Minutes of the
MEETING OF THE FACULTY SENATE
PRESENT: Bill Bedford,
ABSENT: Martha Evans, Fari Towfiq
GUESTS: Monika Brannick, Shannon Lienhart, Jerry Patton, Susan Snow
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the president, Steve Spear, at , in Room SU-30.
Proxy Votes: Bonnie Ann Dowd announced the following proxies:
Sara Thompson holding a proxy for Martha Evans
Judy Cater holding a proxy for Fari Towfiq
In response to a question on whether proxy votes were still being used, Steve Spear indicated that unless the Senate takes action on this issue, proxies will continue to be accepted.
Minutes: No minutes were presented.
Announcements: Steve Spear reminded everyone to vote in tomorrow’s elections.
Evaluations: Steve Spear announced that the Administrative Evaluations will be distributed this week.
Election Results: Stan Levy announced that as a result of the recent Senate elections Doug Key and Lori Waite were elected ough May, 2005.
President Amador: Steve Spear reported that he and Senate Vice President Sara Thompson continue to have their weekly meetings with Dr. Amador. Recently they’ve been discussing the presidential selection committee process and the Student Learning Outcomes working group. Dr. Amador will be leaving as of July 1, and the district will hire an interim president.
Report: Steve Spear reported that Michelle Barton presented a report on transferring students at the recent Governing Board meeting.
Council: Steve Spear stated that the Strategic Planning Council will take action on the Credit/No Credit issue of eliminating faculty signatures at its March 2nd meeting. The
group is also discussing the annual Implementation Plan and the academic calendar.
Miller reported that a new position as Manager of the
Dolan distributed information on the new Equipment Replacement Procedure as well as new board policies on Risk Management,
Injury/Illness Prevention, and the new smoking ordinances. She also reported
that work will begin
this summer on a change to
Email Addresses for
Part-time Faculty: Bill Bedford reported that Perry Snyder is scheduled to meet with Berta Cuaron next week to discuss the issue of email addresses for part-time faculty members.
Motion 1 MSC
Roy Latas (complete term 03-05)
Institutional Review Committee
Lori Waite (complete term 02-04)
Technology Master Plan Task Force
Student Equity Committee
Motion 2 MSC Bedford, Dolan:
Rosa Antonecchia (at large term 02-05)
Annette Squires (at large term 02-05)
Sara Thompson (at large term 03-06)
Personnel Standards & Practices Committee
Rocco Versaci (at large term 03-05)
Professional Development Review Board
Kalyna Lesyna (02-04 term)
Student Learning Outcomes Task Force
Academic Technology Committee
Monika Brannick (04-06 term)
Haydn Davis (03-05 term)
Administrative Services Planning Committee
Judy Dolan (through 2004)
Tenure & Evaluations Review Board Coordinator
Senate members thanked
Curriculum: Teresa Laughlin announced that there is a computer application titled, Curricunet, which will facilitate the curriculum change and development process. There is a demo for the new program scheduled for Wednesday, March 31, from in room ES-19. Brief discussion followed on the new program.
PD Hours for Attending
Motion 3 MSCU
Dowd, Miller: The
Motion 4 MSCU Dowd, Cater: The
Motion 5 MSCU Dowd, Gowen: The
Signature: The current application process for a change of grading basis from A-F grading to CR/NCR requires an instructor’s signature. Title V section 55752 does not require an instructor’s permission, as a minimum condition, but allows a student the option to elect the grading basis within the first 30% of a course.
Consequently, a recommendation is being made for the removal of the instructor’s signature from the form. If a student chooses CR/NC grading, the online class roster will show, like it does now, that CR/NC grading has been selected by a student. The Admissions staff will continue to enforce all catalog course policies where CR/NC is not an option; no student will be allowed to select CR/NC when it is not available.
