Approved 11-10-2010
Meeting Minutes for Wednesday, October 27, 2010
BC 214, 3:00 – 5:00 pm
Members Present: Ignacio Alarcón (President), Cornelia Alsheimer,Barbara Bell, Cindy Bower, Susan Broderick, Stan Bursten, Angel Cardenas, Gary Carroll, Steve DaVega, Stephanie Durfor, Esther Frankel, Jack Friedlander, Tom Garey, Atty Garfinkel, David Gilbert, David Morris, Kenley Neufeld, Dean Nevins, Kathy O’Connor, Gail Reynolds, Jan Schultz, Lou Spaventa
Members Excused: Sally Saenger
Guest(s): Christopher Bates, Allison Curtis, Johan Hammerby (The Channels), Ann Wilkinson
1.0Call to Order
1.1.Public Comments – no request received
1.2.Approval of Agenda– so approved with added agenda items 2.6 and 2.7
1.3.Approval of Minutes, October 13, 2010
M/S/C To approve the meeting minutes of October 13, 2010 (Bursten/Carroll) 2 abstentions
2.0Information
2.1.Adjunct Faculty Representative ElectionResults
Congratulations to Cornelia Alsheimer, and Welcome to Senate as AdjunctFaculty
Representative 2010 – 2012. A Big Thank You to Geordie Armstrongand Paul McDowell for
Standing for Election for This Position
Ignacio introduced the newly elected senator Cornelia Alsheimer, the adjunct faculty representative who won the run off election.
2.2.Timeline for College Plan 2011 – 2014
The timeline/guidelinewas developed to facilitate discussions/activities within the various college constituencies in preparation for the next College Plan.
2.3.Classroom Assignments Workgroup (Division Representatives Needed)
Ignacio announced that participants representing their divisions are needed for this workgroup. Jack Friedlander reported that when he first came to SBCC the enrollment was 9,000 students and has grown to over 20,000 without having added square footage to accommodate them. Even now, with a reduced number of sections, we are having problems finding classrooms. Add to that the anticipation of future growth knowing that we have a problem now, Jack said that he needed help on this and would like the workgroup to focus on how to maximize the effectiveness of the classroom space that is available to accommodate more sections.The workgroup would develop the criteria used in making judgments about how best to schedule classrooms and to help in problem solving.Jack said he would send out the information explaining what the workgroups’ charge would be. Jan Schultz asked why not have Planning and Resources Committeework on this? Ignacio said that it would be very helpful to have a workgroup with this sole focus, and that once they completed their task then P&R would take it on.
2.4.Late Adds (After 9th Week) Challenges and Impact on College (Allison Curtis/Ann Wilkinson)
Ann Wilkinson and Allison Curtis announced that they were here to represent the Scholastic Standards committee to ask for help and advice. Ann reported that between the third and ninth week of this semester, close to 700 petitions to add have been received and Allison Curtis handled most of them. Out of those 700 petitions dilemmas arise,and the petition would then need to go to Scholastic Standards. The college does allow late adds until the 9th week. It may be worthwhile to think about whether that is too permissive a policy. By the 9th week an unregistered/unpaid student will perhaps have failed a mid term and then decide not to add after all. There is the possible cherry picking of courses and also the consequence of lost state funding for students that have already received instruction.
Dean Nevins wanted to know if some of these cases were a result of the professor carrying the student in anticipation of a reduction in the number of enrolled students down the road.Ann said that if the student is waiting 3 or 4 weeks, this could present a problem because they may not be able to find a class, which then could impact their financial aid and other issues because they would not have the requisite units.
Esther Frankel gave an example: The professor dropped a student in the first two weeks (the student was sick or didn’t get in touch with their professor). Would this be over and beyond reinstatement? Allison said there is a distinction with students who have been dropped for non payment. Those students are notified they have been dropped for non payment and they are not showing up on a roster. Oftentimes they will be treated as a late add or reinstatement (a gray area).
Angel Cardenas asked why is it nine weeks? Ann said that this has been our practice. Allison added that this came about because of an out of control problem, and the nine weeks was adopted as practice. We need a procedure that halts late adds, especially after the 9th week of the semester.
Cornelia Alsheimer asked how this affects the FTES we are reporting? Jack responded that it would have a negative effect on the total FTES if we’re not over capped. If they are not enrolled and we’re not at cap then we lose that funding. Allison noted that they do get scooped up in a future report.
