43Rd SPRING SESSION RESOLUTIONS
43rd SPRING SESSION RESOLUTIONS
Adopted April 16, 2011
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS...... SECTION ONE
1.0ACADEMIC SENATE...... 1
1.01S11Outreach and Recruitment Committee...... 1
1.02S11Resolution for a Cost Benefit Analysis of Printing Rostrum...... 1
2.0ACCREDITATION...... 1
2.01S11Use of Outside Researchers in Accreditation...... 1
3.0AFFIRMATIVE ACTION/CULTURAL DIVERSITY...... 2
3.01S11Support for LGBT Inclusive Curricula and Anti-bullying Efforts...... 2
3.02S11CPEC report, Access and Equity for all Students: Meeting the Needs of LGBT Students...... 2
5.0BUDGET AND FINANCE...... 3
5.01S11Metrics and Performance Based Funding...... 3
5.02S11Incentives to Encourage Effective Student Behaviors for Success...... 4
5.03S11Oppose Potential Permanent Elimination of all Categorical Funding ...... 4
6.0STATE AND LEGISLATIVE ISSUES...... 5
6.01S11Community College Fees...... 5
6.02S11The Role of the Legislative Analyst Office...... 5
6.03S11Title 5 Regulations Limiting Education Units...... 6
6.04S11 E-Transcripts...... 6
6.05S11System Advocacy and Priorities...... 7
6.06S11Oppose Shift of CCC Credit Instruction to a Pay-for-Service Model...... 7
8.0COUNSELING ...... 8
8.01S11Title 5 Change to Clarify the Role of Advisors and Paraprofessionals in
Counseling...... 8
9.0CURRICULUM...... 8
9.01S11College Level Examination Program (CLEP) Exam Equivalency List
9.02S11Cap on Total Units...... 8
9.03S11Eliminate Repeatability for “Activity” Courses...... 9
9.04S11Adopt Implementing Content Review for Communication and Computation Prerequisites Paper10
9.05S11Local Senate Oversight of All College Offerings...... 10
9.06S11Accelerated Basic Skills...... 10
9.07S11Support for Transfer Model Curriculum...... 11
9.08 S11Curriculum Opportunities for Physical Education, Kinesiology and Athletics Programs...... 12
9.09S11 Research on Student Success of Community College Athletes...... 12
9.10S11Study of the 18-Unit Major/Area of Emphasis Requirement for an Associate Degree...... 13
9.11S11Economic and Transfer Impact of “Recreational Courses”...... 13
9.12S11Support and Retention of Intercollegiate Athlete Programs...... 14
9.13S11Course Substitutions in TMC-Aligned Degrees...... 14
10.0DISCIPLINES LISTS...... 15
10.01S11Disciplines List – Health...... 15
10.02S11Disciplines List – Accounting...... 15
10.03S11Disciplines List – Classics...... 15
10.04S11Disciplines List – Art History...... 16
10.05S11Disciplines List – Military Studies...... 16
10.06S11Disciplines List – Theater Arts...... 16
10.07S11Disciplines List – Sustainability...... 16
10.08S11Disciplines List – Peace Studies...... 17
10.09S11Disciplines List – Futures Studies...... 17
10.10S11Associate Degree Equivalency Guidelines...... 17
10.11S11Supplemental Learning Assistance and Tutoring Center Coordinator Minimum Qualifications.17
13.0GENERAL CONCERNS...... 18
13.01S11Need for Behavioral Intervention Teams...... 18
13.02S11Tutoring Centers and Supplemental Learning/Instruction...... 19
13.03 S11Democracy Commitment...... 19
13.04S11Opposition to Western Governors University California...... 20
13.05S11Local College Participation in the LGBT-Friendly Campus Climate Index...... 20
15.0INTERSEGMENTAL ISSUES...... 21
15.01S11Reciprocity for TMC Courses in Associate Degrees for Transfer...... 21
15.02S11Mandatory Student Success Courses in Associate Degrees for Transfer...... 21
15.03S11Common Baseline Indicator of Readiness for College-Level Mathematics and English...... 22
15.04S11Oppose the Inclusion of Local and State-mandated CSU Graduation Requirements...... 22
18.0MATRICULATION...... 23
18.01S11Priority Registration...... 23
18.02S11Drop/Withdrawal Policies...... 23
18.03S11Collecting Drop/Withdrawal Data...... 24
18.04S11Academic Credit for Veterans and Military Service Members...... 25
18.05S11Limiting Repetition and “Ws”...... 25
21.0VOCATIONAL EDUCATION...... 26
21.0S11Career Technical Education (CTE) -- Effective Practices ...... 26
FAILED RESOLUTIONS ...... SECTION TWO
9.02.01S11Amend Resolution 9.02 S11...... 27
9.05.01 S11Amend Resolution 9.05 S11...... 27
9.06.01S11Amend Resolution 9.06 S11...... 27
9.14S11Defining Repeatable Visual and Performing Arts Courses...... 27
9.15S11Defining Repeatability in Physical Education Courses...... 28
9.15.01S11Amend Resolution 9.15 S11...... 28
9.16S11Course Repeatability and Title 5 Changes...... 29
9.17 S11 Increasing Completion through Accelerated Basic Skills...... 29
10.12S11Disciplines List – Ethnic Studies...... 30
10.13S11Support the Change to the Disciplines List for Education...... 31
MOOT RESOLUTIONS...... SECTION THREE
6.07 S11Support for Credit Instruction Extension Program...... 32
6.08S11Support for AB515 Extension Classes...... 32
9.18S11Repeatable Courses...... 33
10.14S11Disciplines List – Education...... 33
DELEGATES...... SECTION FOUR
1
2011 Spring Session Adopted Resolutions
1.0ACADEMIC SENATE
1.01S11Outreach and Recruitment Committee
Julie Withers, Butte College, Nominations Ad Hoc Committee
Whereas, The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges Nominations Ad Hoc Committee has been charged with expanding the pool of faculty volunteers for Academic Senate committees and other related statewide service;
