November 18, 2015 Meeting

Agenda

TAFT COLLEGE ACADEMIC SENATE MEETING

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2015

12:00PM TO 1:00PM, COUGAR ROOM

Call to Order Public Commentary Approval of Minutes from October 2, 2015

Meeting Commentary on Electronic Committee Updates

AGENDA

Information/Discussion Items

  1. Highlights of ASCCC Fall Plenary—Dyer, Hall, Grimes—10 Minutes
  2. Tutoring Update—Jones—10 Minutes Action Items
  3. Distance Education Committee Proposal/Charter (Second Reading)—

Hall—5 Minutes

  1. SLOASC Charter Revisions (Second Reading)—Jacobi—5 Minutes
  2. New Athletics Program Proposal: Golf (Second Reading)—Bandy—5

Minutes

  1. Taft College Academic Senate Constitution and Bylaws—Dyer—15

Minutes Other Adjournment

Next meeting is Monday, December 7, at 12:00pm in the Cougar Room. Tentative agenda items are accessibility concerns, actions to maintain accreditation, revised annual program review template, student learning outcomes, AB 288 (Dual Enrollment), and Taft College Academic Senate Constitution and Bylaws.

Minutes

Taft College Academic Senate Minutes

Wednesday, Nov. 18, 2015

Cougar Conference Room

Members Present: President Geoffrey Dyer, Vice President Vicki Jacobi, Jennifer Altenhofel, Megan Andrews, Eric Berube, Paul Blake, Adam Bledsoe, Joe’ll Chaidez, Chris Chung-Wee, Bill Devine, Sharyn Eveland, Tori Furman, Shelley Getty, Greg Golling, Jessica Grimes, Dan Hall, Michael Jiles, Diane Jones, Danielle Kerr, Kelly Kulzer-Reyes, David Layne, Julian Martinez, Mariza Martinez, Tina Mendoza, Michelle Oja, Ruby Payne, Juana Rangel-Escobedo, Terri Smith, and Tony Thompson.

The meeting was called to order at 12:11 p.m.

Public Commentary

  • No public commentary was offered.

Review of Nov. 2, 2015 Senate Minutes

  • Since there were no changes made to the Nov. 2nd minutes, according to Robert’s Rules, they are thereby approved and we do not need a motion to approve them.

Commentary on Electronic Committee Updates

  • Two electronic updates were received from the Curriculum Committee and the SLOASC committee.
  • Geoffrey commended the Curriculum Committee for investigating how our program discontinuance works.
  • Geoffrey thanked the SLOASC Committee for working towards revising their charter.

Highlights of ASCCC Fall Plenary – Dyer, Grimes, Hall

  • Geoffrey shared about recent accreditation news. The statewide Academic Senate passed a resolution to adopt a new paper called “Effective Practices in Accreditation”.
  • The Board of Governors has directed the Chancellor’s Office to establish a new model for accrediting California community colleges.
  • Geoffrey attended an EEO Faculty Diversity Summit. Title 5 requires that before serving on screening committees, we must participate in training regarding the educational benefits of workforce diversity and the elimination of bias in hiring.
    • Geoffrey cited a study by Robert Fairlie that supports the link between having a racially/ethnically diverse faculty and higher success/completion rates for minority students.
    • With the additional $62 million to fund the hiring of more faculty at the community college level, we have an opportunity to reverse our demographic trends in personnel that don’t match the demographic makeup of our students.
  • Dan shared about the Hot Topics in Distance Education discussed at plenary: 1) Accreditation, 2) Accessibility, 3) [State] Authorization, 4) Online Education Initiative, 5) Regular/Effective/Substantive Contact, and 6) Proprietary Publisher Generated Materials.
  • Jessica briefed us about two laws affecting faculty pay for non-credit coursework. More ‘Basic Skills’ coursework will likely be funneled into non-credit status.
  • Jessica reported that with the increase in funding for new faculty, over 1000 new faculty will likely be hired for next year. This makes hiring faculty very competitive and it would be helpful to get ahead of the big hiring push in finding quality candidates and in vetting them.

Tutoring Update – Jones

  • Diane stated that some of their math students have expressed concern about a lack of one-on-one tutoring appointments being available.
  • Currently an administrator is overseeing the Learning Resource Center and it is Diane’s and others’ belief that a faculty member should oversee the center.
  • Mark Williams met with the math faculty to discuss the issues regarding the LRC. The math faculty were concerned about the two tutoring positions that have not been filled. The math faculty are also concerned about the fact that some of the current tutors are looking for employment elsewhere. The two part-time tutoring positions were then combined to form one full-time position.
  • According to data the math department has been analyzing, only a small percent of the time that tutors are available is devoted to one-on-one appointments (7.4% in Fall 2014; 12.0% in Spring 2015; and 4.8% in the first 8 weeks of Fall 2015).
  • Vicki pointed out that overseeing the LRC used to be the responsibility of faculty. The position has never been re-filled. We are currently using grant money to pay for the supervision of the LRC. In order to get apportionment funding for this position, there needs to be “line of sight” supervision.
  • The job description for the new full-time tutoring position was reworked to be a Learning Assistant/Tutor so that there is more flexibility in providing a broader variety of services to the students.

