March 02, 2015 Meeting
Agenda
Minutes
Taft College Academic Senate
Minutes Monday, March 2, 2015
Cougar Conference Room
Members Present: President Tony Thompson, Vice President Vicki Jacobi, Jennifer Altenhofel, Megan Andrews, Nancy Artiga, Kanoe Bandy, Eric Bérubé, Adam Bledsoe, Jill Brown, Joe’ll Chaidez, Bill Devine, Geoffrey Dyer, John Eigenauer, Juana Escobedo, Sharyn Eveland, Bruce Ferguson, Shelley Getty, Greg Golling, Gary Graupman, Jessica Grimes, Dan Hall, Brian Jean, Michael Jiles, Craig Johnson, Diane Jones, Kelly Kulzer-‐Reyes, David Layne, Steve Lytle, Julian Martinez, Mariza Martinez, Mike Mayfield, Janis Mendenhall, Michelle Oja, Ruby Payne, Joseph Polizzotto, Stacie Rancano, Becky Roth, Terri Smith, Sonja Swenson, Stefanie Walsh, Susan Vaugh, and Karen Ziegler.
The meeting was called to order at 12:10 p.m.
Public Commentary
None.
Review of Feb. 2, 2015 Senate Minutes
A motion was made by Jennifer Altenhofel and seconded by Mike Jiles to approve the February 2015 minutes. The motion carried.
Standing Committee Updates
The Budget Committee update made a reference to the minutes being located on the Intranet. Diane Jones asked about accessing the Intranet. Sharyn let us know that you can access the Intranet by going to the TC main page About Us Information & Technology Services Cougar Tracks Resources Intranet Webpage for Committees (Login). ( http://www.taftcollege.edu/tcwp/its/?page_id=148 ) The username is “staff” and the password is “Cougar”.
Charter for Curriculum & GE Committee Vicki Jacobi
Vicki re-‐visited the charter proposed for the Curriculum Committee.
- The committee did make the one word change that was suggested by Diane Jones. Everything else in the proposed charter remained the same.
- David Layne brought up the stated length of time (1½ hours) for the Curriculum meetings. David voiced that the time should be one hour. Bill Devine reported that the committee wants it to remain as 1½ hours. After discussion on the matter, Tony suggested that the statement regarding the length of time for the Curriculum meetings should be: “To be determined each semester.”
- David noted that the District Curriculum Approval Process chart does not show the
Student Learning Outcomes as being involved in the process. Vicki said that the chart
is board approved, and in order to make a change to the chart, the board would have
to amend it.
o David made the motion that the Academic Senate recommends to the board the need to change the District Curriculum Approval Process chart to reflect the addition of the SLO’s. Dave suggested that the SLOs category be placed side-‐by-‐side with the Technical Review category. Michelle seconded the motion. The motion carried, with one abstention, and with Sharyn voting against the motion.
- David would like to have the charter for the Technical Review sub-‐committee and the revision to the SLO Review sub-‐committee be first brought before the senate for review.
- Brian Jean questioned why the VP of Student Services is a voting member and the VP of Instruction is not a voting member. Brian felt that neither should have voting privileges. Since curriculum is faculty driven, only faculty should be voting members.
- Brian inquired about the potential need to appeal decisions made by the Curriculum Committee. Bill reminded the senate that any member of the senate has the right to make motions that advocate for a change in the committee’s decision(s). David asked to include a stated appeal process for decisions made by the Curriculum Committee. There was discussion about whether the appeal process should come from division chairs rather than faculty.
- Brian stated that item #11 on the first page of the propose charter does not make sense as stated. The sentence ends with the word “and”. Also, in what way is curriculum “offered complimentary and integrated”?
- Vicki offered to table the proposed charter until next senate meeting so that all
of the suggested changes can be incorporated into the proposal.
Accreditation Institute Report Tony Thompson
- Vicki, Eric and Mark reported on their participation in the Accreditation Institute put on by the Academic Senate.
- Vicki attended one session that stressed that part of the focus on student equity means that Student Services should be available online for our distance learning students. Vicki suggested that we write a Distance Education plan.
- There will be two new accreditation standards. Everything will be SLO driven. We need to reduce the number of SLOs per course to one or two. The accreditation team will be looking for continuous quality improvement and the evidence to go with it.
- Eric went to sessions – “Preparing your campus for a site visit”; “Changing your culture for campus-‐wide involvement” & “What’s new when you don’t meet the standards?” The Chancellor’s office wants more reporting.
- Mark felt that the institute was a high caliber event and very productive. Constance
Carol, who was a major force behind the Bachelor’s degree effort, spoke on the accreditation
process. Another session focused on “Assessing Regular Effective Contact” for distance
education courses. Matt Wetstein spoke on Institutional Effectiveness. One big takeaway
for Mark was that we can reduce our level of headache when it comes time for accreditation
by more closely aligning what committees do with the accreditation requirements.
AP 2510 -‐ Draft Tony Thompson
This document addresses how the Board of Trustees interacts with the Academic Senate. AP 2510 document is built on the 10 + 1 language. While board policy 2510 states towards the end, “See administrative policy,” there is no administrative policy on this matter. The AP 2510 document is an effort to put policy in place where we have said that we have a policy. Bill stated that this document is consistent with similar documents that are acceptable to faculty at other colleges.
New Faculty Position Proposal Tony Thompson
As stated by Dena, the administration will ultimately fill the positions as the faculty voted last Fall. Mark will direct the CTE program for the rest of this semester. The issue was raised that the Industrial Health and Safety faculty position the senate voted on last year looks as if it will be a grant director position with the option of teaching overload in the IH&S program. Mark would like this position to be modeled
after how Paul’s faculty position is being used. There is an advantage in having this position be a faculty position out of all the three potential options. (The position could be either administration, classified, or faculty.) Mark said that it is the goal of the administration to have this CTE Director position be a full-‐ time district funded position.
- Kanoe stated that the current position being hired does not give the Applied Technology Division the new full-‐time district funded faculty position they requested. The division may feel the need to submit a proposal for a new faculty position in Industrial Health & Safety next year.
- Kelly voiced not liking the idea of having faculty running a grant and directing other faculty.
Other
Greg nominated Craig Johnson for Professor Emeritus status. Diane made the motion for that action to take place. Mike Mayfield seconded. Motion passed.
Meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Dan Hall