Minutes of the
MEETING OF THE FACULTY SENATE
PRESENT: Bill Bedford, Judy
ABSENT: Anne Voth
GUESTS: Elaine Armstrong, Monika Brannick, Julie Ivy, Gloria Kerkhoff, Shannon Lienhart, Susan Snow
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the president, Steve Spear, at , in Room SU-30.
Approval of Minutes: The minutes of
The minutes of
of the following memorandum from Daniel Finkenthal were distributed and a
request made that it be included in the minutes of
I respectfully request that the minutes be updated to reflect what was said and done under the category of “OTHER”.
I would like the record to reflect that Senate President Steve Spear refused to recognize my right to address the Senate on December 17th. Although I was able to distribute my letter and supporting documents, I had to do so over the vocal objections of the President. I was only able to speak through direct action taken at the urging of several senators in the room. This did, however, create a very hostile and colored environment for me to present my arguments.
Spear stated that the Public has no right to address the senate during a
special meeting. This is wholly untrue, and his denial of my right to address
the senate is just the latest in a litany of violations of
As a body, you appointed Steve Spear President and granted him special authority to conduct your meetings. This does not, however, relieve you of your own responsibilities to follow the law and question any inconsistencies that you are made aware of. Once again, I request that the senate request that its president provide justification for his proclamation, acknowledge his mistake, or be duly admonished by the senate.
Please do not toss my concerns aside as needless nitpicking. The manner in which the senate conducts its business should be the senate’s highest priority. Faculty should be encouraged, not discouraged, to address the body that claims to be their representative. This needs to hold even for faculty with whom you disagree, dislike, disparage, or even despise.
Welcome: Senators welcomed Faculty Vice President Rocco Versaci to the Senate.
Resignations: Steve Spear announced that Perry Snyder, Anne Voth, and Tamara Weintraub have resigned from the Senate due to scheduling conflicts. A call for nominations to fill those vacancies will be distributed over the next few days.
Stan Levy added that the Elections Committee meets as needed to count ballots and faculty members are always welcome to attend and observe. Anyone interested in being present should contact the senate office for information on when the committee will meet.
Motion 1 MSC Levy, Dowd:
Steve Spear announced that a Senator is needed to serve on the Committee on Committees. Anyone interested in serving should contact him.
Motion 2 MSC
Motion 3 MSC Levy, Cater:
Discussion followed on how the co-chair of the committee should be selected. After various options were discussed, Senate members agreed that the members of the committee should select the chair and the Senate will confirm their recommendation.
Motion 4 MSC Laughlin,
Motion 5 MSC Laughlin,
Bookstore Advisory Committee
Maura Gage – Life Sciences
Carolyn Funes – Library
Matriculation and Transfer Advisory Committee
Leanne Maunu – English
Student Learning Outcomes Task Force
Marty Furch – ESL
Lori Graham – Family and Consumer Sciences
Renee Roth – Counseling
Technology Master Plan Task Force – Co-chair
Mike Arguello – Academic Technology Coordinator
List: Shannon Lienhart
distributed a copy of a Committee Master List dated
Committee: Steve Spear reported
that the Senate will take action to appoint faculty members to the Presidential
Search Committee based on the results of the polls distributed to adjunct and
contract faculty members. This will occur at the
Open Forum: Barb Kelber invited everyone to attend the open forum on Thursday, February 5 from to talk about the presidential search. She added that rather than holding a faculty meeting on Wednesday, February 4, faculty are being asked to attend the forum to share their ideas with the other constituent groups.
Senate Recusal Policy:
Drinan, Laughlin: To postpone action on the
Motion 8 MSC Thompson, Cater: To suspend the agenda to discuss Action Item I, Course Discontinuance Policy.
Policy: Teresa Laughlin reminded Senate members of the draft presented last semester from the Curriculum Committee on Course Deactivation Procedures. Senate members were concerned that the process was automatic, that departments did not have final autonomy, and that the process was three years rather than longer.
She indicated that the Curriculum Committee will discuss this again at their February 4th meeting.