Whereas, The work of the Nominations Committee has focused on identifying new ways to make faculty across the state aware of opportunities for statewide service and communicating the nature and benefits of the various service opportunities; and
Whereas, The name “Nominations,” although a reference to the Academic Senate’s “Nomination to Serve” form, does not reflect the work or the charge of the Committee;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges change the name of the “Nominations Ad Hoc Committee” to “Outreach and Recruitment Committee” in order to make the role of this Ad Hoc Committee more prominent; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges consider making the Nominations Ad Hoc Committee, potentially renamed as the Outreach and Recruitment Committee, a standing committee when fiscal circumstances improve.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates
1.02S11Resolution for a Cost Benefit Analysis of Printing the Rostrum
Morrie Barembaum, Santiago Canyon College, Area D
Whereas, The Rostrum is a publication of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges and features important research and articles for the faculty at member institutions of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges;
Whereas, The current budget situation has resulted in funding cuts to individual colleges as well as to the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges itself; and
Whereas, The Academic Senate has engaged in several efforts to “go green,” including placing supplementary material online (e.g., “How Green Is the Senate?” Rostrum, December 2010);
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges research, review, and publish the costs of printing and mailing the Rostrum to the member colleges no later than the Fall 2011 Plenary Session; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges research alternate methods to disseminate the Rostrum that are budget and environment conscious and report these findings no later than the Fall 2011 Plenary Session.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates
2.0ACCREDITATION
2.01 S11Use of Outside Researchers in Accreditation
Sara McKinnon, College of Marin
Whereas, Budget cuts at the California community colleges have led to increasingly dwindling staff, including full-time faculty;
Whereas, Certain processes such as accreditation take a monumental amount of work and expertise that may lead some schools, especially the smaller ones, to hire out significant portions of areas such as the self study process;
Whereas, In addition to depending upon outsiders to gather data, many schools may also commit to using technology, including particular data bases, that requires expensive upkeep; and
Whereas, The use of outside researchers to gather data for the Educational Master Plan or other future-shaping plans for colleges may have negative implications, especially when said researchers are unfamiliar with the colleges for which they are working;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges encourage local senates to consider the ramifications of hiring outside parties to conduct research for their self studies and, when possible, to share any concerns with their local administrations and boards.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates
3.0AFFIRMATIVE ACTION/CULTURAL DIVERSITY
3.01S11Support for LGBT Inclusive Curricula and Anti-bullying Efforts
Phil Smith, Los Rios Community College District
Whereas, The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges Executive Committee Policy 30.00, Diversity, defines diversity based on, “but not limited to, race, ethnicity, gender/sex, sexual orientation, sexual identity and expression (transsexual/transgender) disability status, religious and political affiliations, age, cultural background, socioeconomic status, academic and vocational disciplines, full- and part-time status. . .” ;
Whereas, Resolutions 3.02 S09 and 20.01 F09 urged local senates to review their curricula, co-curricular activities, and campus practices for inclusion of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) students and asked the Academic Senate to research the pedagogical and student services needs of these students and to collect examples of best practices and to report in an appropriate forum the results of the research;
Whereas, AB 620 (Block, March 31, 2011) calls on California community colleges to develop and implement professional development programs to train faculty to generate inclusive curricula, to address harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity, and to train campus public safety officers about hate crimes and harassment; and
Whereas, AB 620 (Block, March 31, 2011) also requests that colleges designate an employee at each campus to address the needs of LGBT faculty, staff, and students, and to share demographic information collected with the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC);
