Approved 4-28-2010
Academic Senate meeting Minutes for Wednesday, April 14, 2010
West CampusBC 214, 3:00 – 5:00 pm
Members Present: Ignacio Alarcón (President), Armando Arias, Barbara Bell, Cindy Bower, Stan Bursten, Gary Carroll, Steve DaVega, Monica DiVito, Esther Frankel, Jack Friedlander, Tom Garey, David Gilbert, Atty Garfinkel, Kathy Molloy, Marcy Moore, David Morris, Kenley Neufeld, Dean Nevins, Kathy O’Connor, Ana María Ygualt, Oscar Zavala
Members Excused: Stephanie Durfor
Guest(s): John Lorelli, Kyle Rokes (The Channels), Laurie Vasquez
1.0Call to Order
1.1 Public Comments – no request received
1.2 Approval of Agenda– so approved w/added agenda items
1.3 Approval of Minutes, March 24, 2010
M/SC To approve the March 24, 2010 meeting minutes (Carroll/Frankel)
2.0Information
2.1 Academic Senate President Election Results
Ignacio announced that Dean Nevins would begin serving as President of the Academic Senate beginning the end of Spring term 2011 through Spring term 2013. The news was met with a round of applause and congratulations from the senators.Dean’sofficial duties begin with serving as President Electbeginning Fall 2010 through Spring 2011.
2.2 Division Senator Elections to be conducted this Spring: English, Fine Arts, Modern
Languages/ESL, Health/Human Services, Sciences, Technologies. Their terms are three
years, beginning Fall 2010.
Ignacio announced that some elections have already taken place. The School of Modern Languages/ESLelected Gail Reynolds; who will be replacing Ana María Ygualt.Oscar Zavala,from the Educational Support Division,informed everyone thatSusan Broderick has been elected to fill in for him during Fall 2010.Health and Human Services has reelected Cindy Bower to serve another term as Senator.
3.0 Reports
3.1 President Report
3.2 CPC Liaison Report /IA Liaison Report
Tom Garey reported that CPC has been working hard to make sense of the resource rankings for equipment, facilities, technology equipment and technology software. No vote on ranking has taken place. Tom also reported on Senate Bill Number 1143. The Liu bill is very early in the game and proposes to fund community colleges based on performance measures. Atty Garfinkel said she believed the bill has been tabled on the senate floor indefinitely.
Tom continued his report with one of CPCs main discussions: Categorical funding, e.g. DSPS, EOPS, Matriculation.These programs have had major cut backs. These operations are looking at further cuts of approximately 8% for next year. There was an increase in District funding for the categorical programs to offset the lack of carryover funds and the lack of Federal ARRA money which was used this year to try to maintain some level of service to students. President Serban has committed the contribution of approximately $1.5 million of the general fund dollars to backfill the categorical programs. Categorical programs supervisors Marsha Wright, Janet Shapiro, and Keith McLellan reported in detail how these cuts have impacted their programs and how they collectively continue to look at alternatives to reduce the impact of having less funding.
Tom reported on CPC’s other main topic, the 2010-2011budget. Dean Nevins added that at CPC it was made clear that when we talk about money for backfill, we are talking about hard caps. If a program has been funded/is being funded with a certain level of backfill, and the program would get more funding from another source the general fund commitment would then be reduced proportionately to what they have received. The numbers are often ‘squishy’ particularly in DSPS where there is a component to their budget that is determined by whomever needed their services andthat dollar amount changes from year to year and is an unknown until services are rendered.
Oscar Zavala asked if the 8% cut would come from the general fund; there have already been cuts by the state. Tom’s understanding was that it would be an aggregate cut of the total funding for next year vs. this year and that this included the categorical funding, including carryover, state money, and any backfill. The net of what was received this year vs what is projected for next year. Kathy Molloy stated that the categorical programs have been so severely cut that, if these programs should ever receive more state funding, the funds should not automaticallyreturn to the general fund. She would like the Senate to consider that the categorical programs be allowedto keep all money up tothe amount of the backfill before returning that money to the general fund. Esther Frankel said she was underthe impression that for DSPS there was a required minimum level of service. Dean said ‘reasonable accommodation’ is the law. Other colleges have brutally cut their DSPS services and have not experienced any legal problems. SBCC has taken the high road in their approach to programs in these service areas. Tom stated that many schools across the state have slashed these programs and it is a commentary about our philosophy and commitment to use general fund money to provide continuedservices.
Kathy O’Connor said a recommendation could be made about the extra money EOPS expects to receive, thatsome of it should be for DSPS and an agreement could be made that any extra money DSPS received would stay with DSPS because of the shortfall they are now experiencing. Jack Friedlander wanted to clarify that EOPS cut their program by 10% and are now getting back $25,000 more than they had expected. That does not mean those cuts that were made were any less painful. Matriculation was cut $40,000 and had a major impact on hourly counseling help. The three areas, Credit Matriculation, DSPS and EOPS have agreed to work together to help each other out to whatever degree theycan to minimize the budget impact.
