Task Forces

Background

In January, 2014, the Stockton Advising Council endorsed a document outlining a vision and mission for advising at Stockton and ‘best practices in precepting.’ Precepting at Stockton has been a lifelong tradition and has provided an environment for students and faculty to interact on multitude of topics outside classrooms including determining the course schedules and academic progress.

Over the years, with the growth of Stockton, there has been faculty concern pertaining to (but not limited to) the varied preceptee-faculty ratio and the method of its delivery. To address such concerns, the Faculty Senate held an open discussion and listening session at its April meeting. The variety of viewpoints expressed across the faculty, gave a compelling reason for us to examine this topic in a greater detail. 

Charge:

The Task Force on Stockton’s Approach to Precepting is charged to review the current model of precepting addressing, but not limited to, the following

  1. Potential precepting issues/problems that might not yet be known (or recognized) among faculty, potentially through a faculty-wide survey
  2. How students are experiencing precepting
  3. Preceptee-faculty ratio across the programs/schools/divisions
  4. The best methods and modalities of its delivery across the academic year
  5. A better instrument and procedure for evaluating precepting
  6. Providing training/support for preceptors

This review should be supplemented by examining the precepting models adopted at similar sized institutions across the country.

Faculty Senate proposes to create a faculty-led task force addressing these topics and assist the Senate in providing recommendations to Stockton’s approach to precepting. Such a task force will include membership from the Student Senate, professional staff from the Office of Academic Advising, professional staff from the Center for Teaching & Learning Design, at least one faculty from each school, and any additional faculty and professional staff with interest in academic advising.  The Task Force is charged with producing a report to the Faculty Senate no later than the May 2023 meeting.

The Senate authorizes the Senate Executive Committee to constitute the membership of the proposed task force following expressed interest of faculty-staff institution-wide.

Members

Aleksondra Hultquist (Co-Chair)

Mark Berg (Co-Chair)

Kristin Jacobson, ARHU

Jongbok Yi, ARHU

Vince Cicirello, BUSN

Christian Ehiobuche, BUSN

Stacey Culleny, EDUC

Kerri Sowers, HLTH

Larider Ruffin, HLTH

Luis Garcia, HLTH

Mike Law, NAMS

Rick Mulvihill, SOBL

Rodger Jackson, SFT

AmyBeth Glass, Associate Provost for Academic Affairs

Cynthia McCloskey, Academic Advising

Elvis Gyan, Director, Center for Academic Advising

Kathy Klein, Executive Director, CTLD

Paula Dollarhide, Academic Advising

Brianna Bracey, Student Senate President

Marissa Levy, Dean of SOBL 

The essential learning outcomes were created a decade ago. In the current environment marked by social issues amplified by the pandemic and racial injustices, it is pertinent to review the current ELO’s and their role in synthesizing student learning and overall professional growth. Faculty Senate proposes to create a faculty-led task force to assess the current model of essential learning outcomes to determine if the current ELO’s meet the needs of our academic programs, students and community. Such a task force includes membership from the APP, General Studies committee, and other faculty with research backgrounds in subject matters related to the ELOs and general education.

 

Members

John O'Hara (Chair)

Chelsea Tracy-Bronson

Ekaterina Sedia

Heather McGovern

Janet Wagner

Mary Padden-Denmead

Philip Eaton

Siobahn Suppa

Tara Crowell

John Bulevich

Peer Evaluation is a significant service contribution for faculty and important to the tenure and promotion process. Faculty Senate proposes to create a faculty-led task force to examine the current model of training peer evaluators and develop recommendations on the future of SIPET. The Senate authorizes the Senate executive to constitute the membership of the proposed task force.

 

Members

Elizabeth Shobe (Co-Chair)

Meg White (Co-Chair)

Mina Jafarijoo

Douglas M Harvey

Elyssa B. Smith

Jung Ah Han

Muntakim M Choudhury

Quynh Nguyen

Robin Hernandez-Mekonnen

Thierry Saintine

 

Stockton University has been at the forefront of life-long learning, adaptability, and social justice in an interdependent world. Following Faculty Assembly resolution in June 2020, Stockton Board of Trustees (BOT) passed a resolution titled “Commitment to Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Social Justice at Stockton,” requesting the University President to “consider establishing a committee to determine whether a location-based name of the University, consistent with our founders’ original intentions should be pursued.”

