Table of Contents

Appendix 1: MWC Student Profile Fall Semesters from 1980 to 1999

Appendix 2: Mary Washington College Mission Statement

Appendix 3: James Monroe Center's Mission Statement

Appendix 4: MWC Board of Visitors Resolution

Appendix 5: SACS Self-study Committee Members and Committee Charges

Introduction

A reading of the Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools' (here in referred to as SACS) "Handbook for Institutional Self-Study: the Alternative Model" suggests that a successful applicant is required to: 1) document compliance with four threshold requirements, and 2) develop a proposal for the Strategic Topic that the institution wants to pursue. This part of our application is focused on the latter, the Strategic Topic, which in our case is the move from a college to a university. The first section of this document is a brief history of Mary Washington College. The second section explains how we have come to this particular juncture in the institutionís development and to the current strategic topic. The third section is a list of the goals of the study. The fourth section describes the proposed approach to the study, including the research questions we plan to answer, the assumptions that will guide and direct the investigation, the studyís infrastructure including the human resources involved in the study, the methods to be used in the study, and a proposed timeline. The fifth section outlines the use of the consulting team and delineates a follow-up plan that will include an assessment of the planning effortís success.

History and Development of the Institution

The College was founded in 1908 as the State Normal and Industrial School for Women in Fredericksburg. It was renamed Mary Washington College in 1938, after having undergone a transformation from a teacherís college to Virginiaís public liberal arts college for women. In 1944, Mary Washington College became affiliated with the University of Virginia as its womenís undergraduate arts and sciences division. In 1970 the entire University became coeducational and in 1972, by action of the General Assembly of Virginia, the College became an independent, state-supported liberal arts college for women and men, with its own governing board. In 1978 the College added to its traditional residential B.A. and B.S. degree programs, two new degree programs for part-time commuting adult students, the Bachelor of Liberal Studies and the Master of Arts in Liberal Studies. Then, in 1999, the Collegeís James Monroe Center for Graduate and Professional Studies opened its doors on a new campus across the Rappahannock River from Fredericksburg in Stafford County.

Although it still serves a number of part-time commuting adult students (B.L.S. and M.A.L.S. programs together currently enroll between 400 and 500 students), the original campus in Fredericksburg focuses primarily upon full-time undergraduates, the majority of whom live on campus (see MWC Student Profile, Appendix 1). All of its degree programs are based heavily in the traditional arts and sciences. Highly selective and with an emphasis on academic quality, the B.A. and B.S. degree programs of the College attract students from all areas of Virginia, particularly the urban areas of Northern Virginia, Richmond, and Tidewater. In addition, approximately thirty percent of the on-campus resident students are from other states and foreign countries, with the largest population coming from Southern, Middle Atlantic, and New England states. Total current enrollment on the Fredericksburg campus approaches 3,800, and it is intended that this number will never exceed 4,000.

The new James Monroe Center of the College is designed to be academically independent of the Fredericksburg campus. It has a pronounced high-tech focus and caters to the local adult population within commuting distance. It strives also to address the manpower training needs of local businesses and industry, as well as those of nearby school districts and local government jurisdictions. It offers both degree and non-degree instructional programs in various professionally oriented fields of study at the baccalaureate and masterís level. Its baccalaureate degree programs are "degree-completion" programs offering only upper level undergraduate courses. It offers no arts and sciences courses at all. Enrollments at the James Monroe Center in its first year of operation were relatively small (between 200 and 300 at "census date" in November, 1999). But rapid enrollment growth is expected, including enrollments in two newly-approved masterís degree programs (in business and in teacher education). There will be no cap placed upon enrollments on the James Monroe campus, and it is anticipated that one day in the not-too-distant future its enrollments will exceed that of the Fredericksburg campus.

Currently the Collegeís mission statement (see Appendix 2) is focused primarily on liberal arts programming on the Fredericksburg campus. The mission statement was revised in 1992, to include being "sensitive to the educational needs of the growing population within its commuting region." The statement further discusses the development of the "James Monroe Center for Graduate and Professional Studies (located at a new campus in nearby Stafford County)." The current mission statement makes it clear that "Pursuant to its own distinctive mission, the James Monroe Center is designed to offer programs appropriate to the regionís economic development needs and to provide educational opportunities for the personal life-long learning and professional advancement objectives of the citizens of the region." This mission is very distinct from the mission of the Fredericksburg campus, in fact the James Monroe Center has elaborated its own Mission statement which is presented in Appendix 3. Now that the new campus is up and running, it is time to revisit both mission statements, with an eye toward the projected growth at the new campus and toward increasing clarity regarding the independent functioning of the two campuses.