Ann explained that in order to add a class late, the instructor must approve the late add. A signed late add petition however does not guarantee approval because there may be a qualification that the student has not met, which complicates the process. The complications can be time conflict; limitations on course repetition; prerequisites; and others. After the ninth week is when the real serious problems begin for Allison and the Scholastic Standards Committee. We know the student must register and pay their fees, if they have not done that,this is a gift of public funds, for instruction. If they have been in class unregistered and find they cannot add it may be too late for them to find another class. Their financial aid, EOPS and other items are affected. The real dilemma is that the student can come back not only after the 9th week; they can come back after the semester, after the end of the year, after two and three years and seek to add the course because they were sitting there, received grades and did not add the course for a variety of reasons and now they want credit for the course if they passed. We have many adjuncts that don’t return to SBCC and sometimes it is difficult to find the instructor in order to clarify what the situation was.
Esther asked if this was a policy; was it in the catalog? Allison said it was a practice; that there is a policy and procedure on the books. Any attempt to add after the 9 weeks goes to the Scholastic Standards Committee. That’s the practice because we are trying to figure out how to communicate to faculty and to students that enough is enough. Last year we received over 4,000 petitions. Esther suggested we might want the Academic Policies Committee to review this.Ann added our faculty have a responsibility to keep up to date rosters and not allow unregistered people to attend class. Informational notices are sent to faculty. How do we get faculty to be more responsible about this?
David Morris asked if the percentage for Financial Aid students who failed to pay their fees was available? He found more and more students were having financial difficulty attending and explained that some students did not receive their checks from Financial Aid until after the deadline and when they couldn’t pay they were dropped and then had to petition for an add. We could look at the Financial Aid payment deadline.
Jan Schultz said she was trying to figure out the reason for the 9 weeks. She has processed a number of those petitions and it is usually because they have messed up their registration. It’s discovered after a first quiz, when her roster doesn’t match. Ann added that many faculty do not check their rosters after the first week. Jan added they have to enter a grade somewhere. Maybe another faculty responsibility in addition to identifying someone who is not attending faculty should be to look for people who are attending and not on the roll. The instructor should be able to have this done by week 5 or 6. Ann said they receive a variety of responses from faculty which then leads to the possible error and that opens a window for the committee to give the student the benefit of the doubt. Gary Carroll stated that it sounds like we, the faculty are the problem. The dean ought to be contacted and then they should contact those faculty members with the unusually high amount of petition requests from students and let them know that they cannot do this.
Lou Spaventa gave an example: I teach 5 week courses if I do not let any student into a class for which they have not registered they would have missed 20% of the class. I do what I can; however, the Admissions and Records office is closed at night; the student is busy during the day, etc.
Barbara Bell suggested that Scholastic Standards should begin by identifying patterns and then work on changing the policy. Ann added that all students are told they must register and all instructors are told to not carry people in their classes. Esther asked if the seven days to pay remained the same for a short course? A student might be there for two weeks and I would have no idea whether they had paid or not. Angel Cardenas mentioned that in the past we used to get a record of roster activity. Now if the instructor doesn’t go back to Pipeline, they don’t know who is actually registered. Angel suggested automating a notification system in Pipeline so faculty can get an updated report on what activity is going on with their rosters. Kathy O’Connor added that the short courses can be problematic. Ann stated again that the dilemma gets worse when students come back after a semester, or a year, or more because we allow them to petition after nine weeks.
Everyone thanked Ann and Allison for bringing this to the Academic Senate. Ignacio said that he would ask that Academic Policies Committee should review the adds policy and procedures.
M/S/C To recommend that this be moved to a discussion item (O’Connor/Frankel)
2.5.SB 1440 (Transfer Degrees) Update
Ignacio announced this is happening very quickly and will be a prominent item at the state Academic Senate Fall Plenary Session. Jack added that at the administrative level he has been having weekly conference calls. The goal is to have twenty majors developed system wide and in place next fall.
2.6.Congratulations to Atty Garfinkel for hosting the Candidates’ Debate for the 23rd District
Atty Garfinkel reported that three of the four congressional candidates attended and participated in the debate. Jack added that after the event two of the candidates commented directly to Ben Partee about how they wished this would be a model followed for other debate forums. They said they were extremely impressed with the students and their experience at how well run, organized and professional the event was.
2.7. Congratulations to Academic Senate Secretary Anita Cole for 20 years service at SBCC.
The Senate gave Anita a round of applause after Ignacio informed that the Board of Trustees agenda of October 28 includes the recognition of Anita’s 20 years of service at SBCC.