Celebrating Stockton’s rich history of last fifty years, our growing presence in Atlantic City as an anchor institution, and in pursuit of Stockton’s strategic plan 2025 that emphasizes the diversity and inclusion as one of the key areas of focus, Faculty Senate is formulating a task force to conduct self-study, lead a faculty discussion and exploration of the institution’s name change as a strategic institutional endeavor envisioning the next fifty years and beyond. This task force will facilitate discussions among as many constituent groups as possible and inform itself through research.

The Task Force shall consider potential gains and losses associated with this change including, but not limited to: financial sustainability, faculty and student recruitment and retention, perceived valuation of Stockton degrees, student and alumni relations. Further review of this task force may constitute the following:

1.  Conduct institutional-wide survey to determine whether Stockton should consider a name change with the following groups: faculty, staff, administrators, students, and alumni.

2.  Conduct focus groups to explore social-cultural implications from diverse constituent stakeholders.

3.  Examine financial implications of name-change transition (e.g., impact on donor base), community perceptions and overall community support.

4.  Conduct comprehensive financial analysis of the name change exercise (signage, web development, online presence, stationary etc.).

Present detailed report including items (i iv) to the Faculty Senate upon completion or latest by April 30, 2023, which will subsequently be shared with the entire Stockton community.

Members
Suya Yin, SOBL (Co-Chair)

Thierry Saintine, GENS (Co-Chair)

Sharon Musher, ARHU

Kerrin Wolf, BUSN

Duo (Helen) Wei, BUSN

Steve Nagiewicz, NAMS

Francisco Javier Sánchez, ARHU

Diane L. Garrison, Director of Budget

Sarah Gray, NAMS

Kory Olson, ARHU

Flora Ruli, Student Success Coach

Lisa Warnock, Coordinator of Event Services

 

Joseph J. Trout, NAMS

Heather Perez, Libary

Carmine Taglialatella, BUSN

Naz Onel, BUSN

Jongbok Yi, ARHU

Naveen Jain, BUSN

Christian Ehiobuche, BUSN

Dan Tulino, EDUC

Mariana Smith, ARHU

Mary L. Padden-Denmead, HLTH

Manish Madam, SOBL

Robin Hernandez-Mekonnen, SOBL

Carmine Taglialatella, BUSN

Regina Green, HLTH

Mariah Duffey, Office of Continuing Studies

Chrissy Easton, Case Management Specialist

Brianna Bracey, SOBL student

Vineyard Ekwe, SOBL student

Charge:  to study the accessibility of Stockton’s vehicle to its faculty for conducting University business (i.e., field trips, conference travel, etc.).

Members
Joshua Duntley (Co-Chair), Criminal Justice SOBL

Tait Chirenje (Co-Chair), Environmental Science, Geology and Sustainability NAMS

Brooke Rollman, Asst. Director, Athletics Admin Staff

Chrissy Easton, Complex Director, Housing, ResLife Staff

Christine Tartaro, Criminal Justice SOBL

Douglas Deane, Social Work SOBL

Erin O'Hanlon, Coordinator of Service-Learning Adjunct Faculty Staff

Francisco Sanchez,, Associate Professor of Spanish ARHU

Jeffrey Webber, Geology NAMS

MaryAnn Schiattarella, Health Sciences HLTH

Michael Sullivan, Manager of Parking and Transportation Staff

Neil Aaronson. Physics NAMS

 

Rhianon A Lepree, Director of Real Estate Staff

 

 

Vehicle Task Force Summary Report, May 2022

Charge:

  1. Review the current institutional practices of visa procedures and their effect on the retention rate of international faculty;
  2. Review policies and best practices at similar institutions in New Jersey;

  3. Make recommendations regarding visa procedures and support for international faculty including financial support.

     

Members
Yulong “Helen” Gu, HLTH (Co-chair) Arleen Gonzalez, SOBL (Co-Chair)
Xu “Bevin” Song, ARHU Chenyan Xu, BUSN

