the quality of student-services if students were also included as members of these quality-team activities. Student insight can be invaluable to the problems the staff members are addressing in student-services. Student participation on problem-solving and evaluative committees would be important and helpful. While the pace is slow and cautious, these efforts clearly speak to the University’s commitment to forge ahead with increased student involvement in planning activities. Furthermore, students have reciprocated by calling for more student involvement in University planning and decision-making over the past few years [6.2B3, Memorial Union Board Report to Goal 1.3 Committee; 6.2B3, USG Report to Goal 1.3 Committee; and Lode issues].

The University would like to change the student culture a bit by encouraging more teamwork, more orientation to the world "outside" Tech. The small number of student-life staff may actually promote the goal of creative leadership. Students want more weekend programs, but the staff is not really there to provide it. This could open the opportunity, if staff were used to coordinate programs and provide resource ideas, for more student-led activities. After all, the best example of student-led "life" on campus is Winter Carnival. Almost no staff or faculty participate in planning this event. To facilitate such student-initiated programming activities, student-life staff may need to be empowered more fully. Staff would need to both coordinate with each other and possess the autonomy to guide and even fund student-sponsored programs in their area of responsibility. If the University chooses to keep student life staff "lean" to encourage student leadership, it would have to provide clear authority and responsibility to the staff it does have. It would also have to nurture a culture of "coordinated autonomy" in the sense that staff would not only use their individual authority in program areas to advance student projects but also share plans, problems, and cross-functional ‘gaps’ with others members of staff.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 5: Integrity

Diversity

The University is working to uphold its Mission to "...promote diversity, creativity, leadership, and teamwork...". Student life at Michigan Tech is rich in its diversity of student organizations and activities. It is believed that a student’s involvement in a club or organization will help to enhance their educational and social experiences. The results of the Student Organizations Survey conducted by our committee suggest that 35% of student organizations’ activities are social, 25% are community-service related, 20% are based upon leadership activities, and 10% on substance abuse awareness/relationship awareness activities. It seems plausible that these percentages represent a diversity of program offerings. This has a favorable effect on student life. The data does not allow us to ascertain the issue of the inclusion; however, each organization’s constitution includes a membership clause that affirms membership shall not be impeded on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, height, weight, or marital status. Membership cannot be denied on a basis of disability or veteran status. A method for monitoring membership to student organizations under the factor of inclusion would be a more effective way to evaluate an "educationally diverse community" [6.1D]. The institution needs to establish a method to monitor student participation in organizations if the institution desires to ascertain the many-sides of diversity represented by student participation in student organizations.

Student Involvement in Decision Making

The concept of student involvement in University governance and daily affairs stems from the resolve to minimize student unrest exhibited in the late 1960s. Recast in a different light thirty years later, student involvement in University decision-making is a result of University officials’ beliefs that better decisions are made when student input and feedback are obtained on matters that directly affect the lives of students. Examples of student input in University decision-making can be found in the University Senate, Senate committees, Student Affairs search committees, Career Center and Athletics advisory boards, and the student representation found on policy- and contract- review activities such as the judicial advisory board (student code of conduct) and the health services committee. Student representation can also be found on policy and review matters such as computer fees, computer privacy, residence hall life-style options, performing arts center, campus safety, parking, and institutional review of academic departments’ assessment plans. Students have also served on University wide searches and performance reviews such as the Dean of Engineering search and the Dean of Sciences and Arts’ performance review. These examples and others demonstrate the institutions’ commitment to involve students in University decision-making. The institution has affirmed the belief that student involvement in decision-making allows accountability to be substantiated and supported by those most likely to challenge policies and decisions. Finally, four of the nine members of the committee responsible for writing this report on quality of student life are student leaders at the University.

A review of departmental charters and self studies indicates that few units have systems in place for student evaluation of policies and programs. Thus, the potential may exist for departments to be unresponsive to students’ changing needs when they develop policies and procedures that affect their students. An absence of mechanisms for student evaluation also suggests that opportunities may arise for unfair or inequitable policies and procedures to be established in the absence of student input. However, some units provide strong examples of equitable policies and receptive attitudes toward student input in their departmental self-studies [e.g., 2.6D, 2.6H10, and 2.6H11]. The discussion on the development of the new student code of conduct is an good example of equitable policy formation in the Office of Student Affairs. Students worked with staff to evaluate and revise the student code of conduct over a year-long period.

The School of Forestry and Wood Products stated that the students, faculty, and staff work toward a common goal. The report lists a number of activities that involve students, faculty, and staff. These activities include the Forestry Club’s interactions with the department, the Forester yearbook, and the monthly meetings between student leaders and the Dean. They cite these activities as their way of unifying the school, maintaining accountability and allowing everyone to work toward a common goal [2.6D]. The Daniell Heights Residents Council routinely makes decisions that affect residents. To enhance student input, they send out exit surveys, a major needs analysis, and a facilities survey in order to prioritize projects [2.6H10].