Motion 6 MSC Dowd, Cater: The
Motion 7 MSC Dowd, Dolan: To extend the meeting until
The Committee on Committees was asked to determine how and why the term of one faculty member, Wendy Metzger, on the Administrative Services Planning Council (ASPC), was apparently changed from 02-04 to 03-05. In order to understand the issue, the committee communicated with the past chair of Committee on Committees, communicated with another faculty member, Judy Dolan on Administrative Services Planning Council, and read the emails from both Shannon Lienhart from 08/26/03 and Wendy Metzger from 08/26/03. The Senate minutes were read from 12/02 to 05/03, and all the Administrative Services Planning Council minutes were read from fall 02 to spring 03. This is what was used as the group’s source of information.
Understanding the chronology, in
August of 2002 there were no faculty members on Administrative Services
Planning Council (ASPC) because it was a new planning committee. There were
three 02-04 openings. They
should have been staggered when it started and they weren’t, with one of them
being 01-03. In September
when the council was first developed, the volunteers were Jerry Houser and
Wendy Metzger and they were
confirmed on ASPC. One term was left vacant throughout fall 2002. Wendy was on
sabbatical during spring 2003
so she resigned from the committee leaving Jerry as the sole faculty member and
then there were two openings left
for 02-04. The call for volunteers went out in the early spring to fill those
committee slots that had been
left open by the resignations and no faculty members volunteered for ASPC.
According to the Senate minutes, on
The Committee on Committees recommendations are as follows:
That Judy Dolan be confirmed to ASPC as she has been attending the meetings since 03/03
No changes should be made in the current ASPC membership.
In the future, terms should not be changed before they expire even when they’re vacant. Even though faculty members may prefer to volunteer for two year terms, those changes can cause confusion about the terms.
1. All committees are to be examined for appropriate staggering before the spring solicitation begins.
2. When questions regarding committee membership or appointments and terms are expressed by any faculty member, that those concerns should be addressed by the Committee on Committees as soon as is reasonably possible.
3. The new solicitation guidelines require that the Committee on Committees publish the terms of committee appointments on the solicitation materials.
4. When volunteers are either confirmed or elected to a committee, they will again be notified of the term they are serving.
These practices should reduce any confusion on the part of faculty members.
Motion 8 MSC
Kelber, Gowen: The
Committee: Jerry Patton provided an update on the recent reorganization of the Bookstore. Administrative Services will retain fiscal watch over the operation but actual oversight of the processes and procedures in the bookstore have been shifted to Bruce Bishop under Joe Madrigal.
· The Senate has expressed concern about the precedent setting move of the “Nike affair.”
Jerry indicated that he has not and will not approve that arrangement, although he has been asked to do so. If they choose, they will finance it without any funds from the district.
· The status of the new contract with Follett.
Jerry stated that the current contract expires in November, and we will be able to utilize the current 5-year extension in its current terms or have to put out an RFP.
· Can input or changes occur to the contract during that 5-year extension?
Jerry stated that the members of the Bookstore Advisory Committee, along with the Bookstore Manager are open to changes brought forth by students and staff.
· What is Joe Madrigal’s role?
Jerry indicated that Bruce Bishop doesn’t report to him but is under Joe Madrigal. Bruce, as Director of Student Affairs, is more familiar with the day-to-day activities of the students are as well as what their needs might be.
Senate members also expressed concern to Jerry that the meeting time for the Bookstore Advisory Committee was changed without discussing it with the membership. Not only was there a change in the chair of the committee, but committee members are not being made aware of changes that are being made without their input.
When asked about simplifying the procedure for instructors ordering textbooks, Jerry Patton indicated that there has been discussion about providing the service online but it is not available yet.
TERB Procedures: There was a suggestion made that the Senate holds a joint meeting with the Tenure & Evaluations Review Board. This would provide an opportunity for some dialogue between the two groups and an opportunity to clarify each group’s responsibilities and relationship.