Moving toward University Status

It is apparent from the foregoing sketch of institutional history and from the two distinct mission statements that Mary Washington College is an institution in transition. For many years the College concentrated single-mindedly and almost exclusively upon "liberal education" in the arts and sciences for eighteen-to-twenty-two year old traditional full-time residential students. That part of the mission is at the core of what transpires today on the original Fredericksburg campus, and it dominates the academic culture on that campus. But beginning in the early nineteen eighties, the College began slowly to expand its part-time adult student enrollment and evolved an office of "graduate and continuing education" to look after that clientele and also to develop non-credit programming in response to the demands of a growing local population and business community. By the early nineties, formal plans were in place to develop a second campus which would focus exclusively upon serving the continuing education needs of the greater Fredericksburg commuting region, and at the same time return the original campus essentially to its historic agenda of traditional liberal arts education. The two campuses would have very different agendas, and they would need to operate with a considerable degree of autonomy, one from the other.

In the fall of 1997 a very broadly representative (faculty, students, staff, alumni, governing board, foundation board, local community) task force was created by President Anderson to look at the implications of opening the new campus, especially with respect to institutional image, and to recommend a name for new campus. The task force recommended, among other things, that the institution "move toward university status," and call the new campus the James Monroe Center for Graduate and Professional Studies.

In September 1998, bearing in mind the task force recommendations and anticipating a new level of institutional complexity that would come with the opening of the new campus the following fall, the Collegeís Board of Visitors adopted a resolution officially committing the College to seeking university status. It also proposed using the SACS "alternative" Self-Study mechanism as the vehicle for accomplishing the strategic planning and decision making that "becoming a university" would require. The full text of the Board of Visitorsí resolution adopting this course of action is presented in Appendix 4.

In July of 1999, in his annual message to faculty and staff about matters to bear in mind and refer to during the upcoming academic year, the Vice President for Academic Affairs and Dean of the Faculty reminded everyone about the Boardís September resolution, proposed a time line for the upcoming SACS self-study, set forth some issues that would need to by addressed by an "alternative model" self-study which would focus upon moving to university status, and sought faculty input.

During the 1999-2000 academic year, plans for the alternative model self-study progressed. In February, a Self-Study Director was named and a committee structure was proposed. An "issues" list evolved reflecting input from the College community. In the late spring a steering committee was named and met to flesh out the composition of each of the proposed self-study committees. In July, at its annual summer retreat, the Board of Visitors reviewed the up-date of self-study planning as it stood at that point.

At the very beginning of the 2000-2001 academic year, in August, the Steering Committee, in a retreat with President Anderson, received its formal self-study "charge" and put final touches on the actual plan for the alternative model self-study, which follows. The Board of Visitors approved this plan for submission to SACS at their first regularly scheduled meeting of this year on September 22-23, 2000.

Goals of the proposed self-study

The plan is to use the SACS Alternative Self-Study Model to define a development and transition plan that will move Mary Washington College to "university status" and allow for the development in the future of additional schools and colleges. The goals of the proposed study, as outlined in the title of this proposal, are:

• To assess the opportunities and demands associated with a move to university status,

• Define administrative and resource changes required to support the move to university status and to provide support for any proposed changes.
• Propose possible new programming, including additional colleges, graduate and undergraduate programs.
• Propose enhancements to existing programs.
• Define resource development needs and opportunities.

• To define priorities, and

• Define a timeline for implementation of needed changes in administrative systems, and resource allocation
• Define a timeline for implementation of enhancements and new programs
• Define a timeline for resource development
• Assure that development occurs in ways to maintain the reputation for faculty and academic excellence and quality in higher education
• Assure that development occurs in ways that meet the educational needs in the region.

• To safeguard existing strengths as the institution grows to meet the educational needs in the region.

• Assure that faculty and academic excellence and quality remain at the forefront of all development efforts.
• Assure that the strengths, character and image of the Fredericksburg campus are maintained.
• Refine mission statements to assure appropriate focus, allowing for future development on both campuses.

