Skip Navigation



                         ACTING AS THE
                       NOVEMBER 14, 1996
                     LARGE CONFERENCE ROOM

Members Present               Guests                   Staff

Mr. Dalton B. Floyd, Jr.      Mr. Larry Wilson         Mr. Fred Sheheen
Mr. R. Austin Gilbert, Jr     Dr. Mike McCall          Dr. Michael Smith
Dr. W. David Maxwell                                   Mr. John Smalls
Mr. Bill H. Stern                                      Mr. Nelson Lindsay
Mr. Roger B. Whaley                                    Mr. Mike Brown
                                                       Ms. Maggie Hicks
                                                       Mr. Charlie FitzSimons
                                                       Ms. Camille Brown
                                                       Ms. Lynn Metcalf

The Committee on Planning and Assessment, acting as the Steering Committee for Performance
Funding, met at 2:00 p.m. on November 14, 1996 in the large conference room.  Mr. Roger
Whaley presided.

I.  Approval of Minutes

It was moved (Floyd) and seconded (Stern) and unanimously voted to approve the minutes of 
the October 17, October 23, and October 30 Steering Committee meetings, as written.

II.  Presentation - Larry Wilson
     Chairman, Research Sector Committee

Mr. Wilson gave the Committee an update on the progress of the Research Sector Committee. 
He expressed concern over the number of indicators that are difficult to measure or hard 
to determine what is good (i.e. class size).  He also explained that about half of the 
indicators are good things for universities to do, but do not necessarily increase 
quality (i.e. approval of mission statement).  Mr. Wilson stressed the fact that only 
three indicators measure excellence and could change the behavior of the universities: 
research funding, SAT scores, and faculty compensation. In addition, he emphasized 
comparing the research universities against an aspirational peer group.  Finally, 
Mr. Wilson asked that the measure for Indicator VI.A be changed from the percent of 
freshmen who meet or exceed the benchmark SAT to the university's average SAT
score as a percentile of the aspirational peer group average.

III.  Consideration of Indicator VI. C., Post-secondary Non-academic Achievement of
Student Body (Attachment A)

Dr. Smith gave a brief description of the staff recommendation for this indicator which 
would be a yes/no question.

It was moved (Stern) and seconded (Floyd) and unanimously voted to approve the staff
recommendation for Indicator VI.C.

IV.  Progress of Sector Committees

Dr. Smith updated the Committee on the progress of the sector committees in their 
deliberations on benchmarks and weights for the performance indicators.  He indicated 
the progress was slow because of the nature of the task, but the committees are working 
hard and are committed to completing the job.  Several issues are being raised at the 
sector committee level and will be forwarded to the Steering Committee with 

V.  Consideration of responses to RFP for consultants on performance funding

It was moved (Floyd) and seconded (Stern) and voted unanimously for the Committee to 
go into executive session to discuss the contractual matters of the RFP.  No action 
was taken during the executive session.

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:55 p.m.