3.0Action
3.1.Recommendation of Replacement of Full-Time Positions EffectiveFall 2011 (pg. 8)
a American Ethnic Studiesd. Dance
b. Associate Degree Nursing e. Librarian
c. Automotive Technologiesf. Theatre Arts
M/S/C To approve the recommendation of the Full-Time Faculty Replacement Positions for American Ethic Studies; ADN; Automotive Technologies; Dance; Librarian; Theatre Arts (Nevins/Carroll)
4.0Reports
4.1.President Report
4.2.CPC Liaison Report /IA Liaison Report (Tom Garey)
Tom Garey reported the good news on the budget was that by next week we will have received all our deferred apportionments from last year. New deferrals may begin this spring semester for the next fiscal year. CPC discussed and finalized the timeline for the development of the College Plan that is attached to Senate’s agenda.At CPC there was a discussion about the value of“listening sessions” that would be professionally facilitated. Program Review and Resource Requests were tackled by the “sanity meeting” where members of the Planning and Resources Committee, classified staff and the Administration went through all the Program Review Resource Requests and came up with some totals and all for next year. These are not all new requests – these are requests that came from the Program Review.
Facilities Request$11.6 mil
Faculty Request$ 2.8 mil
General Equipment$ 1.8 mil
Hardware$ 1.6 mil
Other$ 1.6 mil
Staff$ 4.4 mil
Software $ 759,000
TLU$ 646,000
For a total of$ 24.4 mil
Part of the sanity check identified the problems that all should be working on. They are in a list sent out last week by President/Superintendent Serban to Department Chairs: 1) all fields in the Resource Requests need to be filled, including costs 2) “WAG” from the pull down menu means a ‘wild ass guess’ 3) items already funded need to be removed from the Program Review requests 4) the requests need to be ranked according to critical needs e.g. 1.1; 1.2, and 2.1; 2.1 to a maximum of 9 in each category 5) permanent positions will not be ranked and kept off the record 6) V.P.’s are to ensure the appropriate categories are filled e.g. supplies, equipment, etc. 7) non routine equipment replacements are now supposed to go into a template to be available in December. There is a lot of discussion about non routine replacements to go in the Program Review when everyone is thinking about it and how this would add transparency in the Program Review process. There was also confusion about what goes into facilities requests, as opposed to work orders. Facilities requests would be new or additional facilities.As an example, a new carpet for an office would be a work order. More clarification is needed.
We are required by law to create an Equal Opportunity Employment Plan and a draft is attached to agenda. The EOE plan needs to be responded to and acted on by December with a committee set up by spring.
Jack added that once we clean up the Program Reviews Resource requests, the total will be reduced. It’s been a great process learning while doing. Tom added that, for example, there is $8.4 million listed in the Facilities Request that is actually Measure V funds for the HumanitiesBuildingand should not have been included.
4.3.Liaison Reports
4.3.1.Barbara Bell
Barbara reported that Darin Garard has contacted all three top ranked candidates and all said their proposals do not need to be revised and all would be prepared for a one year sabbatical if funding became available.
Gary Carroll asked if someone serving on a committee would go on Sabbatical could there be any consideration for that person to continue serving on that committee. The answer is that no faculty on Sabbatical should serve on any committee.
Faculty Professional Development has distributed a mini survey on Thursday morning flex activities and division reps are being asked to pass them out to their departments to get feedback on how everyone felt about the flex activities and whether they were happy with how the Thursday morning sessions were going.
CTL still does not have the ISLO data because of the installation of the new version of eLumen. Mark Ferrer gave a report on the Student Success Basic Skills meeting and the numbering system being developed. His take is that it is a rather big effort, with some resistance and looks like it will be a long term project.On another topic, CTL had been discussing the charge that was given to CAC about class size and justification issue and thought this should have gone to CTL instead. There is some confusion there. One person reported, inaccurately, that they were supposed to be justifying their class size without concern to pedagogy or furniture. Kathy O’Connor explained that they are not supposed to determine class size based on the size of the classroom. Class size is supposed to be done for pedagogical reasons and be consistent throughout the division and the sections. Barbara said a question was asked about why this was being done and the motivation for it. Jack has heard from some faculty members that they were being asked to justify their class size and he has explained to them that is not what they were asked to do. Kathy O’Connor explained that the curriculum forms have always had a section where justification is requiredfor class size. It is not meant to be a big essay. It is just asking for an explanation about why that particular class size suits your particular discipline.It is not anything new or different. That is a little different than the bigger discussion that we are beginning at CAC. Jack said the chairs are telling him that the perception is the administration wants to increase class sizes and why should they be asked to justify that. Jack added that is what is out there and that some areas he has been hearing these questions. He explained that his intention is not that class sizes are increased, but rather that there is consistency. Barbara closed by saying that second or third hand that is the way the class size justification question it is being perceived and that some clarification would be a good idea.