Approach to the Study

Although the effort certainly will develop over time and does not yet have its final shape, much of the studyís infrastructure is already in place. The study will be highly participative, involving stakeholders in the design of the research; using surveys, questionnaires, focus groups, and individual interviews to gather input from appropriate constituencies; and involving these same constituencies in the analysis and interpretation of the resulting data. To manage the process and further develop the research questions, a set of committees has been established and they have begun meeting. The definition of the committee structure was in part driven by the development of an initial set of research questions. Providing answers for the research questions will be one way in which the completed Self-Study may be assessed.

Research Questions

Although they do not yet necessarily constitute a final list, here are the questions we currently believe are at the heart of the matter.

Assumptions guiding the study

There are a few assumptions that will guide the work of the self-study from the beginning. These are:

• That this institution is, and will remain, devoted to the pursuit of excellence in higher education, and the delivery of educational services of the highest quality.

• That the current strengths of the institution will be safeguarded and, where possible, enhanced.

• That the Fredericksburg campus will remain an academically self-contained, selective, primarily residential, undergraduate college of arts and sciences, with its own faculty and governance system, independent of the academic units on the James Monroe campus.

• That the long-standing enrollment cap of 4,000 (headcount) on the Fredericksburg Campus will remain in place indefinitely.

• That no matter what names are eventually decided upon for the institution and its various parts, the name "Mary Washington College" will be prominently preserved.

• That with the establishment of the James Monroe Center for Graduate and Professional Studies and the second campus, this institution has committed itself to becoming a "university".

• That the addition of baccalaureate and post-baccalaureate professional degree programs, already begun at the James Monroe Center, will continue into the future.

• That the newly initiated and future academic programs at the James Monroe Center will be independent of the established academic programs, faculty, and governance system of the Fredericksburg Campus.

• That program development and enrollment growth at the James Monroe Center will move forward without any pre-established limits or enrollment caps.

Self-study Committees and Support

The "strategic topic" facet of the self-study, as currently structured, will use eight committees to explore these questions. A ninth committee will be devoted to the criteria compliance facet of the self-study. The eight committees are briefly described in and appendix to this part of our application. The Compliance Committee will function independently. The eight committees will be chaired by Mary Washington College faculty, or in one case by an administrative staff member, and will include the variety of constituents that are directly concerned with the issues being addressed by the committees. As currently structured, the committees directly involve 33 faculty members, 32 administrators/staff members, 10 students, a member of the Mary Washington College Board of Visitors, a member of the Mary Washington College Foundation, two College alumni, and two representatives from the local Fredericksburg community. A list of the committees, including the associated charges, members, and specific areas to be covered, is presented in Appendix 5. In addition to the resource allocation evident in the numbers of faculty and administrators involved in the committees, the self-study director has been given a three-course-per-semester load reduction, moved to a temporary twelve month assignment, provided with dedicated office space and given financial support to include a part-time administrative assistant. The budget also includes support for additional computer equipment, travel, and meeting expenses.

Research Methods

As mentioned earlier, the self-study will use a variety of methods. Initially we are collecting various in-house documents appropriate to the research questions being explored by the various committees. We plan to identify other schools that have gone through similar transitions and conduct phone interviews with key personnel and to conduct site visits to those schools deemed most useful to our study. During the first academic year, all committees have been charged to do any archival research that will help them further develop research questions and to develop appropriate methods to address those questions.

The research questions and the associated methods will be coordinated through the Steering Committee to help develop joint efforts where appropriate, e.g. a single alumni survey or series of focus groups covering questions from several committees. Data collection methods are anticipated to include archival sources, surveys, focus groups, and individual interviews. The process will be iterative in some cases, with the results of the data collection efforts being "fed back" to appropriate constituencies for elaboration and clarification. The Mary Washington College Board of Visitors, the Mary Washington College Faculty Senate, and the James Monroe Academic Council will be kept abreast of developments as the study progresses. Meetings with other constituencies, e.g. the Student Senate, or the Commuting Student Association, will occur when appropriate. A variety of other communication methods will be used to communicate with the students and alumni. A web page with an on-line discussion forum has already been established allowing interactive communication with the entire College community (http://departments.umw.edu/sacs/www/Index.html). Articles about the study will appear in the campus newspaper and the alumni magazine as the study progresses.

While most major data collection efforts will occur during the Summer and Fall of 2001, some committees may have to begin data collection earlier. We currently anticipate having the data collection phase, including any iterative efforts, completed by the end of the Fall semester 2001, with analysis and report writing beginning in the Spring of 2002. Final editing will occur in the fall of 2002, with the anticipated site visit by the consultation team occurring in the Spring of 2003. Below is a timeline describing the work of the study.