Survey results indicate that many student leaders of academic student organizations feel that they have adequate influence within their own academic department, but not within the entire University [6.2B3, Student Organization Survey]. Although no constituency, student, faculty, or staff, may feel they have adequate influence in University decision-making, student leaders assert in a variety of governance settings that their input needs to be solicited more often. It would seem wise and prudent for the University to include student review and comment on any new initiative or policy change that affect students. Thus, we recommend that all departments consider increasing student input in the review of departmental decision-making. It is also important to clarify the methods available to faculty and staff in soliciting student input. Although one could survey every student on every matter, such an approach is hardly timely or economical. The more common method is to solicit student governance input and/or student representation in a particular academic department. The institution needs to find ways to continue to bring these interested students into the varied discussions on decisions that affect students in University life.

An important note on student governance: the University administration has improved its relations with the USG over the past couple of years. The Provost’s office and the Office of Student Affairs have been working with the USG to include them in more and more decision making. On the other hand, Auxiliary Services continues to experience difficulty assimilating student involvement in the decision-making process. The most prominent examples of this difficulty are the decisions made with regard to Memorial Union operations and those made by the Department of Residential Services about housing options [6.2B3, Memorial Union Board Report to Goal 1.3 Committee; 6.2B3, USG Report to Goal 1.3 Committee]. In the case of Residential Services, the Provost assisted in the resolution of the dispute by chairing a committee composed of student representative from USG and Inter Residence Hall Council. As a result of the Provost’s effort, a decision-making process was drafted with student input and adopted by the Provost and Residential Services. This recent response by the upper administration represents the institution’s commitment to increase student input in University decision-making.

Although Auxiliary Services (currently defined as the divisions of residential services and retail operations) may have good intentions to include students, their actions are not perceived by students as inclusive. For instance, student members of the Memorial Union Board, which serves in an advisory capacity, believe their opinions are not solicited often, and when they are, they are not acknowledged [6.2B3, Memorial Union Board Report to Goal 1.3 Committee]. We recommend Auxiliary Services begin to adopt procedures to include student leaders in policy- development and program-review matters. Key to this recommendation is the need to have students engaged in the discussion in the formulation stage versus the implementation stage. It is also important to note that Auxiliary Services has been a particular focus in this discussion largely due to the fact that their services directly impact upon the daily lives of students. Although other departments and programs also touch the daily lives of students, none may do so more outside of the academic setting than the staff responsible for the places students sleep, live, eat, play, and congregate. If we model ourselves after the idea of "no taxation without representation," students should have a major voice in the decisions of student and auxiliary services. This would yield better decisional practices between students and the University.

Departmental Complaints and Ombudsman

Academic departmental charters and student-services self studies contain only limited evidence that departments have clearly stated complaint procedures for students. Although an institution-wide complaint procedure is outlined in the Student Handbook, students are not always aware of the procedure nor the role an Ombudsman can play in helping them resolve their complaint. As a result, students may experience frustration when the problem goes unresolved. We recommend that all departments post the institution-wide procedures outlined in the Student Handbook and that the Office of Student Affairs inform students at new-student orientation of the complaint procedures.

SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats)
Analysis

Michigan Tech, in the last five years, has increased its attention to issues of the quality of student life. The University generally knows where it wants to go and is delivering what it says it will deliver. But, due to weak assessment of its programs, it does not really understand how well its services are working to meet the goals for student life stated in the Vision and Mission statements. Moreover, the rapid growth in the student-services area has created new needs for better coordination of services and great need to include students in decision making. That the University has hit the coordination and inclusion problems means it is in the midst of a difficult transition period between the older minimalist approach and the newer one of creating a lively and effective sphere of student life.

Strengths

• Student-services has made a number of significant programmatic improvements over the last decade.
• Students generate most social, cultural, and even educational activities; this demonstrates the capacity of Michigan Tech students for leadership.
• Growth in the number of staff assigned to offices which support student life indicates a serious and enduring effort by the University to promote excellence in student life.
• Sustained attention to building staff competencies in student life and student-services has opened opportunities for further development in student-services and student life.
• Academic departments are beginning to consider the environment that affect students in their majors. The Michigan Tech community has experienced a growing realization that student success is as contingent upon life outside of the classroom as it is related to course content. While this is largely an opportunity for Tech, its very presence signifies an important trend.

Weaknesses

• Low student fees may be a limiting factor in what is possible at Michigan Tech.
• The student culture itself—of toughing out the winters and the stiff academic programs—resists organization by non-students. This is not all bad, because it also promotes student leadership.
• The decentralized organization of Tech makes coordination of student-services extremely difficult.
• Despite growth, the area of student-services seems still to be understaffed in a few areas. Given the strong academic focus of the institution, however, it is unclear how important this is to this university. It may be that the number of student-life staff present an opportunity to build a setting even more conducive to the development of student leadership.
• Student-services has not engaged in effective assessment of on-going programs and services. Departments have become great places for initiating programs, but are less amenable to maintaining and evaluating the programs once begun.

