Mission College Academic Senate

Ext. 5413

Axpproved  Minutes

Thursday,   September 26, 2002

 

I.       Call to Order/Roll Call

            The meeting was called to order by President Jane Patton at 2:05  p.m. 

Senators

   A

   P

Senators

   A

   P

Brennan    (Ext. 5313)  Comm

     

    X

McAlister (Ext. 5087)  Stud.Dev.

    

   X

Charland  (Ext. 5046)  Stud. Dev.

 

    X

Mancini    (Ext. 5855) AF/HM

 

   X

Dooley    (Ext. 5379)  AAS

 

    X

Martin      (Ext. 5356)  Tech.

    X

   

Estrada     (Ext.5164) CommSvc

 

    X

Musat       (Ext. 5331) Math

 

   X

Guich      (Ext. 5270) Social Sci.

 

    X

Oliver       (Ext. 5427)  AAS

 

   X

Johnson   (Ext.5277) CATA

    X

    

Patton    (Ext. 5296) Comm Stud

 

   X

Lavallo    (Ext. 5399)  Math

 

    X

Rivas       (Ext. 5282)  CATA

    

   X

Light       (Ext. 5717) AF/CIT

    X 

    

Rosner     (Ext. 5317) ESL

    

   X

Lynne      (Ext. 5248) CommSvc

 

    X

Sippel      (Ext. 5118) Comm

 

   X

 

 

 

VanTassel (Ext. 5334) Tech

    X

   

Other:   A.Braun (CRC),

   

    X

Other:  B.Grayson (Staff Dev)

    X 

   

S. Ghiya, S. Hanna (ASB Reps.)

 

    X

Guests: G.Greenwood, T.Jackins, S.Kinsella, D.McKay, Q.McKean, A.Moore, G.Singh,

 

   X

   X

   X

                   

 II.    Approval of the Minutes

            The minutes for the September 19, 2002, meeting were accepted and approved as submitted (M/S/P - Charland/Mancini).

 

III.    Order of the Agenda

            It was agreed that the order of the agenda will be reordered to accommodate Carol Toppel at 2:45 p.m. (M/S/U - Charland/Sippel) with Item VI.D.2 and Item VII.B.

 

 IV.    Oral Communication from the Public

            Albert Moore addressed the Senate regarding the curriculum approval process.  Last week, the Mission College Academic Senate passed a motion to retain the current curriculum approval process.  This action was based on the information that the proposed change in the process was to delegate the curriculum approval authority to the college president. This information, which came from Cabrillo College, was erroneous. Albert explained that the recommendation from the Community College League of California is that the authority be delegated to the Chancellor, an agent of the Board of Trustees.  This change in process will expedite the approval of curriculum, and the Chancellor will keep the Board informed of any curriculum approved. If the Academic Senate feels the Chancellor's decision is not in the best interest of the college or students, it retains the opportunity to address the Board directly in accordance with AB 1725 and the District's established shared governance policy.  Albert stated that the members of the District Council feel that this change is a streamline of process and is in the best interest of the college.  The Senate is requested to reconsider and Jane agreed to place this item on next week's agenda.

 

            Steve Kinsella has been appointed as interim President of Mission College.  Steve stated that his objective is to work as closely as he can with everyone and concentrate his efforts on helping the institution to continue its operation and move forward.  He hopes to become more familiar with the college's history, its faculty and staff as he roams the campus.   Jane thanked him and welcomed him to the college.

 

            Gagan Singh, Mission Colleges Student Trustee on the Board was introduced and stated his particular interest in the upcoming forum on the calendar issue.

        

  V.    Information & Announcements 

         1.  Jane announced that a call for faculty volunteers to serve on the President Selection Committee has been sent out to all faculty.  She asked the Senators to consider criteria to be used in the selection process, which will take place at next week's meeting.

            2.   The Fall Plenary Session of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges will be held in Los Angeles, October 31 - November 2nd.  She indicated there are funds available to send one or two Senators to the session.  The theme of the session is on diversity and multi-cultural students.  She urged anyone interested in serving as Senate President to consider attending the conference.

            3.   A reception for Chancellor Arterberry will be held in Hospitality Management on Wednesday, Octrober 9th, from 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.  Albert encouraged all to come and meet the Chancellor.

 

VI.    Administrative Business/Actions/Appointments

  A.    Curriculum Committee  -   No report. 

 B.     Staff Recognition -  None presented. 

  C.    Committee Appointments  -  No appointments made.

  D.    Oral Reports

         1.  Staff Development  - No report.

         2.  Instructional Technology Committee  -  This item postponed to 2:45 p.m.

         3.  Program Review Committee  -  Jane reported that the task force met yesterday.  Its charge is to consider various models and change the college's current program review process in response to recommendations from the accreditation team to include outcomes and tie program review to budget and planning.  Senator Mancini reported that the intent is to integrate all three aspects of program review:  student services, administration, and instructional.

         4.  District Information Technology Steering Committee  -  No report.

         5.  Other:   None

 

         As agreed, the order of agenda is changed to accommodate Carol Toppel.  Item VII.A will be addressed at 2:45 p.m.

 

VII.   Old Business

  

    B.  Consider ACE Policy on Associate Faculty Guaranteed Interviews

            Jane explained that ACE has requested that the Senate consider a policy that will guarantee associate faculty members an interview for open full-time faculty positions.  The Senators were asked to discuss this matter with their constituents and bring the results forward today.  She opened the floor to discussion.

 

            Although senators spoke in support of associate faculty, it was clear that their constituents did not support a guaranteed interview for various reasons.  The following motion was made (M/S - Dooley/Oliver):

 

            "that the Mission College Academic Senate inform ACE that it does not support the idea of guaranteed interviews to associate faculty."

 

            Discussion ensued.  It was stated that in some departments, there is an extremely large number of associate faculty, and a guaranteed interview would necessarily delay the hiring process and place a huge burden on the department.  Another view is that it is inappropriate to grant a guarantee in the hiring process.  If an individual is qualified for a position, and the presumption is that she/he is, then that person will pass paper screening.  If the individual does not meet the qualifications, which is possible, an eligible person may be excluded from the interview stage.  There were also concerns regarding the legalities involved in granting special allowances for associate faculty. 

 

            The Senators tried to determine how to best support associate faculty.  Senator Mancini, the representative for Associate Faculty, stated that, historically associate faculty do not participate in college activities.  The solution is to integrate associate faculty into campus life.  The Academic Senate has the opportunity to find some way to let associate faculty know that they are part of the college community and invite them to participate in the hiring process when a position opens.  Others agreed.

 

            The above motion was passed, and the Senators agreed that it behooves the Senate to develop some process or statement that will encourage departments to notify their associate faculty colleagues of any open positions and encourage them to apply.  This matter will be considered at a future Senate meeting.  Jane will notify ACE of the Senate's decision regarding the issue of guaranteed interviews and look into the legal questions raised today.                          

 

            Carol Toppel arrived and her items were presented as agreed. 

 

   D.   Oral Reports

         2.  Instructional Technology Committee         - At last week's meeting, Carol provided the Senators with a table of contents for the college's Technology Plan.  This week, she presented the strategic plan for instructional and administrative technology.  The plan includes six strategic objectives:

                  •     Enrich the teaching and learning experience by providing appropriate levels of technology for students and faculty in classrooms and laboratories.

                  •     Empower faculty and staff to use technology by providing reliable network services, up-to-date hardware and software, training, and support that meet or exceed State Total Cost of Ownership guidelines.

                  •     Commit to being THE technology college of Silicon Valley.

                  •     Facilitate technological access of information to foster student, faculty and staff success.

                  •     Provide appropriate support to maintain uninterrupted access to information for the Mission College community.

                  •     Evaluate and recommend a College budget process that will ensure the successful implementation of this technology plan.

 

                  Carol explained that the intent is for the Technology Plan to be fluid and indicate the current status, accomplishments over the past year, and what remains to be accomplished.  The plan will be flexible with room for recommendations.  The committee is currently reviewing the plan with the consultant.  She stated that the committee is comprised of representatives from all constituent groups.   Discussion veered to the college's need for PARIS in order to be able to track student success.  Carol advised that currently there are 20 reports available on PARIS. 

 

              Discussion veered to budget needs to ensure the implementation of the Technology Plan, and Carol advised that the current budget model does not meet the needs of technology.   CBAC will have the opportunity to determine the need and time line required.  The consultant has demonstrated how best to lay out the plan and its cost.  Ultimately the college makes the decision and resources will necessarily be considered.  The plan was based on the college's core values, and the E&FMP papers.  Carol will bring the concerns relative to PARIS to the committee.

 

VII.   Old Business (Continued)

 

    A.  Consider Formation of Crisis Intervention Committee as a Standing Committee of the Academic Senate

            Carol requested that the Senate consider establishing the Crisis Intervention Committee as a subcommittee of the Senate. She would prefer that the name of the committee be changed to indicate a proactive charge rather than a reactive one. The intent is to develop a handbook that will  provide support, guidelines and training, teaching staff and students how to best prevent and deal with crises in the classrooms or on campus.  Carol has gathered extensive material from other colleges that have such a program in place.

 

            The rationale for making this a Senate committee was questioned.  Carol stated that her intent is to ensure that such a body/program becomes permanently institutionalized.  In her view, this is best assured under the Senate.  It was suggested that such a program might be better housed under the auspices of counseling. The following motion was passed unanimously (M/S/U - Brennan/Mancini):

 

            "that the Mission College Academic Senate acknowledges the importance of establishing a Crisis Intervention Committee and that a subcommittee of the Senate be formed to consider how to best institutionalize a crisis intervention program."

 

            It was agreed that this item will be placed on next week's agenda to appoint senators to a committee to consider the question.                                                                   

 

         The order of the agenda was resumed.  Senators were asked to indicate which of Items VII.C, D, and E they would participate on at the next meeting, and the next item of business was addressed.

 

    F.   Forum on Compressed Calendar

            The Senate wanted to give people a chance to voice their opinions on this matter and allowed for one-minute statements, alternating pro and con arguments.  The arguments made for a compressed calendar are as follows:

 

            •     The history of the 18-week calendar for community colleges is that the legislature tied them to K-12.

            •     All colleges have a 15-16 week semester, and almost all community colleges are on a 16 week calendar.  

            •     No research is available indicating that a compressed calendar is detrimental or beneficial to students.

            •     Mission College is not fitting in with other community colleges in the area.  Students are confused about start dates. 

            •     Students will respond to the expectations of the instructors; if the instructors expect their students to handle the shorter calendar, they will.

            •     Only 5-6% of curriculum is offered between 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.   Even if all offerings between 4-7pm crash, it could be made up by inter-session.

            •     Students can be helped to be more successful during inter-session by offering remedial classes such as grammar review, algebra review, etc. 

            •     The democratic process has indicated that both students and faculty advocate a compressed calendar. 

            •     ACE negotiates the calendar, and having two different calendars has caused problems for ACE.  This could lead to unfair labor practices.

            •     Summer school students and inter-session students have done very well.  One reason being that they are more focused in a shorter period of time.

            •     The compressed calendar is not pedagogically unsound.  Students taking courses under the current schedule from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. are mostly working adults and both students and instructors become extremely tired by the end of the semester. 

            •     How can summer school be justified

            The arguments made against a compressed calendar are as follows:

           

            •     The Nursing Program is tied to Board regulations regarding the number of hours and focus per day.  Compacting the schedule may be against Board regulations.          

            •     Since there is no research data available on this issue, why make a change that will put borderline students at risk?  The college could lose those students. 

            •     Students who start classes late, traditionally do not pass the course.

            •     The Hospitality Management Program would face a facility problem. Although Jim Burrell indicated the compressed calendar could work, this is not a standard design campus.  Changing classes will be difficult.  It is important to make certain this can be done.

            •     The longer the break, the poorer students do.  How long is an inter-session?

            •     Student Services will have a problem with staffing the inter-session as well as budget issues.

            •     Counseling has staffing concerns regarding the inter-session and summer session.  Most counselors are on an eleven-month schedule, and it is not clear how to provide adequate staffing.

            •     The compressed calendar will not allow time for the essential practice of skills for ESL students and this is pedagogically unsound.

            •     Many students take 18 units and are unable to succeed in an 18-week calendar.  How can it be done in 16?  It is too much to expect.

            •     Summer school does not compare to the usual semester and is irrelevant in this discussion.  The main argument against this calendar is that we are offering our students less resources and asking them to be more successful.  There's a push in public education to make it more difficult for people who need education the most.  We need to resist - in terms of democracy. 

            •     The Math department is opposed to the shorter calendar.  We are kidding ourselves to say this change will not impact our students.

 

            Dianne McKay clarified that it is incorrect to say that only 5% - 6% of our curriculum is offered during the 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. time slot.  It is much higher.  There are many iterations combined within the time slot.  She stated her opinion that the calendar will work if we have high expectations and that there are several ways to make the change.  She offered hand-counted preliminary statistics on the student survey, indicating that 56.3% are in favor of a compressed calendar and 42.6% are not.  She also clarified that it is not illegal for the two colleges to be on different schedules, and she emphasized that the state Chancellor will not approve a compressed calendar unless it can be demonstrated that it is pedagogically sound and is in the best interest of our students.  Jane thanked everyone for his/her input.

 

            The order of agenda was resumed.

 

VIII.  New Business

 

    A.  Presentation on Global Ed Study Abroad Project Proposal

            Senator Rivas presented a report from Joan Powers, Chair of the Global Education Committee, on a study abroad proposal.   Joan is requesting that the Senate support and approve the concept of the project.  During discussion it was noted that the class is an established class of Global Education and was approved by the Curriculum Review Committee in September of 2001.  The course ends with a study abroad trip, the location to be determined and selected from a number of countries such as Brazil, Argentina, Morocco, etc. The course is to be listed in the schedule of classes. 

 

            There was a brief discussion regarding the district's liability. It is understood that such a program would be covered as other past travel abroad programs of faculty and students have been covered.  It was explained that additional insurance is required for travel abroad projects.  Insurance riders can be obtained and district procedure followed regarding liability.

 

            As discussion continued, the Senators agreed that any statement of support would be redundant since its agent, the Curriculum Review Committee has already approved the program.

                   

   B.   Set 2002/03 Goals for the MC Academic Senate

            President Patton distributed a drafted list of goals.  She asked the Senators to review and be prepared to discuss and adopt at next week's meeting.                                     

     

  X.   Correspondence, Publications, & Announcements

         Correspondence

         1.   E-mail on Program Review Models from Linda Retterrath dated September 17, 2002.

         Publication/Minutes

1.         Article from September 20, 2002,  San Jose Mercury News "In defense of the college lecture."

                  Article from the September 21, 2002, issue of San Jose Mercury News,  "UC body to review course synopsis."

            2.   The agenda for the September 25, 2002, meeting of GAP.

            3.   The September 19, 2002, issue of FA NEWS from the Foothill-DeAnza Faculty Association.

            4.   Changes in the ACE Contract, Article 26A regarding Evaluation-Regular Faculty.

            5.   The agenda for the September 25, 2002, meeting of the District Council.

            6.   The September 20, 2002, issue of DVC FORUM from the Diablo Valley College Faculty Senate.

            7.   The minutes for the September 18, 2002, meeting of DBAC.

         Announcements/Conferences

         1.   The Fall 2002 Plenary Session of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges will be held in Los Angeles, October 31, 2002 - November 2, 2002.

 

XI.    Future Agenda Items

1.  Discuss & Consider Senate Actions to Enhance Role of Associate Faculty          

 

XII.   Adjournment

            The meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m. (M/S/U - Brennan/Oliver).  These minutes are respectfully submitted by Grace Hazán, Academic Senate Secretary.