Gloria Kerkhoff added that this issue arose because of DAP (Dual Admission Program) coming from the UC System. The current process allows the top 4% of students coming out of high school who are UC eligible to apply and are admitted as freshmen. They have instituted a policy where those students who fall between 4% and 12 ½ % can apply to a UC while in high school, be accepted, come to a community college and complete two years with a guarantee that if they complete their contract, they can go to the UC that accepts them. The UC writes a contract outlining which courses students must take and the grades they must receive. Currently UC is doing this articulating and advising based on our catalog, which isn’t accurate because many of the courses listed aren’t being taught. The other issue is SDSU, who has been impacted to such a degree that they had to come up with Enrollment Management Procedures. Their procedures are that every student transferring has to have all general education done and all major prep done as is listed in a SIS. That is inaccurate because we have courses listed as major prep that we aren’t teaching. Due to the budget crisis, the remainder of the CSU systems have now been mandated zero growth, so they are looking at SDSU and how they’re managing their zero growth and many are choosing to close in spring and if that doesn’t aid in the growth problem they will start implementing the same policy as SDSU. What’s listed in our catalogues must be accurate because students are being held accountable for courses which aren’t being taught.
Teresa Laughlin stated that two other important issues are being addressed: accreditation and the minimum conditions required by the Chancellor’s Office.
issue will be brought back to the Senate on
Motion 9 MSC Dowd, Nebelsick-Tagg: To extend the meeting until
PD Hours for Attending
Meetings: Steve Spear
reported that senators Bonnie Dowd and Judy Cater will attend the next
Professional Development Review Board meeting on February 5, where the issue of
faculty members obtaining PD hours for attending Governing Board meetings will
be discussed. They will also discuss with the members of PD board the fact that
all procedure changes to Professional Development are an Academic and Professional
matter and therefore should be approved by the
Personnel Standards &
Evaluation Forms: Copies of the proposed changes to the Evaluation Forms were provided to Senators on December 8. Maria Miller indicated that the changes were made to allow the form to be used with a scantron. Some minor typo errors were pointed out and those changes will be made.
10 MSC Dowd,
Task Force: ACADEMIC TECHNOLOGY SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE
Proposed by the Academic Technology Task Force
Co-Chairs Mike Arguello and Judy Dolan
Senate members: Sue Norton, Marilee Nebelsick-Tagg, and Tami Weintraub
Either VII (to replace Salary and Benefits Committee) or XI (as new subcommittee)
committee will coordinate faculty interests in all areas of academic
technology. This committee will advise the Senate on relevant technology matters.
It will be composed of one Faculty Senator as Chair, the Academic Technology
Coordinator, the Coordinator of the
The roles and responsibilities of this committee are as follows:
1) discuss issues on technology related to student equity (access).
2) coordinate with faculty on technology governance committees
3) coordinate with curriculum committee on distance learning courses
4) discuss pedagogical issues relating to on-line courses and changes in technology
5) discuss issues of training for on-line instructors
6) advocate for faculty concerns regarding technology
Meetings: at least once a month and as issues arise.
Possible Board Policy 3710
The Superintendent/President, in
conjunction with the
Possible Board Procedures 3710
The Technology Committee will organize Palomar’s copyright procedures, designating which campus governance committee is responsible for developing, revising, and monitoring all aspects of the copyright procedures, and coordinating these procedures into one copyright manual. The Technology Committee will review all these procedures at least once a year for compliance with law, enforcement procedures, and safeguards for the college. It will report to SPC on this review.
Steve Spear reported that after discussion and possible changes, the Senate will forward the Board Policy and Procedures to the Strategic Planning Council for their input and recommend that the document be sunshined to faculty and staff. After input from faculty, the document will come back to the Senate for final approval, then forwarded again to the Strategic Planning Council for their final approval.
After some discussion, Steve Spear indicated that he would invite Pat Schwerdtfeger and/or Terry Gray to an upcoming Senate meeting to provide additional information on this issue.