Priti Haria, EDUC

Francis Nzuki, GENS
Kathy Sedia, NAMS Jiangyuan “JY” Zhou, Office of Global Engagement
Lawrence Fox, Human Resources Maggie Quinn, Admin & Finance

Task Force on Faculty Visas — Final Report and Recommendations

As of September 2018, Stockton University has a number of positions, held by faculty, which carry with them a wide range of duties and responsibilities beyond those assigned to them purely in their role as faculty per se. These positions, Co-ordinators and sub-coordinators, Directors, Convenors, Presidents, Advisors, Chairs, permeate the institution and will be referred to hereafter as “Faculty Leadership Positions.” All of these are listed in the Coordinators Agreement of 2018. Some of these positions date back to the founding days of the college and are a product of the original ethos of the institution. Because these positions include the option of either financial compensation or course release or a combination of both they have been the subject of negotiation between the Union and the Administration. For these reasons any substantive reexamination of the Faculty Leadership Positions requires the combined efforts of the Stockton Senate and the Union.

The need for such a reexamination has been motivated by several factors but three figure most prominently.

First, Stockton has been engaged in a robust expansion for the past twenty years in almost every area of its existence: student population, faculty, administration, curriculum, geographic locale, number of buildings, community services, number of accredited programs, etc. This rapid and extensive expansion has resulted in a wide range of consequences, many of which impact the scope and nature of the Faculty Leadership Positions.

Secondly, higher education nationally and locally has changed over the past twenty years, and faculty, programs, and administrators now have additional responsibilities. As just a few examples, programs are now responsible for more frequent and robust assessment of student learning, and faculty leaders in these positions are often responsible for hiring, scheduling, mentoring, and managing the needs of a larger proportion of adjunct faculty.

The third factor is a direct outgrowth of the first two, namely that the administrative demands of these positions have increased to the extent that both the faculty and administration believe the current system(s) has become both inefficient and often even demoralizing.

With this in mind, the Senate and SFT 2275 have agreed to form a joint task force with the following goals:

a) Critically examine the history, scope, and nature of the positions covered in the Coordinators Agreement of 2018

b) Ascertain the opinions of the individuals who hold or have held these positions as to how they might be improved, if at all, to address the three concerns listed above.

c) Research how similar such positions are conducted at other institutions to compare and contrast them with our current system.

d) Make recommendations as to what might be done to address the concerns listed above.

While the primary charge of this Task Force is not an exercise in cost saving it is understood that the analysis and recommendations will need to be conducted within a fiscally responsible context. With this in mind we will invite select administrators to consult with the Task Force to advise members on such matters.

Task Force Documents and Reports 

 

Members
Christina Morus, ARHU Christine Ferri, SOBL
Marc Richard, NAMS Heather McGovern, GENS

Kim Lebak, EDUC

Patricia Quinn McGinnis, HLTH (co-chair)
Rodger Jackson, SFT (co-chair) Joe Trout, Faculty Senate
Jennifer Potter, Administrative Liason Maya Lewis, Graduate Programs
WeiXuan Li, BUSN  

 

Charge:

  1. Review and update the white paper produced by the Sexual and Gender-Based Violence Teaching Circle titled, A Current State of Affairs Regarding Sexual Violence Initiatives at Stockton University.
  2. Review the recent Student Campus Climate Survey report, which will be posted in the Stockton Go Portal.
  3. Conduct additional research on the reporting and investigation of incidents of sexual assault and sexual violence at Stockton, both qualitative and quantitative data.
  4. Research practices of similar institutions in size and demography.
  5. Research the logistics of developing a centralized hotline at Stockton to address student safety concerns.
  6. Develop recommendations for best practices in handling incidents of sexual assault and sexual violence on campus.

