Thursday, January 17th, 2013, 2:10pm Cougar Conference Room<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Attendees<\/strong>: Jennifer Altenhofel, Kanoe Bandy, Michelle Beaseley, David Berry, Wendy Berry, Eric Berube, Darcy Bogle, Kamala Carlson, Joe\u2019ll Chaidez, Christopher Chung-Wee, Bill Devine, Geoffrey Dyer, John Eigenauer, Sharyn Eveland, Bruce Ferguson, Tori Furman, Shelly Getty, Greg Golling, Lourdes Gonzales, Gary Graupman, Jessica Grimes, Dan Hall, Vicki Herder, Brian Jean, Craig Johnson, Diane Jones, Kelly Kulzer, David Layne, Julian Martinez, Mariza Martinez, Mike Mayfield, Gracie Mickelberry, Michelle Oja, Ruby Payne, Harold Pease, Joseph Polizzotto, Robin Polski, Juana Rangel-Escobedo, David Reynolds, Rebecca Roth, Jeff Ross, Tony Thompson, Susan Vaughn, Stephanie Walsh<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Prior to the meeting, Tony Thompson extended a special thanks to Big Denweed\u2019s Friendly catering, giving the caterers gift cards from Barnes & Noble and encouraging them to purchase educational materials for their children with the gift cards.<\/p>\n The meeting was called to order at 12:31 p.m.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Public Commentary<\/u><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Robin Polski remarked \u201cFood\u2019s delicious,\u201d referring to the catering.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Review of December 3, 2012 Senate Minutes<\/u><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n The minutes were approved as presented.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Old Business<\/u>\u2014Subcommittee Report on Sabbatical Process<\/u> – Eric Berube<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Eric presented the draft of the Faculty Sabbatical Leave Handbook <\/em>prepared by the subcommittee formed to study the faculty sabbatical process. Eric explained that the committee would like feedback on the draft so that the document and the process delineated in the document could be voted on at an upcoming meeting.<\/p>\n Eric explained that the subcommittee researched the sabbatical processes of many California community colleges to inform the draft policy. The draft policy includes the following process: Faculty seeking sabbatical would submit a proposal that would include an abstract, outcomes, and measures; a committee would rank these proposals based on established criteria delineated in a rubric; and the committee would forward these proposals and rankings to administration (see Faculty Sabbatical leave Handbook <\/em>draft).<\/p>\n Faculty discussed the local senate\u2019s potential role in this process and how committee rankings might affect administrative decisions. Eric emphasized that he was more concerned with having a clear framework than dictating how administration used the rankings provided to them. Diane Jones expressed that the \u201cbargaining committee should have a goal, a number [of annual sabbaticals<\/p>\n <\/p>\n potentially granted] to shoot for,\u201d and faculty recognized that sabbaticals, like any other bargaining items, require resources. Faculty also discussed the number of years (six) required to apply for a sabbatical. Vicki Herder provided an example of requesting a sabbatical to develop an emergency plan. Jeff Ross pointed out that it is faculty\u2019s responsibility to apply for sabbaticals. The group discussed the difficulty of a faculty member taking sabbatical when that faculty member may be the only faculty member who teaches in a given discipline, and Kanoe Bandy offered the example of losing an Athletics Director for a year to sabbatical and what that would mean to the campus and community. Craig Johnson suggested that in some instances, a departmental recommendation might accompany the proposal.<\/p>\n Tony Thompson requested that faculty review the Faculty Sabbatical Leave Handbook <\/em>draft more closely and place the item on the next meeting agenda. He also requested that the senate vote for or against the document and procedure by March of 2013.<\/p>\n Budget Committee Update<\/u> – David Layne<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n David informed the group that the committee has not been meeting. He said that Superintendent Dena Maloney is going to \u201creactivate and revamp\u201d the committee, \u201cprobably by February.\u201d<\/p>\n Class Size Limits<\/u> – Diane Jones<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Diane Jones requested that the senate take action to establish existing class size limits in writing. She explained that English classes have traditionally had an enrollment limit of only thirty students, but that Banner and waitlists affect this. She requested a document delineating the class size limit for courses that would consider physical limitations of certain classrooms, such as lab environments that only accommodate twenty-four students.<\/p>\n The senate discussed the appropriate venue to advance the issue in, suggesting Division Chairs. Kanoe Bandy asked if the class size limits should be made clear in the faculty contract, and Craig Johnson said that the limits might apply to the contract \u201cas a workload issue.\u201d Diane Jones suggested adding an appendix delineating current class size limits (thirty for English, thirty-five elsewhere, and twenty-four for labs) to the contract. The group wanted these numbers to also reflect the classrooms themselves.<\/p>\n Tony Thompson volunteered to contact Patti Bench, Vice-President of Instruction, and ask her to bring the issue to the Division Chairs meeting.<\/p>\n Evolving Curriculum<\/u> – David Layne<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n David Layne gave a brief overview of an Academic Senate of California Community Colleges plenary presentation entitled \u201cOur Constantly Evolving Curriculum: Hot Topics.