Ad Hoc Senate Task
Force: Bonnie Dowd indicated that the Ad Hoc Senate Task Force had been discussing several issues and will begin meeting again in February. Some of the issues being discussed are: a thorough review of all the Senate committees and their responsibilities; a Recusal Policy and Ethics/Professional Standards Policy; and, other constitutional change recommendation e.g., Senate terms extended to three-years.
Bonnie said the group will probably make a formal report to the Senate sometime in March along with recommendations some of which are Senate matters and others which require faculty approval.
Senate Email voting: Because it was recently discovered that it is a violation of The Brown Act for the Senate to conduct elections electronically, this issue will be removed from the agenda after a formal motion is made at the February 2nd Senate meeting.
After a request to move the item from Information to Action, there was discussion on proper procedures regarding agenda items. Some senate members thought that as long as the item was listed on the agenda, it could be moved to action at the same meeting. Others thought it was a violation to do this. After some discussion, Steve Spear indicated that he would research this and let Senators know at the next meeting.
Email Addresses for
Part-Time Faculty: Adjunct faculty member and former Senator Perry Snyder continues to work on obtaining email addresses for all part-time faculty members. Bill Bedford indicated that he would contact him for a report on his progress.
Although email addresses are routinely assigned, no one is monitoring the process and keeping it up-to-date. After brief discussion, Senate members agreed that because of the importance of this issue, a motion will be brought forward at the February 2 meeting.
Investigative Task Force/
Stolen Emails: Senate members discussed the issue of the stolen emails which arose last semester. Some senators were anonymously provided copies and some weren’t. There are differing opinions about whether the emails should have been discussed at all because they were stolen. Some recalled the Senate discussing what was alleged in the emails but not really addressing whether or not the Senate wants to address matters that come forward having been illegally obtained. There was discussion about whether a Task Force should be convened to determine where the emails came from and who stole them. There was also discussion about whether or not the source may not be as much of an issue now as whether the Senate should make a statement to the effect that it will not discuss any issue that comes to its attention in the future using stolen property.
Senators agreed that Faculty members need to know that they can bring any issue to the Senate for discussion and it will be addressed. Bonnie Dowd added that the Ad Hoc Senate Task Force is working on an Ethics Statement and this issue may be covered in the recommendation that will be coming forward to the Senate and Faculty. The Statewide Academic Senate has a current policy on ethics, which the Ad Hoc Task is considering as a guideline.
There was discussion about that fact that perhaps faculty members should be made aware that emails sent from a Palomar email address are on the district’s server and therefore, under certain circumstances may be viewed as the property of the district.
of 2002: Steve Spear provided a brief history on a TERB election which occurred in the fall semester of 2002.
Shannon Lienhart reported her concerns with the way in which the election was handled and provided the Senate with a written statement from Dan Finkenthal stating his concerns about the same election, stating that the election was not conducted according to the faculty manual:
It was further stated that the TERB election process is not a usual committee appointment process as the procedure is handled by the Elections Committee and not the Committee on Committees. TERB members are elected from within their divisions by members unless there is only one volunteer for that division seat whereupon the Senate confirms the volunteer.
Stan Levy indicated that he couldn’t recall any instance in any election that the Elections Committee appointed an alternate.
When asked specifically what she wished the Senate to do with this issue, Shannon Lienhart indicated that Dan Finkenthal would like to be appointed to the Tenure & Evaluations Review Board.
A Senator expressed concern that a TERB Board member stated that the Tenure & Evaluations Board has not met in almost a year. Steve Spear indicated that the group has not met because of contract negotiations, and will only call a meeting because of a substandard or unacceptable evaluation. He added that the two evaluations in question are now being handled by Berta Cuaron.
Monika Brannick also expressed frustration with TERB. She said that she has made several attempts to communicate with the Coordinator in writing as well as requesting a meeting with the TERB board. She said she did not receive any replies from any board members to her emails. She did receive a reply from the Coordinator referring her to the Vice President for Human Resources.
Because there was more than one issue relating to the tenure and evaluation’s review process being discussed, it was suggested that the TERB Coordinator be invited to attend an upcoming meeting and that these issues be separately addressed by the Senate.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at
Bonnie Ann Dowd, Secretary