Opportunities

• Student life, since it is still currently seen as "everything that is not academic," may offer the ideal location for experimenting with Michigan Tech’s organizational structure. Successful programs on the non-academic side might more readily be linked, over time, to the programs of the academic departments.
• The University would like to change the student culture a bit by encouraging more teamwork and more orientation to the world "outside" Tech. The small number of student-life staff may actually promote the goal of creative student leadership.
• Students want more weekend programs, but the staff is not really there to provide it.
• This could open the opportunity, if staff were used to coordinate programs and provide resource ideas, for more student-led activities on the weekends.
• Through the assessment process, we now possess a baseline survey for student organizations and for students. This can be used to assist with further efforts in assessing the effectiveness of student-life programs and University progress on its Vision for student life.
• Institutional Advancement can serve as the predominant fundraising champion of student-services programs, as it is far more adept at fundraising activities external to the University. A collaborative bridge built between the two areas may serve as an opportunity to insure the future success of student-services and the quality of student life.

Threats

• Because zoning rules limit the development of a college town near campus, every shortcoming in dining, recreation, and bookstore is amplified by the lack of choices off campus.

A number of recommendations resulted from the analysis of the quality of student life and student-services in Goal 1.3 Committee. These recommendations can be discussed under three major themes: assessment, coordination, and student input. The University needs to expend greater efforts on the assessment of student life and student-services activities and programs. More coordination among student-services and the initiating of coordination of student activities is going to be an important element to the institution’s future success. Finally, students need to be allowed greater opportunities and participation in University decision-making, especially in those types of decisions that directly affect the daily lives of students.

Assessment

• The quality of student-services and student activities needs to be monitored, assessed, and evaluated for their relationship and effectiveness in fulfilling institutional goals. These activities need to assess the relationship between student-services and student activities and

—student learning;

—stress reduction;

—University mission goals related to leadership, communication, teamwork, global diversity, and valuing lifelong learning;

—student success; and

—the strategic-planning process.

It is particularly important that student-services demonstrate how human, physical, and financial resources are organized to meet institutional goals. Assessment programs need to occur on an annual basis and need to include progress and program-effectiveness evaluations in each report.

• The University needs to support an on-going assessment of how outside revenue generated in the use of facilities impacts upon student access and utilization of facilities, especially in the realm of student activities.
• The University needs to develop a financial plan to advance their objectives for student life.
• Student-services need to begin assessment and planning activities that not only link to the strategic plan but link to the institution’s commitment to student academic achievement. The institution needs to provide leadership and resources in assisting student-services in meeting this endeavor of continuous improvement in the future. Finally, the institution needs to ascertain whether the method of planning in individual departments serves in the best interest of the University.

Coordination

• Student activities need greater coordination. Coordination areas include the establishment of a centralized student-activities calendar to minimize conflict between events and to assist in the pooling of resources for University-sponsored events.
• The institution needs to assist student groups in providing more opportunities for students to socialize at on campus events.
• The programs and services among units of student-services need greater coordination. Focus areas include greater frequency of communication between units in the implementation and evaluation of services, increased activity in the development of units’ planning processes that align with the University’s mission, and greater coordination of academic advising across departmental units and learning centers.
• All departmental promotional material sent to student needs to include information about student-life opportunities.

Student Input

• The institution must establish mechanisms that reflect student input on the development, implementation, and evaluation of facilities use for student activities (events, meeting space, and office space).
• student-services need to provide annual data that demonstrates student involvement in decision-making and how they notify students of complaint procedures. These procedures must be stated publicly.
• Position searches for middle management and above should include student representation and input.
• The 1988 NCA report identified the need for improved student representation in MUB decision-making. Since little progress has been made in the ensuing decade, the University should now make this a priority for the improvement of integrity in University operations.

Alpha Phi Omega Minutes, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI,

Boyer, E.L., College: The Undergraduate Experience in America, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Harper and Row, New York, 1987, p. 177–199.

Goal 1.3 Committee Student Organizations Survey, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 1996.

Goal 1.3 Committee Student-Services Survey, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 1997.

Goal 1.3 Committee Quality of Student Life Survey, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 1997.

Goal 1.3 Committee Facilities Managers Survey, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 1997.

Graduate Student Council Minutes, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI,

Memorial Union Board Report to Goal 1.3 Committee, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 1997.

Pascarella, E.T., and Terenzini, P.T., How College Affects Students, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 1991, p 214–334.

Undergraduate Student Government Report to Goal 1.3 Committee, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI, 1997.

Intramural Program Report to Goal 1.3 Committee, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 1997.