\u201d David showed the senate where to find the presentation on the ASCCC website. He gave a brief overview and explained some of the slides. Topics of the presentation included prerequisites (content review or content review combined with statistical validation), new repeatability rules to take effect by fall of 2013, the organization of courses into \u201cfamilies,\u201d and the impact of adult education shifting to community colleges. David encouraged faculty to visit the ASCCC website to learn more and to contact him with any questions.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Overview of Selected ASCCC Presentations<\/u> – Tony Thompson<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n In the interest of time, this item was tabled.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n IT Department\u00a0 Issues Affecting Instruction<\/u> – Tony Thompson<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Tony continued the discussion begun in December about IT. He began by referencing the proposed vote of no confidence. Tony said, \u201cI\u2019m not comfortable\u201d pursuing a vote of no confidence for four reasons: professional courtesy; overstepping the academic senate\u2019s role; the possibility of pursuing the desired outcome without the senate acting directly to remove someone; and the fact that administration already is aware of concerns about IT and the discussions taking place in the academic senate. A subcommittee, bringing the head of IT to academic senate, and other possibilities were discussed.<\/p>\n Ultimately, Tony requested that members of the senate email Tony specific IT problems affecting instruction to Tony, so that he could aggregate the list and advance it to Dena Maloney, Superintendent. Tony said, \u201cI\u2019m not willing to take this upstairs to Dr. Maloney if it is framed as a personal attack on the director of IT.\u201d Tony pointed out that senate has \u201cno authority\u201d over the director of IT, and that \u201cwe\u2019re not trying to fire him.\u201d Tony pointed out that some faculty had reported good service from IT in December\u2019s meeting. Some faculty expressed this during today\u2019s meeting as well. Chris Chung-Wee said, \u201cWhenever I want help, I get help quickly.\u201d More than one faculty member expressed that IT was understaffed, and one person pointed to a candidate for Vice President of Instruction\u2019s open forum and the data he shared regarding IT supporting this assertion.<\/p>\n Additionally, Eric Berube suggested a customer satisfaction survey be implemented and included in IT\u2019s program review. \u201cBoom, we\u2019re done,\u201d Eric said, explaining that implementing the survey could happen quickly, providing feedback and concerns to IT to shape their annual planning.<\/p>\n One faculty member requested that measures taken to correct ongoing issues be provided to faculty in writing to alert faculty of follow-up and how the status quo will change.<\/p>\n Dan Hall encouraged faculty to send requests to him, and offered to convert VHS tapes to digital files and help with other instructional technology matters.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Wendy Berry suggested finding out how adjunct instructors feel about IT services.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Although faculty were invited to send specific issues to Tony, many faculty verbally expressed specific concerns during the meeting. They are as follows:<\/p>\n *Failure to remove names of deceased faculty from Outlook<\/p>\n *Lack of back-up for the Virtual Transfer Center causing loss of two-years\u2019 accumulation of data<\/p>\n *\u201dComplete and total lack of communication . Maintenance communicates. IT is a black hole.\u201d<\/p>\n *Miscommunication regarding appropriate hardware (keyboards) and hardware not replaced.<\/p>\n *Wireless issue: \u201cCisco said our system could multitask. We paid for a package that allowed us and students to use personal equipment on the wireless network. IT didn\u2019t install the services . . . IT said \u2018The capability is there, but the implementation won\u2019t allow it.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n *Two years of footage of Taft College baseball, intended for class analysis, lost, never backed up.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n *Request for VHS player for class materials answered with \u201cYou need to get with the times.\u201d VHS player provided for one semester, then removed, despite repeated requests.<\/p>\n *Tablet given to IT for back-up of files. Six years of data lost.<\/p>\n *Equipment (data projector controllers\/laser pointers) stored in ceiling of classrooms without instructors being informed.<\/p>\n *Unmet requests for functional computers in classrooms.<\/p>\n *Favoritism. \u201cTechy people get treated better by IT.\u201d<\/p>\n *Old, nonfunctional computer equipment never removed from classrooms.<\/p>\n *Limited availability of IT staff (available until 5:00pm) with no one to call for help during night classes.<\/p>\n *Switch to Outlook happened during summer and did not reflect input given prior by faculty on Technology Committee. (This was expressed by two members of the Technology Committee).<\/p>\n *Need minimum standards for smart classrooms.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Other<\/u> – Vicki Herder<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Vicki Herder acknowledged the one week anniversary of the Taft Union High School shooting and the grieving that is occurring. She pointed to a news report that indicated that students were reluctant to attend Taft College because they thought \u201cthis may be a bad area.\u201d Vicki provided, as a resource, a handout from VCU Center for Teaching Excellence dealing with teaching during tragic events. She encouraged faculty to send troubled students to counseling. She encouraged faculty \u201ckeep this in the forefront of your mind on Tuesday\u201d (the first day of classes). She closed with a heartwarming story of the grief dogs working at TUHS.<\/p>\n Geoffrey Dyer<\/p>\n <\/p>\n
\n