The time-line:

The following is a brief initial outline of the tasks and the time-frame associated with each milestone in the self-study effort.
 

The Consultation team and proposed follow-up efforts

The Consultation Team:   At this early point in the work it is difficult to identify the skills and expertise we will look for on the Consultation Team. We believe that we will want someone who is very experienced with educational programming for part-time adult students, someone who has some experience with distance learning programming, someone with experience in institutions that have made similar developmental transitions, and perhaps someone representing professional accrediting bodies like AACSB. We hope their experience and objectivity will allow them to critically review the proposed changes to the institution, and then recommend changes to the plan, help us prioritize our efforts, and point out potential pitfalls or hazards we are likely to encounter as we implement the proposed changes.
As we move forward in this effort, the expertise desired on the Consultation Team, and details about the nature of the consultations needed, will become better defined. We would like to reserve an opportunity to address these questions more fully at a later time.

Follow-up Efforts:  The success of this effort will be difficult to ascertain in the short term. However, we expect that the first measure of success will be a review of the research questions posed and subsequently answered. We expect to have a list of prioritized steps for implementation of the recommendations stemming from the self-study committees and from the SACS Consultation Team with appropriate delegations and timeframes. This prioritized list will be compared to the list of research questions presented in this proposal and with additional lists of questions developed as the study progresses. A second early measure of the success of this effort will be the acceptance of the plan by the Mary Washington College Board of Visitors, the faculty on both campuses, and by the SACS Consultation team.

Long term follow-up of the implementation efforts will be tracked, managed, and measured by the Office of Planning, and Institutional Research, or its "university" successor. This office is currently in charge of putting in place and monitoring institutional effectiveness efforts and measures.

This study is occurring at a very opportune moment. The region is growing rapidly. With this rapid growth come significant changes in the educational needs of the region, and the demand for very different programs and services from schools in the region. During our last self-study, a new campus was envisioned, one specifically designed to meet the educational needs of the growing number of working adults in the region. A little over a year ago the first building on the new campus opened its doors, and the new enterprise already shows much promise. With that promise come new challenges. The culture of the Fredericksburg campus, while ideal for the traditional 18 to 22 year old residential liberal arts student, does not fit the needs of the growing numbers of part-time non-residential adult students interested primarily in educational programming focused on their professional aspirations. The flexibility required to meet the new demands at the Stafford campus is at odds with established traditions that have served the Fredericksburg campus well. The current infrastructure is experiencing the effects of both the growth and the cultural differences. It is time for us to develop the requisite infrastructure and programming that will allow these two very different campuses to flourish, each in its own way. We believe that this can best be accomplished within a new "university" structure. We hope that the proposed application of the alternative self-study model will provide us the opportunity to carefully plan this next step in our ongoing efforts to pursue educational excellence in all of our programs, as well as to better meet the educational needs of this region.

Appendix 1: MWC Student Profile Fall Semesters from 1980 to 1999

Appendix 2: Mary Washington College Mission Statement

The current official mission statement of the College, as it appears in the College Catalogue, the Faculty Handbook, and elsewhere, is as follows:

Appendix 3: James Monroe Centerís Mission Statement

The current official mission statement of the James Monroe center for Graduate and Professional Studies, as it appears in the their Academic Catalogue is as follows:

The Stafford Campus of Mary Washington College supports regional economic development and personal life-long learning and professional advancement through quality full-time and part-time educational programs and appropriate ancillary services. With upper-level undergraduate courses in job-related professional and technical areas, it offers baccalaureate degree completion programs to supplement regional community college education. For area workers and professionals with baccalaureate degrees, this campus offers post-baccalaureate certificate programs and masters degrees, including programs developed through partnerships with other institutions and by cooperative agreements with Virginiaís public research universities. Professional certification/re-certification programs, individual professional development courses, and continuing education courses and seminars are also offered. These programs and courses are provided in a variety of settings (traditional classroom, business-place-on-site, distance learning) and delivered with an emphasis on state-of-the-art information and instructional technology. The composition of the curricula and faculty remains flexible in order to respond to the changing needs of the students and businesses the campus serves.