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community support the goals of AB 620 (Block, March 31, 2011) to develop and implement professional development programs to train faculty to generate inclusive curricula, to address harassment based on sexual orientation and gender identity, to train campus public safety officers about hate crimes and harassment, to designate an employee at each campus to address the needs of LGBT faculty, staff, and students, and to share demographic information collected with the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC).
MSCDisposition: Assemblymember Marty Block, CPEC, Local Senates
3.02S11CPEC report, Access and Equity for all Students: Meeting the Needs of LGBT Students
Katie Holton, San Diego Mesa College, Area D
Whereas, The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges has long been committed to serving the academic and student service needs of all students to the best of its ability with limited resources;
Whereas, The California Postsecondary Education Commission’s June 2009 report, Access and Equity for all Students: Meeting the Needs of LGBT Students (http://www.cpec.ca.gov/completereports/2009reports/09-14.pdf) notes the lack of data regarding lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) students and their experiences in California higher education;
Whereas, The California Postsecondary Education Commission’s June 2009 report Access and Equity for all Students: Meeting the Needs of LGBT Students recommends that colleges collect data on sexual orientation and gender identity in the same way they currently allow students to voluntarily report data on their race, ethnicity, gender, and disabilities; and
Whereas, The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges recognizes that privacy and the security of an individual student’s information regarding sexual orientation and gender identity is uniquely important for our LGBT students;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges support allowing students to voluntarily report their sexual orientation and gender identity on college and district forms where other demographic data are collected; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges be actively involved in helping create processes for collecting demographic data regarding sexual orientation and gender identity that protect the privacy of individual students.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates
5.0BUDGET AND FINANCE
5.01S11Metrics and Performance Based Funding
Michelle Pilati, Rio Hondo College, Futures Ad Hoc Committee
Whereas, Senate Bill 1143 (Liu, 2010; now in Education Code §84502) called for a task group to identify metrics for performance based funding, and the group is well on its way in developing such metrics;
Whereas, The metrics being discussed include progress metrics (e.g., accumulating a certain number of units, advancing from basic skills to transfer courses), as well as achievement metrics (e.g., earning a certificate or degree), but, as of yet, little consideration has been given to metrics intended to ensure the provision of services that support student success;
Whereas, The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges maintains a long-standing opposition to the notion of performance based funding but at the same time needs to provide guidance to its representatives on the SB 1143 Student Success Task Group and to permit them to participate fully in the development of the least problematic metrics possible; and
Whereas, SB 1143 makes it clear that performance based funding will be developed with or without the support of faculty, and that law could adversely impact base funding;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges participate in discussions regarding performance based funding, asserting that any such proposed funding modifications should be additive and above base funding;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges advocate for development and consideration of metrics that are intended to incentivize the provision of student support services given that such services are necessary to ensure the success of all students as well as to improve academic progress and completion; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges assert that the best approach to increase all measures of student success is to support students in meeting their goals and that colleges should be incentivized to ensure the provision of such services.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates, Consultation Council, SB 1143 Task Force
1
2011 Spring Session Adopted Resolutions
5.02S11Incentives to Encourage Effective Student Behaviors for Success
Debbie Klein, Gavilan College, Futures Ad Hoc Committee
Whereas, Colleges have taken an active role in student success by supporting and encouraging students to complete courses, obtain degrees, and prepare for transfer;
Whereas, Student success is a partnership between colleges and students, where students themselves have a responsibility in their success and control over many of the factors that will lead to success;
Whereas, Data indicate that participating in such incentives as educational planning, early assessment, and attending college full time can positively affect success; and
