General Meeting Information

Date: October 31, 2023
Time: 10 - 11:20

  • Agenda

    Time Topic Purpose Discussion Leader
    10:00-10:45 Review CAS Standards in Groups I All
    10:45-11:00 Large group reflection on review process of CAS standards I All
    11:00-11:20 Training on personnel prioritization forms I Erik

    A = Action
    D = Discussion
    I = Information

  • Minutes [DRAFT]

    RAPP Notes - 10.31.23 

    Voting members present: Tina Lockwood, Andre Meggerson, Erick Aragon, Erik Woodbury, Robert Alexander, Daniel Solomon, Alicia De Toro, Nicholas Turangan, Debbie Lee, Adam Contreras, Melinda Hughes, Ian Ang, Kate Wang

    Advisory members present: Martin Varela, Randy Bryant

    Absent members: Rob Mieso, Pam Grey, Thomas Ray, Michele LeBleu-Burns, Mallory Newell, Sushini Chand, Eric Mendoza, Elvin Ramos, Ben Furagganan, Izat Rasyad

    1. Approval of minutes from 10/24/23 – the committee approved the minutes. 
    2. The committee continued its review of the CAS standards for students services: and worked on completing the feedback form:
    3. Reflections on CAS review process
      1. RAPP should encourage writers to fully define acronyms and terms. It is important to note that when thee reviews were originally written that the audience for the reviews was the department/program itself so the writing style and content reflects that. 
      2. RAPP thinks being generous and understanding in the new process is important and a key way to support all the people involved.
      3. The reports generally reflect the time and hard work that these programs put into them. RAPP was impressed with the work and want to commend the authors. The forms are great and well organized.
      4. A concern was expressed that a lack of clarity or information would negatively impact program requests or needs in the future. RAPP can only commit to doing its best with the information provided with the intention of asking additional questions as they arise.
      5. The Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) showed a high degree of variability and more practice/training on how to draft and measure those is advisable. Generally orientation to the CAS is a good idea and giving feedback on this first effort will hopefully result in improvements in subsequent submissions.
      6. For RAPP:
        1. Training: Next year RAPP should start by reviewing 1 program review together
        2. The CAS is intense with a lot of information. Slides and OKR summaries were excellent and the committee may ant to focus on those as the main vehicles for communication in future iterations with the CAS itself being a useful reference to address questions that arise or any need for a deeper dive on informational items. The CAS could be a kind of appendix with more information.
        3. Have presentations given to RAPP in the same way they were given to SSPBT
        4. Formatting the CAS with a Table of Contents/Bookmarks to make quick navigation through the document would also be nice.
    4. Meeting Adjourned

Documents and Links

Back to Top