The Stafford Campus is, to a degree, administratively and operationally dependent upon the Fredericksburg Campus of Mary Washington College. However, it is academically independent, with its own faculty and its own distinct courses and degree offerings, tailored to the needs of residents and businesses within a commuting radius. None of the courses or degree offerings duplicate or overlap the courses and degree offerings of the traditional residential liberal arts college in Fredericksburg.

The Campus operates on a schedule consistent with the needs of the adult commuter students, with classes, advising, and other services available during the evening and on weekends as well as during normal weekday business hours. It also provides on-site consultation for business practitioners through the Rappahannock Region Small Business Development Center.

Appendix 4: MWC Board of Visitors Resolution

Steering Committee Chair, Larry Penwell
 

Meta Braymer, JMC Staff, Ex officio

Ana Chichester, MWC Faculty

Steven Greenlaw, MWC Faculty

Philip Hall, MWC Staff, Ex officio

Richard Hansen, MWC Faculty Emeritus: Consultant

Richard Hurley, MWC Staff, Ex officio

Adrienne May, MWC Faculty

Joseph Nicholas, MWC Faculty

Cedric Rucker, MWC Staff

Ronald Singleton, MWC Staff, Ex officio

Roy Smith, MWC Faculty

Brenda Vogel, JMC Faculty

Roy Weinstock, MWC Staff, Ex officio

To be named, MWC Student

To be named, JMC Student

To be named, Self-Study Report Editor

The task of this committee is to coordinate the activities of the various SACS committees to assure input from all appropriate constituencies, to conduct needed collaborative research, to analyze and to make prioritized recommendations to the Mary Washington College Board of Visitors regarding the future of the two campuses and the institution as a whole. The committee will develop the institution's strategic plan for long term growth and development of both the Mary Washington and the James Monroe campuses, in a way that fits the higher education needs of the region and that complies with the accreditation criteria of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. Specific areas to be covered include: integration and integrity, quality and planís compliance, data collection, conflict resolution, and process management.

Compliance Committee Chair, Roy Weinstock

This committee will function independently for the majority of its work. The primary task of this committee is to assure that we currently are "in-compliance" with the SACS accreditation criteria. Secondarily, this committee will work with the Steering Committee to assure that proposed changes meet the accreditation criteria. This committeeís work will include assembling the information needed by the SACS Compliance Team during their visit in Spring, 2003. Faculty and staff from both campuses will be involved in this effort as it develops.

University Mission and Image Committee Chair, Steven Greenlaw
 

Gene Bailey, Community Representative

Kristy Bartle, MWC Student

Jenifer Blair, MWC Staff

Ranny Corbin, MWC Staff

Terrie Crawley, MWC Alumni

Jean Ann Dabb, MWC Faculty

Dori Eglevsky, Board of Visitors

Alan Heffner, JMC Faculty

David Cain, MWC Faculty

Harold Wright, JMC Faculty

To be named, JMC Student

In collaboration with the SACS steering committee, and with input from all appropriate constituencies, this committeeís charge is to research, to analyze and to make prioritized recommendations regarding what changes should be made to the institution's Mission Statement, in light of the planned move to "university status", and regarding the extent to which separate institutional images and identities for the two campuses should be promulgated and maintained. Specific areas to be covered include: Admissions, Publications (e.g. catalog, admissions materials, handbooks, track-books, etc.), College guides and ratings, Commencement ceremonies, Accreditation, Planning, Academic program review and assessment, and Institutional research.

New Programs Committee Chair, Brenda Vogel
 

Mehdi Aminrazavi, MWC Faculty

Gail Brooks, JMC Faculty

Meta Braymer, JMC Staff, ex officio

Phillip Hall, MWC Staff, ex officio

Pamela Hopkins, JMC Faculty

Donald Rallis, MWC Faculty

George Meadows, MWC Faculty

In collaboration with the SACS steering committee and the input of all appropriate constituencies, to research, to analyze and to make prioritized recommendations regarding what new degree programs, graduate and undergraduate, should be developed at both the James Monroe and Mary Washington campuses, and what organizational entities (e.g., centers, schools, colleges) should be created to deliver them.