Kathy Molloy said some guidance is needed for the CPC reps, and she proposed to make a motion and asked to move this to discussion and action. Jack said they all get the 8% cut and asked if the proposal meant that for any money received over and above the 8% cut, that money would stay with the program the following year. Kathy said that is what she meant by her motion; that the money remain with the categorical programs. Dean suggested that if they do get extra money that a pool or fund should be created where the categorical programs as a groupcan discuss how to distribute/use/spend the additional money. Tom expressed that the 8% reduction projected for next year is compared to this year which was already significantly reduced/cut last year. Last year’s state categorical allocation was $1.16 million dollars; current year allocation $749,000 and the projected categorical is $637,000 so the state would really have to boost up the funding. Tom said that Andreea Serban continues to be very concerned about drawing down the reserves and she has projected that we would be using the reserves to backfill categorical programs for at least three years (the minimum projected link to the downturn). Tom said within 8 days we have already had a drop in revenue over expenses by $300,000 for the projected year. Jack said the college was notified last week, because of all the people on unemployment, that the unemployment insurance tax contribution had been raised by $270,000. What has not been determined is the $800,000 projected cut in FTEs generated courses in non-credit. Andreea has been working with Ofelia Arellano and Joe Sullivan to analyze and determine a realistic number. It is a budget footnote that there will be a reduction number but the number is not yet known. Jack said for the summer we are within two TLUs and if a class cancels we would be right on target. The projected Fall and Spring TLUs are within 50 TLUs of our funded enrollment, which means the budget expenses may need to be adjusted upward because the projected budget is more aggressive than we can really support; at the same time we want to avoid being hurt by not meeting our cap. It is a budget that is in flux and Andreea has presented our best shot, with large variables. Another thing we do not know is how much money we have left over from thisyear.
David Morris wanted to clarify the Categorical Programs EOPS, DSPS, Matriculation discussion points: 1) There is a discussion at CPC to set a cap on the backfill for these programs 2) There is a proposal to keep the cap in place, however, allow them to keep money if the state does not cut as much as expected or when other monies are available/received.
Kathy O’Connor explained about adding to the motion the caveat to backfill the programs up to the amount of what they requested. She used DSPS as the example. DSPS was short $115,000 from what they requested; Matriculation was short $40,000. Then let’s say some miracle happened and we receive more money than was expected. We would not use more money than those differences to supplement the categorical programs. Example: if we received $300,000, the remainder would go back to the general fund to help support the general fund money that was given to those categorical programs to begin with. What all these programs have requested is actually only part of what the backfill is.
M/S/C To move this item to discussion (O’Connor/Bell)
M/S/C To move this item to action (O’Connor/Carroll)
M/S/C That if the state provides additional funding above what is currently being provided for categorical programs, that the additional funds should remain with the categorical programs up to and not above the requested budget amount (Molloy/Zavala)
3.3 Liaison Reports
3.3.1 Armando Ariasannounced the Faculty Recognition Committee’s recommendations for Faculty Excellence Award and for the Rice Diversity Award. See agenda item 4.2.
CTL viewed two presentations: One on teaching online and the other on Enriching the Culture. The committee is also working on selecting a new chair. The subcommittee on ISLO’s will be meeting with Jack on April 23.
FPDC is discussing workshops that might be offered for the next Inservice. Some of the proposed workshops: e-textbooks; Best practices to engage students in a learning environment; Copyright at SBCC; Mobilecomputing at SBCC; The future is already here – A look at serious games and instruction; Early Alert System. If anyone has a suggestion about a particular workshop they should contact Dixie Budke. The EVP suggested a workshop on different strategies for faculty to help provide students feedback on their writing and alternative strategies. Monica Divito would like a workshop on Health and Safety and what to do, for example, when a student has a seizure or suffers from diabetes, etc., and how to perform CPR. Kathy O’Connor suggested a CurricUNET workshop.
Sabbatical Leave Committee continues to review reports and the committee is working on a request from the Senate President about the recommendation to separate the Sabbatical Leave portion from the general Leaves of Absence policy so the Sabbatical Leave policy and procedures could reside in the corresponding Educational Programs and Faculty policies section.
3.3.2 Kenley Neufeld
AP, P&R, Facilities/Safety/Security/Parking, EOPS/Financial Aid committees have not met since the last Senate meeting.
3.3.3 Kathy O’Connor
CAC has met the deadlines for this semester using CurricUNET. The discussion about TBA/Plus hours and the plan to move them to Distance Ed was held.
