4/17/03 Board meeting

 

 

Trustees:

Perhaps you've noticed a change in the demeanor of the Senate reps in the last month.  You might assume it is because of outrage over losing colleagues and programs.  Of course that is true.  But what if it is because we are right about some things?  What if we know some things that you don't know? 

 

You might feel overwhelmed these days with the decisions facing you as Trustees of WVMCCD.  I am here to help simplify your task.

 

You have one extremely important decision to make:

1. Should you let go tenure track and tenured faculty members or

2. Should you retain them?

 

Let's look at WVMCCD goals and budget priorities---commitments you have already made.

1. The District's Strategic Plan includes these values: student success, service, engaged learning

2. . The District's Strategic Plan vision statement says we strive to be student centered; a leader in teaching & learning; dynamic & responsive; highly accessible; a leader in technology. . .

3. The Board's Budget priorities for 03-04 puts people first

 

 HOW CAN YOU BELIEVE IN THESE IF YOU LET FACULTY MEMBERS GO?

 

As time goes by, it becomes clearer that the decision to send nearly 60 March 15 notices was either the result of a hard line bargaining strategy or an example of very poor planning for the academic programs of the colleges.  Faculty such as the librarians, counselors, and lab faculty ARE as essential  to student success as classroom faculty.  Do you think students will come to our colleges if they don't have the support of these  faculty---guiding them in their decisions, helping them with assignments, keeping them in their classes.

Believe me, it will not take long and students will go elsewhere---where they receive the instruction and support they need.

Do you think our students do not need support outside their classes?

 Did you hear any of the hundreds of students who have told you how much they need their counselors, teachers, etc?

 

Where have we gone wrong?

Some decision making errors have occurred.  We teach students about these errors in our communication classes.  One error is called "solution centeredness."  This occurs when a group prematurely jumps to a solution without considering all options.  Did we have options?  YES!  Did the district look at all options?  Nowhere near.

 

A second problem in group decision-making is called "Group think."  This fatal error occurs when the following are present in a group : a) the group overestimates its power and morality---assuming only their answer is the right one; b) the group is close minded & only considers information that confirms their pre-conceived  choices .

 I plan to use this district as a textbook example of poor decision-making

 

 

Belief in some myths has also contributed to the poor decisions made by this district.  Let me share a few.

 

MYTH #1   We only had a few days to decide  about lay offs---no time for a group to meet.

 

REALITY We had at least a week---maybe longer---from Feb 24-Mar 3 .  That was the time period from when the Presidents spoke to their Performance Goals Committees until the Presidents submitted a list of names to the Chancellor.  Check it out.  An emergency task force could certainly have been convened----to look at ALL options----not just ONE.

 

MYTH #2 The only way to save the district money was through faculty layoffs.

 

REALITY Who would know?  Who seriously looked at alternatives?  ACE has provided the District several solutions to prevent all layoffs and the District has turned all of them down.

Personnel such as faculty members, administrators, and groups such as GAP and the Student Services Council have stated that a larger share of the deficit should come from central services and areas away from students------who has heeded that wise advice?

 

 

MYTH #3 the district had to take the worst case scenario

 

REALITY Already the worst case from this year (mid year cuts) has been proven too drastic.  The working groups did NOT recommend taking such an extreme view----its not reality  (see email from Ian Walton)

 

 

MYTH #4 Some faculty are dispensable, unnecessary

 

REALITY  The Board---in policy--- has agreed to rely primarily on the advice of the AS in academic matters.

The AS has repeatedly  said : we need ALL  faculty in order to provide the curriculum & services our students need.  The Board and Chancellor have repeatedly ignored the advice of the AS.  And  you have not responded  to  our requests in written form as agreed upon in policy. 

 

 

MYTH #5 The trustees and Chancellor keep repeating "we do not want to lay off faculty."

 

REALITY  Where is the reality???  Where is the action???  Clearly this statement is simply not true.

 

 

MYTH #6 The only way to return faculty  remaining  on the lay off list in through the negotiations process.

 

REALITY  Obviously that is not true.  You have already rescinded  many this week---outside of negotiations.   Why not all?   Obviously it is because the district has decided to use trusted employees, dedicated teachers, as pawns in their hard line bargaining.

In addition, the faculty union has already provided solutions to layoffs-----so the district has other agendas.

 

 

 

MYTH #7  Faculty have not stepped up to the plate

 

REALITY  The Chancellor asked the Senates to suspend hiring next year and sign a waiver request for the FON.  After prompt deliberation, the Senates agreed, knowing that while e it was NOT the best thing for their programs and colleagues, they  felt that it was in the best interest of the district overall.

The shared governance bodies at MC readily participated in major reductions---both mid year and for next year.

 

Please open your hearts and minds and do the right thing.

--

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Jane Patton, President

Academic Senate

Dept. Chair, Communication Studies

Mission College

 (408) 855-5296 office S2-403

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *