The minutes for the November 2, 2000, meeting were accepted and approved as submitted (M/S/P - Toppel/Jackins).

It was agreed, by consensus, that the order of the agenda will be altered to accommodate guests.

IV. Oral Communication from the Public

There was no oral communication from the public.

1. This evening’s Board meeting is a strategic conversation on accreditation, to be held at West Valley College Board Room at 7:00 p.m. All were encouraged to attend.

2. Copies of the summaries of the Accreditation Surveys will be available in the Academic

Senate Office. Dianne noted that the summary of the Student Survey indicates a high

response to the campus climate and the instructional climate.

A. Curriculum Committee - Dianne advised that the Board approved the proposed curriculum packet as submitted by the Mission College Curriculum Committee.

B. Staff Recognition - No nominations were submitted at today’s meeting.

C. Committee Appointments - A Technology Plan Task Force has been formed to develop an RFP to hire a consultant. Dianne and Jim Wilczak have requested that faculty representatives of each college be included on the committee. Mina Jahan, Carol Toppel, and Ian Walton have agreed to serve as representatives of Mission College to ensure that the college’s goals are considered and reflected in the work of the committee. The Senators approved the appointment of these three faculty members (M/S/P - Akers-Martin/Hudak) to this task force. (Please see Item VII.A, Page 4 for additional information on this matter.)

1. Instructional Technology Committee - Carol Toppel advised that the committee is seeking the support of the Academic Senate for a proposal to upgrade the computers in the E202 lab to PC’s rather than an upgrade of the MAC lab in E2-401. The rationale for this request is to meet the demand for the PC labs, which is considerably more in comparison to the MAC lab. In essence, this proposal will eliminate one MAC lab and create a second PC lab.

The Senators passed the following motion (M/S/P - Hudak/Jackins):

"that the Mission College Academic Senate supports an upgrade of E2-501 with new PC’s. The PC’s currently in E2-501 will be placed in E2-202, making it a new PC lab instead of a MAC lab, to be completed as soon as possible."

2. Distance Learning Committee - Amy Grams reported that the committee is continuing its endeavors to fulfill its charge as directed by the Academic Senate. Chair Chris Moyers is progressing with her survey of departments relative to a five year plan. The college is almost capable of offering a complete AA program in General Studies through a combination of telecourses and on-line courses, and the college is one to two courses away from offering an AA in Social Science as well. In addition, the committee is making sure all Mission College courses will have a similar style and it is looking into means of identifying students. Amy reported that an increasing number of companies are offering on-line ‘canned courses’ and Allen Bacon’s web site is a good resource for those courses (abinteractive.com).

3. Staff Development - * Betty submitted a tentative schedule for the Spring semester’s flex days for the Senators’ review, and the schedule has been forwarded to all the division chairs. The theme for flex is "Celebrating Mission College." During review, it was suggested that the members of the Calendar Committee be invited to attend a flex day breakout session on Alternative Calendars. * The District Council has charged staff development staff to develop a proposal for a Faculty and Staff Recognition Program. Betty submitted a proposal to the Senators for their consideration. As discussion ensued, it was noted that the proposal is not reflective of the recognition programs currently in place at Mission College. It was also noted that the administration was not included in the proposal. This district does not provide many opportunities to recognize and reward people, and it was suggested that other models or programs from other institutions be researched. The support for monetary awards was mixed; some Senators felt it was inadequate and/or inappropriate, others felt a monetary award might be well received. It was agreed overall that the proposal needs work, and ultimately, the Senators unanimously passed the following motion (M/S/U - Jackins/Grams):

"that since the Mission College Academic Senate does not view the submitted Faculty and Staff Recognition proposal as ready to go forward to the District Council, the Senate directs its president, Dianne McKay, to advise the District Council that the Senate has concerns about this proposal. Dianne was also directed to ask Betty Grayson and Karen Gobbi of Staff Development not to present the proposal to the District Council on November 29th, and to form a committee comprised of faculty, staff, and administration to develop a new proposal."

4. Datatel Implementation Committee - Pat Hudak attended the meeting for Amelia and reported that the Datatel system software, originally intended to be Oracle based, will probably never be available. However, the district continues to pay the license fee for the Oracle software. Datatel is compensating the district by providing UNIDATA software. Pat advised that Bruce expressed great concern that the server, as it is currently configured, may not be able to handle fall registration. Discussion ensued, and it was stated that the consultant seems to be acting solely as a facilitator/liaison between Datatel and the district. She is not serving in an advisory role or operating on her own initiative. It is the Senate’s view that the purpose of the consultant is to field concerns and pre-empt troubles within the system, and this isn’t happening. Lee reported that the mock registration went well, except for the billing portion. They are currently working on that aspect of the system and another mock registration will be held soon. Summer registration is comparatively lower than the fall. Everyone is concerned that the system may not be able to handle fall registration for both colleges. It was acknowledged that the system may not run perfectly at the beginning, and it is hoped that the worst case scenario does not occur. Dianne offered to address the mentioned concerns at the next Datatel presentation to the Board.

5. Workforce Development Committee - No report was made at today’s meeting.

6. Other - Dianne advised that the next Senate meeting scheduled for November 30th, will be a joint meeting of the Academic Senate and the Division Chair Council to review the requests for new faculty hires. The Senators received copies of the allocation process for new hires approved by the Senate in September 1999. Lee reported that approximately twenty-six requests have been submitted, and a many as eighteen positions may be available.

As agreed, the order of the agenda was suspended and moved to Item VIII.A and VIII.B to accommodate guests.

A. First Reading of Proposal for New CIT Department

The Senators received a proposal from Jason Halasa to establish a Computer Information Technology (CIT) Department. The proposal has been submitted in accordance with the Senate’s policy and procedure for establishing new programs and departments. It has been submitted, reviewed, and approved by the CIS, CET, and CNT Departments, the Division Chair Council (DCC), and the Curriculum Review Committee (CRC). The final approval comes from the Academic Senate.

Jason went over his proposal with the Senators, responding to any questions and/or concerns relative to the proposal, citing the goals and plans for the department. He explained that the intent of the program is to be specific to the needs of industry rather than specific vendors. The current proposal includes 36 classes, and he is in the process of developing additional courses. It was noted that all the courses currently included in Jason’s proposal are established courses. He anticipates that the additional course proposals should be completed in one year, and a review and update of some CIS courses will be included as well. A degree pattern, when completed, will be submitted to the CRC for its approval.

Dianne asked if the DCC has considered budget, FTE, space, etc., for this department. Lee confirmed that the DCC has considered the proposal and has not stated any exceptions or concerns. In addition, Jason noted that Intel has donated approximately $150,000 in top-of-the-line computers and cash to support the proposed department. Dianne directed the Senate members to review the proposal, its rationale, share it with their constituents, and bring back any comments or concerns to the Academic Senate for the proposal’s second reading at the December 7th meeting of the Senate.

The department’s organization, as outlined by Dr. Halasa, is shown on the following page.

Judy Hooper and Dan Matarangas presented the final draft of the Transfer Center Plan required by the state Chancellor’s Office. Dan explained that, about three years ago, each college in California was allocated $125,000 to establish a Transfer Center. The Chancellor’s Office has requested an updated policy to ensure colleges are in compliance with state regulations as defined in the Ed Code and Title 5. Since this district’s current Board policy does not include a Transfer Center Plan Policy, the two colleges have been directed to develop a district plan to be approved by the Board for placement in Board policy. Judy Hooper and Veronese Anderson have jointly prepared the final draft submitted to the Senate today. The current proposal mirrors the requirements indicated in Title 5, and only policy will be included in the District’s Board Policy once edited by Albert Moore. It was noted that each college will also have to develop individual college policies and procedures.

During discussion and review, there was some concern expressed that related to the staff as outlined in the proposal. Dan advised that the minimum standards came from the Chancellor’s Office and is in compliance with state regulations. The following motion was passed (M/S/P - McGee/Toppel):

"that the Mission College Academic Senate approves the Transfer Center Plan as submitted."

Dianne thanked Dan and Judy for their presentation.

The order of the agenda was resumed and moved to Item VII.A.

As stated in the minutes of November 2, 2000, Dianne was directed by the Senate to present a motion to the Board regarding the Tech II Plan. As also stated in the minutes under a separate note, Dianne opted not to directly address the Board that evening on this matter in deference to Steve Kinsella, the new vice-chancellor of finance. Her intent was to give Mr. Kinsella the opportunity to address the concerns of the Academic Senate, the Distance Learning Committee, the Instructional Technology Committee, and the ASB. Mr. Kinsella assured both Dianne and Jim Wilczak that the plan would not proceed without faculty input.

Less than one week after the Board meeting, it was brought to Dianne’s attention that a meeting was scheduled for Bruce Judd, Joseph Giroux, Dave Fishbaugh, and Steve Kinsella to select a consultant. This would have taken place without faculty involvement. Dianne, Mina Jahan, Jim Wilczak, and Alma Kopernik attended the meeting, and presented their concerns about proceeding without faculty. Steve explained that the group was just trying to get their act together, but it was noted that three major decisions would have been made setting direction and expending funds. They were advised, in accordance with district policy, that any decisions involving the budget process and/or instruction must necessarily include the Academic Senate.

The faculty group at the meeting emphasized the point that the Tech II plan is intended to be a college plan. The district has received approximately $50,000 for Tech II implementation, and $25,000 has been allotted to each college. In addition, the district has allotted $55,000 for process review of I.S. It was recommended at the meeting that the total of these funds be used to support a consultant to develop district and college plans respectively. Dianne reported that Mission College’s $25,000 allowance has been transferred to an Information Systems account, which is unacceptable and remains to be resolved. District funds are processed through the District Budget Allocation Committee and Mission College funds are processed through the College Budget Allocation Committee.

Ultimately, it was agreed that a Tech II task force will be formed to consider the scope of an RFP. Mina Jahan, Carol Toppel, and Ian Walton will represent Mission College on this task force and faculty representatives from West Valley College will be included as well. The charge of the task force is as follows:

1. Define the process for development of the RFP for a consultant.

2. Define the components to be included in the RFP.

3. Issue the RFP and select a Technology Consultant.

4. Identify the objectives of a comprehensive Technology Plan, including meeting the

requirements of Tech II Plan.

5. The RFP should address the components of the Total Cost of Ownership plan applicable

to WVMCCD.

Dianne advised that the Academic Senates will continue to aggressively monitor the process and progress made by this task force.

B. Discuss Feasibility of Alternate Calendars

The Senators received information relative to alternative calendars as presented by the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. The Senators were asked to review the information and be prepared to discuss the subject further at a future Senate meeting.

1. Governance and Planning Council - Carol reported that the council did not discuss the proposed mission statement for the college. It will be agendized for the next meeting.

2. Matriculation Advisory Committee - This committee is working on budget and will bring an overview of its plan to the Academic Senate.

3. District Council - The council did not meet this week.

4. E&FMP Meeting w Consultants - The plan is progressing.

5. College Budget Advisory Committee - December 1st is the deadline for budget request items. Dianne urged that everyone watch their e-mail for information. The new budget cycle will allow for spending to begin July 1st.

6. Other: No other reports were made at today’s meeting.

1. Letter dated November 13, 2000, from the state Chancellor’s Office re: Proposed Fund for Student Success (FSS) Concepts for Fiscal Year 2001-2002.

2. Letter dated October 16, 2000, from ED>Net re: Call for New Initiative Proposals with detailed instructions and information regarding a formal proposal for a new initiative to the Executive Committee. The deadline for submissions is December 15, 2000.

1. A draft copy of the Mission College Accreditation Student Survey results, dated November 3.

2. The November 6, 2000, issue of FA NEWS from the Foothill-DeAnza Faculty Association.

3. The agenda for the November 16, 2000, meeting of the Mission-West Valley Land Corp.

4. The November 3, 2000, issue of DVC FORUM from the Diablo Valley College Faculty Senate.

5. The summary notes for the October 11, and October 25, 2000, meetings of GAP.

1. The 12th Annual Economic Development Network Conference, "New Economy, New Workforce, New Collaborations," will be held in conjunction with CCCAOE in San Francisco, March 12-14, 2001.

1. Discuss Proposal for New Video Collection Policy for MC Library (Estrada)

The meeting was adjourned at 4:03 p.m. (M/S/U - Toppel/Hudak).

These minutes are respectfully submitted by Grace Hazán, Academic Senate Secretary.