Final Report (May 2020)   

 

Members
Betsy Erbaugh, SOBL (chair) Emily Van Duyne (GENS)
Deeanna Button, SOBL Meg White, EDUC

Maya Lewis, SOBL

Jonathan Johnson,
Office of Community Wellness & Health Education
 
Deb Gussman, ARHU Stacey Rose, Care & Community Standards Office
Luis I. Garcia, HLTH
Adrian Wiggins, Campus Public Safety
Jennifer Barr, BUSN Ro Latoracca (Campus Police and Safety)
Margaret E. Lewis, NAMS
Linda Yost, Intercollegiate Sports

The Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Studies (Liberal B.A. or LIBA) is described on the university website as “an option for students whose educational or career goals or academic interests are not met by any of Stockton’s existing degree programs.” It is further described as an opportunity for students to “design a complete 128-credit interdisciplinary program suited to their individual needs and plans.” Notions of specialized and individualized programs of study have been a part of this institution since its conception. The student body, however, has changed dramatically and so has the institutional approach to the LIBA. As such, the Faculty Senate charges members of this task force to examine those changes and future goals of the LIBA.

Charge:

  1. Research the background and history of the LIBA at Stockton.

  2. Review the “Proposed Enhancements to the LIBA,” dated May 9, 2012.

  3. Examine the current School-based LIBA structure, number of students enrolled, and impact on other programs.

  4. Examine whether School-based LIBA are in line with Middle States requirements.

  5. Prepare a proposal to be delivered to the Senate at the May 24, 2018 retreat (if more time is required, submit a formal request to the Senate for an extension).

Task Force Final Report (May 17, 2019)

Members

Doug Harvey, EDUC, AP&P Committe (co-chair)

Marc Richard, NAMS (co-chair)

Brian Tyrrell, BUSN Kerri Sowers, HLTH
Norrie Boakes, EDUC Frank Cerreto, GENS
Adam Miyashiro, ARHU Mac Avery, SOBL
Rob Gregg, Dean of GENS Michelle McDonald, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs

 

CHARGE:

  1. Examine hate speech in the classroom, common space, quasi-private space (residential life), and on social media.
  2. Research laws about free speech v. hate speech
  3. Examine Stockton’s current policies – BIT, BRT, Student Code of Conduct, etc.
  4. Examine the approaches to this issue taken by campus communities (schools of similar size and student demographics).
  5. Develop recommendations for Stockton University
  6. Share full report with the campus community

  

 Task Force Report

Members

Kathy Sedia, NAMS (co-chair)

Adjoa Cofie, Student Senate (co-chair)

Stacy Rose, Care & Community Standards Offices

JY Zhou, International Specialists for Provost’s Office

Amy Jones, Care & Community Standards Office

Michelle MacDonald, Academic Affairs

Adam Miyashiro, ARHU & SFT

Emily Van Duyne, GENS
Stephen Davis, Student Affairs Amee Shah, HLTH
Manish Madan, SOBL John Gray, EDUC
Kerrin Wolf, BUSN Mahalia Bazille, UBSS
Morganne Schafle, Pride Alliance Anthony Farfalla, Model United Nations
Nudar Chowdhury, MSA Reid Truet, College Republicans
Jessica Grullon, Graduate Studies  

 

In 1969, Bowdoin College in Maine became the first test optional school in the United States, launching a movement that is now approaching its fiftieth year. Today, nearly a third of all U.S. four-year colleges and universities are test-optional, or test flexible, including some public colleges and universities in New Jersey.  How colleges and universities define the term has varied widely. For some schools, test optional means first-time, first-year, degree-seeking applicants are not required to submit ACT or SAT scores for the purpose of admissions.  Many more institutions are “test flexible,” only allowing this choice for students who meet certain GPA requirements, or who submit other results like Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate subject test scores as evidence of academic proficiency. Other common exceptions to schools’ test optional policies include preclusion of certain science, engineering, and health science majors, EOF applicants, home school students, and international students.

Stockton University currently requires all freshman to submit SAT and/or ACT test scores as part of the application process. Such scores are used to assess students’ writing and mathematics proficiency, as well as by some majors in order for students to matriculate into those degrees (most notably in NAMS and HSCI).  Finally, Stockton uses test scores, along with GPA and other metrics of academic success, to award the majority of its merit-based institutional aid.  Transfer students are not required to submit standardized test scores.