COI had a demo about Using Twitter in Moodle; and George Federman gave a demo on his online class; the committee discussed strategies on how to contact every online student ahead of time through their cell phones and texting; recommendations for the OIA workgroup were discussed; DTC provision procedures were reviewed; Faculty work week procedure was presented.
ITC reviewed the rankings that came out of CPC and compared them to ITC’s rankings.
Matriculation Committee discussed the Transfer document prepared by Kathie Adams. The matriculation committee also had a discussion on the Prerequisite Challenge issue. There is currently no procedure language except for what is stated in the catalog. Matriculation Committee is recommending a change because the current language states prerequisite challenge must be filed 5 days prior to the semester start date. This does not give counseling/faculty/chairs enough time to gather all the information and make a decision. We then have students that find out well into the term that they did not meet the prerequisite challenge. District policy states only that there needs to be some procedure. Kathy handed out the current catalog language and the proposed change. Senators expressed that this was not clear. The complete statement and requested change was not presented. How long does the process actually take?The proposal does not seem to solve the problem of the student during his/her challenge, who is sitting in a class; if the challenge is denied, can they enroll late in another course?
M/S/C Move to discussion the prerequisite challenge statement in catalog (Nevins/Frankel)
3.4 Partnership for Student Success Report (Kathy Molloy)
The Student Senate passed a resolution and presented it at the BoT study session on behalf of PSS, to endorse the needed funding and make it a budget line item. It was clarified that the Board did not have this item up for discussion at this study session.
3.5 EVP Report (Jack Friedlander)
There are two offers out now to hire faculty. He said that he would like to take some time at the next Senate meeting to report on the Title 5 Grant Workshop Group and the direction we are taking. Within that report he will also like to talk about the transfer issue. He would also like to address the Distance Education Workgroup’s draft of initial findings and recommendations that should be ready for the next Senate meeting or the last meeting of the spring. Jack announced that a one-year temporary contracthas been approved by President Serban for American Ethnic Studies, due to the resignation of Ayanna Yonemura.
After a successful Student Services Groups workshop, Jack said he would encourage any division to contact Doug Hersh if they wanted to have a workshop to demonstrate the new social networking tools available and their possibilities and how they can be applied and used successfully.
Jack reported that there is still need to cut more TLUsfrom next year. A question was asked if the College would consider cutting our summer session. Jack said the upcoming summer session has been cut 14.5%. There are no plans/discussions to cancel the summer session.
4.0 Action
4.1 Recommendation for 2010-11 funding of Partnership for Student Success,
Instructional Support (Readers, OIAs), Non-Teaching Compensation
Ignacio reported that two meetings ago at CPC we received the information that there was $250,000 Bookstore had $250,000 set aside from their reserves for PSS, Readers, OIAs, and the Non-Teaching Compensation recommendations. The Partnership for Student Success would need $208,000 of that money and the remainder of $42,000 would to go towards Readers, OIAs and the Non-Teaching Compensation recommendations. The day after that CPC meeting, Andreea Serban learned from the Director of the Foundation that they had fundraised $72,000 for PSS. The total raised, when added to the Bookstore money, is $322,000 which would leave$114,000 to go towards Readers, OIAs and the Non-Teaching Compensation recommendations if $208,000 is given to PSS.
Kathy Molloy added that PSS would now be a line item, although there is no guarantee of ongoing funding. Kathy handed out the memo from Andreea, dated October 14, 2009, that came out of conversations with the Senate, where she proposed funding for the Partnership for Student Success at the level that it was in Fall 2006, when it was recommended by the Senate and endorsed by CPC and the Board. Kathy iterated that Andreea has continued to be supportive of PSS and she has supported it asa focus of Foundation fundraising. Kathy reminded everyone that the $72,000 from Foundation was specifically for PSS and should go towards the PSS backfill, which then frees up more money from the Bookstore reserves for Readers and OIAs. Kathy also proposed that the money should be used for a combined Readers OIA only fund and the Non-Teaching Compensation recommendations should be excluded from the allocation because these are requests for ongoing compensation. They should be separate budget proposals for faculty stipends. She said the request from the Committee for Non-Teaching Compensation should never have been linked together with the Student Success requests and that this was not a part of her motion.
Dean Nevins asked if the implication from this action would be that, if not enough money was received for the next budget year to cover baseline funding for PSS, then PSS would have priority before Readers and/or OIA; that PSS would have stable funding and the float would be for the Readers and OIA. Kathy Molloy said that her intent would be that PSS would have priority. However, no one knows what will happen next year. PSS tried to get Bookstore funds for backfill last year, but we were unsuccessful. This year, however, President Serban has noted that theBookstore funds come from the students and should be used to directly support students.