Motion 9 MS Kelber, Gowen: That the Tenure & Evaluations Review Board evaluate the Coordinator. The Coordinator should be evaluated based on the time in which they served under her.
Sara Thompson read the following letter from TERB Coordinator Anne Voth:
To: Sara Thompson, Vice
From: Anne Voth
I formally request that Barb
Kelber, Rocco Versaci, and Bonnie Dowd recuse themselves from any debate held
Barb Kelber indicated that she would recuse herself because she was asked to do so, and asked that the Senate once again address the issue of a recusal policy on its next agenda.
Bonnie Dowd indicated that
she would recuse herself as well, and added that the
Discussion followed on the current climate on campus and whether it is appropriate for some Senators to be requested to recuse themselves when there is no current policy in place. Barbara and Bonnie were asked to reconsider their earlier statement that they would recuse themselves as requested by Anne Voth. At this time, Information Item V. G. Academic Due Process was brought up and it was agreed that there needed to be more discussion and confirmation of the existing process. Mary Ann asked that the Recusal Policy be brought back for an Action item for next Senate meeting. Bonnie said that given the discussion about a lack of current recusal policy she would not recuse herself but would instead abstain from any action taken today regarding the current TERB Coordinator. She also stated that it was ironic that she, Barb and Rocco are being personally singled out by Anne Voth, who is clearly making her statement as a personal attack, given that Anne has criticized the Senate about personnel attacks against her. Also, given that Anne has refused to recuse herself in the past when requested by several Senators to do so.
Barb Kelber read the following, an email which she had sent to the Faculty Council following the previous Senate meeting on February 23. She expressed her hope that it would allow all members of the Senate to consider the irony of Anne Voth’s request that she recuse herself from any votes on TERB matters, etc.:
Please give me a few more minutes of your time to read and consider this, and then I’ll simply defer to the will of the Council.
Months ago I argued in the Senate for a recusal policy, with an emphasis on policy rather than personality. Truly, in my mind that policy was meant to create a route around the personal, offering a clear way out of a muddy situation. It was during that discussion in the Senate, though, that I was aggressively shouted down and gaveled into silence. I believe a constructive policy decision was prevented that day.
Before that discussion, I had made a straightforward request directly to the TERB coordinator, asking that she recuse herself, “certainly and at least” in the two cases in which she had filed a grievance against faculty members. What could be more plain or more obvious? It wasn’t personal; it was about seeking a policy that would protect not only our process but the participants on both sides. The response came in the form of an openly threatening letter, which was extremely personal. In itself, that letter should be grounds for a request that the TERB coordinator recuse herself from any access to my own peer review/student evaluation materials, which were in process at that time. Perhaps I should have gone directly to Maria and Teresa, my fellow Senators and members of the Board. Would they have felt able to advocate for a meeting to hear my “problems, complaints and concerns,” as the faculty manual suggests the Board should do?
Did I feel afraid? Yes. Vulnerable? Absolutely. I still feel the same. At that time, I asked a probationary faculty member, whose tenure review committee I chair, whether she felt she might need to reconstitute her committee in order to separate
herself from me. I worried that I had put her at risk by taking a risk myself. Perception or reality? It doesn’t matter. I can’t accept the arrogance that would argue that point.
Forgive me, then, if I wonder at the interest in fairness and protection that comes through in our exchanges about how the Senate should proceed.
So, a final request in this matter: please add an agenda item, “recusal policy,” to be placed on the Senate agenda and voted upon at the earliest possible date. Perhaps, in returning to that ground, we can look at how we got to this place from that one, and we can agree to go together in an entirely different direction.
Rocco Versaci requested that the following letter be read to Senators:
By all accounts, TERB is meant to be an impartial body that guarantees fair and equal treatment to all faculty members. I believe that our current TERB Coordinator, Anne Voth, has violated this guarantee, acting neither fairly nor impartially with regards to certain faculty members. I believe that two administrators, Jack Miyamoto and Michael Rourke, have also acted unfairly and impartially towards certain faculty members. In an open and public manner, I have put forth my best case to reveal this situation, and I have made clear what I think needs to be done.