The Task Force for Test Optional Admission is charged to lead discussions with faculty, staff, administration, students and the wider Stockton community including area high schools about whether Stockton should consider becoming “test optional,” and, if so, how that term might be defined and implemented. It will consult as many constituent groups as possible, and inform itself through research.  Guiding concerns include, but are not limited to:

  • Impact on student recruitment
  • Current placement uses of standardized testing and the viability of alternatives
  • Potential for expanding or diversifying the student body
  • Recommendations (if any) for retaining mandatory test scores for certain fields or constituencies
  • Effect on allocation of institutional, merit-based aid

At the completion of its work the Task Force is expected to produce a written report to the Senate, which will subsequently be shared with the entire Stockton community.

Final Report 

 

Members

Charlie Wu

Heather McGovern

Amee Shah Adalaine Holton
Lydia Facteau Janice Joseph
Norma Boakes Tom Grites
Joe Trout Pete Straub
Frank Cerreto John Iacovelli
Luis Pena Michelle McDonald
  Peter Hagen

 

The Task Force on Campus Accessibility is charged to identify accessibility challenges that students, faculty, staff, and community members experience while on our campus. The Task Force may survey constituent groups and hold hearings to determine whether there are specific areas of concern. It shall prepare a report discussing its findings to be presented to the Faculty Senate at the May 2014 Senate retreat.

Task Force Final Report

Members
Susan Fahey (Co-chair) William Rosche
Fran Bottone (Co-chair) Carole-Rae Reed
Camille Sauerwald Shelly Meyers
Betty Elmore Elaine Bukowski
Bob Ross Nestor Smith
Charles Ingram (or designee) Mary Weisel
Donald Woolslayer Lydia Fecteau
Debbi Dagavarian Kim Furphy
Katherine Panagakos  

 

The Faculty Senate has charged the Task Force as follows:

In light of feedback from the Middle States Commission on Higher Education, the RSC Faculty Senate has created a Task Force on University Status. The Task Force is charged to lead a faculty discussion and exploration of whether Stockton shall remain a college or pursue university status. This taskforce will facilitate discussions among as many constituent groups as possible, and inform itself through research.

The Task Force shall consider potential gains and potential losses associated with this change including, but not limited to: student recruitment and retention, educational offerings to our community, campus physical plant and satellite campuses, perceived valuation of Stockton degrees, student and alumni employment opportunities, faculty and student interactions, faculty teaching and research expectations, faculty performance evaluations, funding opportunities, faculty governance, curricular control of academic programs, administrative staff organization, collective bargaining agreements, alumni attitudes and opinions, and any other area which may be impacted by the change. At the completion of its work the Task Force is expected to produce a written report to the Senate, which will subsequently be shared with the entire Stockton community.

Informational slide show (also available as PDF) on University Status in New Jersey

Founding Mission/Purpose Statement and program plans for Stockton (from Reaching 40)

Current Mission Statement for The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey (1982)

View the faculty summary rating of a change to university status

If you were unable to attend one of the town hall meetings held during the spring 2013 semester, we invite you to review the introduction and powerpoint from these presentations (both faculty/staff and student versions appear below).

Faculty and Staff Town Hall Meeting--Introduction, March 2013

Faculty and Staff Town Hall Meeting--Powerpoint, March 2013

Student Town Hall Meeting--Introduction, April 2013

Student Town Hall Meeting--Powerpoint, April 2013

Members
Robert Gregg Robert Marsico
Claudine Keenan Michelle McDonald
Lewis Leitner Mary Padden 
Michael Hozik Christine Tartaro
Kim Lebak Helen Duo Wei

 

 

Meeting Minutes
Dec 9, 2013 Dec 14, 2012
Apr 22, 2013 Nov 30, 2012
Mar 25, 2013 Nov 9, 2012
Feb 25, 2013 Nov 2, 2012
Feb 03, 2013  
 
Members
Russell Manson Heather McGovern
Deborah Ballard Mark Richard
Joshua Duntley Mike Frank
Sonia Gonsalves Aakash Taneja
Mary Kientz Carra Hood
Adeline Koh  

 

Report to the Senate (March 2012)

IDEA - 5 year review

IDEA - 5 year review statistics