Whereas, Various incentives (e.g., priority registration) can be effective in encouraging students to take advantage of and engage in the activities that will lead to their success;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge local senates to identify and, where possible, implement incentives that encourage students to engage in academically sound behaviors that would increase the likelihood of success in college; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges support the use of academically sound incentives that would benefit students and increase the likelihood of students successfully completing courses, obtaining degrees and certificates, and preparing for transfer.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates
5.03S11Oppose Potential Permanent Elimination of all Categorical Funding
David Morse, Long Beach City College, Futures Ad Hoc Committee
Whereas, Various individuals and constituencies within the California Community College System have proposed temporary flexibility regarding compliance with requirements related to allocation of funding for categorical programs;
Whereas, Categorical programs were originally established because of a need to ensure that certain support services would be guaranteed; and
Whereas, The proposed temporary flexibility regarding expenditures for categorical programs could easily result in permanent reductions in categorical funding;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges oppose flexibility regarding expenditures for categorical programs because it degrades local commitments to ensure the success of all students; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges continue to advocate for restoration of full categorical funding to meet the mandates for categorical programs.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates, Consultation Council, Board of Governors
1
2011 Spring Session Adopted Resolutions
6.0STATE AND LEGISLATIVE ISSUES
6.01S11Community College Fees
Kale Braden, Cosumnes River College, Futures Ad Hoc Committee
Whereas, The 1960 California Master Plan for Higher Education expressed the intent that access and affordability are the principles on which California public education stands;
Whereas, Based on these principles the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges has a long-standing position against fees for public higher education, a position that unfortunately has not been upheld by the Legislature;
Whereas, Given the current budget crisis in California, conversations at all levels of government and agencies both within and outside of California are focused on an increase in student fees; and
Whereas, Fee increases are almost certain to occur over the next several years, and faculty in California community colleges should have a voice in the discussion of these increases other than blanket opposition;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges encourage participants in fiscal and other discussions to advocate for the lowest possible student fees in order to maintain the greatest possible access for students in California community colleges.
MSCDisposition: Local Senates
6.02S11The Role of the Legislative Analyst’s Office
Dianna Chiabotti, Napa Valley College, Executive Committee
Whereas, The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) provides a review and analysis of the operations and finances of state government to the Legislature and is the office that acts as the main nonpartisan resource in fiscal matters to legislators and their staff members;
Whereas, The LAO has historically made recommendations about education in its publications, such as “The 2011-12 Budget: Prioritizing Course Enrollment at the Community Colleges”; and
Whereas, Many of the LAO recommendations are simplistic and they ignore many complex aspects of the California Community College System and individual districts;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges remind local senates that the Legislative Analyst’s Office is a nonpartisan fiscal and policy advisor and not a decision-making body and as such does not create state mandates;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges encourage local senates to critically review the LAO reports and engage in collegial discussions about their recommendations and the potential application to their local college; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges ask local senates to communicate with their local administrators, boards, and legislators that the LAO is a nonpartisan fiscal and policy advisor and not a decision-making body and as such does not create state mandates.
MSUDisposition: Local Senates
1
2011 Spring Session Adopted Resolutions
6.03S11Title 5 Regulations Limiting Education Units
Stephanie Dumont, Golden West College, Executive Committee
Whereas, California State University (CSU) system Title 5 §40409 is decades old and pre-dates the integrated teacher preparation program articulation agreements that have proliferated throughout the California Community College System since the year 2000;
Whereas, The current Title 5 regulations limit the number of education units a student may take at a community college to six that can count toward the baccalaureate degree, when currently there are articulation agreements between campuses that allow up to 12 units;