However, I realize that I am but one voice among several, so I will follow whatever course the Senate, in its collective wisdom, wishes to set concerning this matter. At a minimum, I hope that this Senate sees fit to voice what should be an obvious truth: the unfair treatment of targeted faculty members is intolerable. I also hope that this Senate sees fit to dedicate itself to creating policy and procedures that ensure fair treatment for ALL faculty and not just for those of us who are least critical of each other or of the administration. I will participate in these endeavors both energetically and collegially.
respectfully submit this entire statement for inclusion into our Senate minutes
Faculty Vice President
Motion 9 amended MSC Kelber, Gowen: That the Tenure &
Evaluations Review Board conduct an evaluation of their Coordinator based
on the time in which they served under her. The
A roll call vote was requested:
Drinan, MaryAnn: Aye
Kelber, Barb Neault: Recuse
Key, Doug: Aye
Spear, Steve: Present
Towfiq, Fari: Aye (by proxy)
Waite, Lori: Aye
Senators Bill Bedford, Teresa Laughlin, Stan Levy, Maria Miller, and Rocco Versaci had left the meeting.
It was pointed out that although Barb Kelber agreed to recuse herself from voting on the motion, the request for recusal was made after the motion was made.
Motion 10 MSC Townsend-Merino, Waite: To extend the meeting until
Motion 11 MSC
Townsend-Merino, Hohman: The
A roll call vote was requested:
Drinan, MaryAnn: Aye
Kelber, Barb Neault:Present
Key, Doug: Aye
Spear, Steve: Present
Towfiq, Fari: Present (by proxy)
Waite, Lori: Aye
Senators Bill Bedford, Judy Dolan, Brent Gowen, Teresa Laughlin, Stan Levy, Maria Miller, and Rocco Versaci had left the meeting.
Outcomes: The Learning Outcomes will develop a college-wide system for the assessment of learning, consistent with the Principles of Assessment. The committee’s role and function will be refined and modified as the institutional initiative for the assessment of learning development. The Learning Outcomes Committee has the responsibility for performing the following duties as well as identifying additional tasks which will enhance and improve student learning and success.
1. Create on-going dialogue and encourage engagement of faculty and staff in the assessment of student learning.
2. Develop and implement systems for identifying learning outcomes at the course, program, and institutional level.
3. Develop and implement assessment processes.
4. Establish and implement a process for the collection, analysis, and distribution of assessment data.
5. Based on evidence and feedback, implement plans and strategies for improvement in student learning.
6. Based on evidence and feedback, engage in ongoing review and revision of the institutional process for assessment.
7. Develop and implement institutional celebrations of learning successes.
Learning Outcomes Committee Members:
Seven Faculty Members
representing divisions appointed by
Five Faculty Coordinators* to include
- Curriculum Committee representative
appointed by the
Faculty Professional Development representative – faculty only
Faculty Institutional Review representative* - faculty only
Vice President for Instruction/Co-Chair*
Vice President for Student Services*
One Instructional Dean
Student Services Dean
Director of Institutional Research and Planning*
Confidential and Supervisory Team Member appointed by
One Administrative Association Member appointed by Administrative Association
One Classified Unit Employee appointed by CCE/AFT
Supervisor, Evaluations and Records
* Members of the Coordinating Council
Barb Kelber indicated that our Accreditation Draft Report for the interim is due in the spring of next year. In order for us to have an opportunity to act on this, we need to work with it in the fall semester.
Brief discussion followed on the membership. This item will be brought back for Senate action on March 8.
Hiring Forms: Steve Spear indicated that the Draft of Instructional Hiring Forms will be presented for Action on March 8.
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at
Bonnie Ann Dowd, Secretary