Academic Affairs Committee Chair, Roy Smith
 

Porter Blakemore, MWC Faculty

Gil Coleman, JMC Staff

Leah Cox-Hanley, MWC Staff

Karen Hartman, JMC Staff

Debra Hydorn, MWC Faculty

Pat Norwood, MWC Faculty

Susan Stevenson, MWC Staff

To be named, MWC Student

To be named, JMC Student

In collaboration with the SACS steering committee and the input of all appropriate constituencies, this committeeís charge is to research, to analyze, and to make prioritized recommendations regarding: academic policies and procedures, the related administrative support, and the student services needs, necessary to implement successfully an organizational model supporting the proposed academic programs of both the Mary Washington and the James Monroe campuses. Specific areas to be covered include: academic rules, regulations and procedures, curriculum (course duplication, academic credit, program overlap, etc.), admissions, student services (e.g., advising, ADA accommodations, career services and internships, etc.), Student records, and academic staffing.

Faculty Governance Committee Chair, Ana Chichester
 

Jim Goehring, MWC Faculty

Roy Gratz, MWC Faculty

Lynn Hamilton, JMC Staff

John Morello, MWC Staff

Wendy Price, MWC Faculty

Blair Staley, JMC Faculty

Jo Tyler, JMC Faculty

In collaboration with the SACS steering committee, and with input from all appropriate constituencies, this committeeís charge is to research, to analyze and to make prioritized recommendations regarding how faculty governance will be structured on both the Mary Washington and the James Monroe campuses. Specific areas to be covered include: All matters pertaining to the Faculty handbooks at both campuses, such as faculty appointments, promotion, and tenure, faculty benefits and compensation

Administration and Resources Committee Chair, Adrienne May
 

Rosemary Barra, MWC Faculty

Sallie Washington-Braxton, JMC Staff

Gardner Campbell, MWC Faculty

Dave MacEwen, MWC Faculty

Steve Stageberg, MWC Faculty

Rick Pearce, MWC Staff

Laurie Preston, MWC Staff

Dana Abbott, MWC Staff

John Wiltenmuth, MWC Staff

To be named, MWC Student

To be named, JMC Student

In collaboration with the SACS steering committee and with input from all appropriate College constituencies, this committeeís charge is to research, to analyze and to make prioritized recommendations regarding the organizational structure, the administrative support needs, and the resource allocations necessary to implement successfully a fully-funded organizational model supporting the proposed academic programs of both the Mary Washington and the James Monroe campuses. Specific areas to be covered include: administration and organization, appropriations, budget and resources, facilities management, information technology, networks, and instructional technology, planning, academic program review and assessment, institutional research, student records, admissions, financial aid, library, student services (advisingÖ), and athletics.

University Relations and Development Committee Chair, Joseph Nicholas
 

Tara Corrigall, Past Alumni Board Member

Liane Houghtalin, MWC Faculty

Margaret Mock, MWC Staff

Jeff Rountree, MWC Staff

Mark Safferstone, JMC Staff

Ron Singleton, MWC Staff, ex officio

Rita Stone, MWC Foundation representative

Cynthia Snyder, MWC Staff

George Van Sant, Community Representative

Lea Ziobro, MWC Staff

In collaboration with the SACS steering committee, and with input from all appropriate constituencies, this committeeís charge is to research, to analyze and to make prioritized recommendations regarding the image and successful marketing of Mary Washington College and the James Monroe Center, institutional relations with alumni and the broader community, and the continuation and advancement of private funding for operations, initiatives, and scholarships. Specific areas to be covered include: institutional relations, development, and alumni affairs, publications (catalog, admissions materials, handbooks, track-books, etc.), college guides, ratings, etc., and scholarships.

Co-Curricular Affairs and Student Services Committee Chair, Cedric Rucker
 

Deborah Conway, MWC Faculty

Susan Houff, JMC Faculty

Mark McClure, MWC Staff

John MacDonald, MWC Staff

Matthew Meija, MWC Staff

Marjorie Och, MWC Faculty

Chris Porter, MWC Staff

Curtis Ryan, MWC Faculty

Joann Schrass, MWC Staff

Stuart Sullivan, MWC Staff

To be named, MWC Student

To be named, JMC Student

In collaboration with the SACS steering committee and with input from all appropriate constituencies, this committeeís charge is to research, to analyze and to make prioritized recommendations regarding co-curricular affairs and student services necessary to implement successfully an organizational model supporting the proposed academic programs of both the Mary Washington and the James Monroe campuses. Specific areas to be studied include: Student Life and co-curricular programs (Student Government, Student Organizations, student behavior, Intercollegiate Athletics, Campus recreation, etc.), Facilities Management for co-curricular programs (Residence Halls, programming facilities, etc.), Student services (advising, ADA accommodations, career services, internships, etc.), and Student financial aid.