Distance Education Committee Proposal/Charter (Second Reading) – Hall

  • Three additions were made to the DE Committee proposed charter regarding: 1) accessibility; 2) accreditation; and 3) where this committee sits in relation to the other committees on campus.
  • Jennifer Altenhofel moved to accept the proposal of the DE Committee charter. Greg seconded the motion.
  • Eric offered that given the reference to accreditation in the charter, it might be prudent to wait until the ACCJC report comes out before we adopt this charter.
  • Kelly suggested that we could approve the charter now and revise it later if needed.
  • Serving on this DE committee may or may not count towards fulfilling a faculty committee obligation. That will be determined at a later date.
  • The motion passed.

SLOASC Charter Revisions (Second Reading) – Jacobi

  • There were suggestions made about the charter at the last senate meeting, but there is already language in the charter addressing those suggestions. Therefore, there were no revisions made to the charter.
  • Michelle Oja motioned to approve the second reading of the charter. Jennifer seconded the motion. The motion carried.

New Athletics Program Proposal: Golf (Second Reading) – Bandy

  • This proposal went before the Governance Council twice, and has received their approval.
  • Diane is concerned that we have not funded our current sports at the level they need.
  • Tony speculated that Kanoe feels the Golf program would have a minimal impact on the budget. Tony added that a golf program is one of the cheapest sports programs to add.
  • The hope is that we could likely attract local high school golfers to join the team. Recruiting expenses should be low.
  • The golf athletes will bring in FTES. Vicki suggested that since our enrollment is capped, the increase in FTES does not really help us.
  • Tony felt that Kanoe has vetted this program thoroughly. It is the cheapest way to increase the breath of our athletic program. There are also gender equity issues that this proposal addresses.
  • Tori motioned to approve the proposal. Bill seconded and the motion carried.

Academic Senate Constitution and Bylaws – Dyer

  • Michelle Oja has been working on a poll to send out to faculty regarding the structure of the senate.
  • The Task Force, made up of Geoffrey, Terri, Tony, Michelle O., Bill and Jessica, will try to have a draft of the senate constitution by December 1st. This draft could then be discussed at the Dec. 7th senate meeting.
  • The motion that passed at the last senate meeting was to adopt a senate of the whole with a smaller group of faculty (aka an Expanded Executive Committee or Academic Senate Council) within the senate. There are three California community colleges that have adopted that type of structure for their senate.
    • Columbia College
      • All faculty vote on all senate items.
      • AS Council drafts resolutions and works in advance.
    • Feather River College
      • All faculty vote on everything, except in exceptional circumstances.
    • Skyline College
      • All faculty make appointments and service on committees, but Governing Council has the ability to exercise all functions of the senate.
    • The senate discussed the pros and cons of the three forms of Academic Senate Council. Regardless of what form of AS Council is adopted, one key issue to decide on is what quorum will be set at.
    • We have the flexibility to customize these three examples in any way that best suits our needs.
    • Whatever the task force comes up with, it will be brought before the senate for discussion and input.
    • Vicki likes Columbia’s model of having the vice president of the senate be the president elect. Another thing to like about their model is that the vice president is not the Curriculum chair.
    • Bill wondered about the need to change at all if this is the structure we will adopt.
      • Above all else, Geoffrey wants the senate to come up with a working constitution. But, given that we are not able to accomplish our 10 + 1 responsibilities, it seems that we need to modify how we currently function.
    • Sharyn motioned to adopt the Columbia model of the smaller committee. Tori seconded the motion. The motion passed with Michelle O. voting against the motion and Bill abstaining. The following faculty were present when the vote took place.
      • Danielle, Geoffrey, Tony, Mike J., Sharyn, Tori, Dan, David, Terri, Vicki, Mariza, Julian, Joe’ll, Adam, Greg, Diane, Ruby, Juana, Eric, and Brian.

Other

  • In addition to having our regularly scheduled meeting on December 7th, we will have a meeting on Friday, December 11th (Dead Day) at 1:00 PM so that we can rank the full-time faculty position requests.
  • In order for our rankings to be presented at the January board meeting, we need to have our ranking decisions made by then. If we would have our faculty ranking meeting during the flex days of our January in-service, several faculty would not be present to vote on the ranking. Therefore, the ranking meeting was moved to December 11th.

Meeting adjourned at 1:06.

Respectfully submitted by Dan Hall

Supporting Docs