October 18, 2017 Meeting

Agenda

Taft College Academic Senate Council Meeting

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

12:00pm to 1:00pm,
Cafeteria Conference Room

Call to Order
Public Commentary
Approval of Minutes of September 20, 2017 Meeting

Agenda

Information/Discussion Items

  1. Academic Senate for California Community Colleges Resolutions Discussed at Area Meetings & Update on Area A Meeting (Dyer)

Action Items
2. Criteria for New Faculty Position Requests (Division Chairs)
3. Draft Integrated Plan
4. Draft Guided Pathways Readiness Assessment
5. Draft AP 7211: Faculty Service Areas, Minimum Qualifications, and
Equivalencies.

  1. Replacing Retiring Faculty
    a) General Overview/Relationship to New Faculty Position Requests
    b) Resolution Referred Back from Senate-of-the-whole
    c) New Resolution (Bill Devine)

Other/Open Forum for Announcements
Adjournment

 

Next meeting of the Academic Senate-of-the-whole is Monday, November 6, at 12:00pm in the Cougar Room. Next meeting of the Academic Senate Council is Wednesday, November 15 at 12:00pm in the Cafeteria Conference Center.

Minutes

Taft College Academic Senate Council Minutes

Wednesday, October 18, 2017

Cafeteria Conference Room

Members Present: President Geoffrey Dyer, Vice President Vicki Jacobi, Secretary Candace Duron, Tony Thompson, Kristi Richards, Tori Furman, Juana Escobedo, Greg Golling, Kelly Kulzer-Reyes, Kanoe Bandy, Mike Jiles, Debora Rodenhauser

Guests: Diane Jones, students: Erica Detweiler, Jordy Cazares, Margarita Gomez, Omar De Haro, Simon Castillo, Gillyn Yamsuan, Teresa Espinoza, Stefani Kunzmann, Mason Bassett-Graves

The meeting was called to order at 12:00 p.m.

Public Commentary

  • None

Approval of September 20, 2017 Meeting Minutes

  • On a motion by Candace Duron, seconded by Vicki Jacobi the September 20th minutes were approved with the addition of Academic Policies & Procedures (AP&P) as an Academic Senate subcommittee.

Academic Senate of California Community Colleges Resolutions Discussed at Area Meetings & Update on Area A Meeting (Dyer)

  • Review the resolutions and amendments that will go for a vote at the ASCCC Fall 2017 Plenary on November 4. Provide your feedback to Geoffrey Dyer or Vicki Jacobi.

Criteria for New Faculty Position Requests (Division Chairs)

  • Kanoe Bandy explained the update made to the Existing Criteria for Ranking Faulty Position Requests, Developed by Division Chairs and IARR&O, Adopted by the Taft College Academic Senate on January 6, 2012.
  • The Division Chairs added definitions to each of the criteria and parameters.
  • Parameters include but are not limited to:
    • Use of program review data to ensure consistency.
    • Either HR or Office of Instruction determines the salary or benefits for faculty positions.
    • Consider funding sources to included non-teaching faculty, CTE, or grants.
  • Discussion:
    • In order for this to be used during the January in-service Academic Senate meeting for ranking it would need to move forward immediately to allow for discussion/revision/approval during the Senate-of-the-Whole in November and December.
    • New faculty positions are not always listed in APR, something to consider when using APR as the data source for faculty ranking. APRs should be an evaluation of data looking back but making recommendations forward to improve in ways that benefit students. It should not be that regardless of data the APR points to the same conclusion of hiring new faculty.
    • There should be a link between budgets, planning, and APR.
    • The number of adjuncts, overload, and waitlists are not reflected in APR data but is important. Office of Instruction can provide this information.
    • Regardless of consistency of data, we all still come to different conclusions because we analyze/evaluate the data differently, which is a problem when we rank as a group.
    • It is important to read the narrative to cover information not reflected in the data.
    • With counseling, there is not data for some subsets because of a lack of support (examples: former foster youth and veterans) yet there could be data/tracking if support was provided. Guided Pathways and AB705 call for more support to students.
    • The definitions alone do not solve the problem because there is still no rubric for ranking.
  • On a motion by Tori Furman, seconded by Kelly Kulzer-Reyes, the Criteria for New Faculty Position Requests updated with definitions by Division Chairs was approved to move forward to Senate-of-the-Whole.

Draft Integrated Plan

  • The draft Integrated plan, budget, and equity executive summary were reviewed.
  • Discussion:
    • Some of the activities do not indicate a funding source. The draft budget does not reflect the activities listed in the draft plan.
    • There are several activities in the BSI category that use specific language of activities that will occur with they are really to be developed or are in discussion.
    • Suggestion to change the language from re-design developmental education sequence to investigate the developmental education sequence.
    • The English discipline faculty has provided feedback to the plan asking for changes but the changes are not reflected in this draft.
    • Suggestions to change the language from reduce at least on level below transfer level courses to review courses below transfer level.
    • The activities should not be listed as directives as they are 10+1 issues that need to be discussed in collaboration with faculty.
  • On a motion by Mike Jiles, seconded by Kanoe Bandy, no vote from Kelly Kulzer-Reyes, the draft Integrated Plan with suggestions/feedback to be provided to Primavera Arvizu, the Dean of Student Success, was approved to move forward to Senate-of-the-Whole.

Draft Guided Pathways Assessment Tool

  • The draft Guided Pathways Assessment Tool of the average ranking provided by the TC Guided Pathways team from its October 4th meeting was reviewed.
  • Vicki Jacobi explained how the team went through each of the 14 elements, each person providing their ranking using the rubric/description in the assessment tool, and evidence to support their ranking.
  • The narrative response has not been developed yet. It will provide an explanation of the ranking, accomplishments to date, identified challenges and barriers, and any additional comments decided by the team.
  • The information provided in this readiness assessment does not impact allocation.
  • On a motion by Kanoe Bandy, seconded by Tori Furman, the draft Guided Pathways Readiness Assessment Tool was approved to move forward to Senate-of-the-Whole.

Draft AP 7211: Faculty Service Areas, Minimum Qualifications, and Equivalencies

  • AP 7211 with strikeout deviations from the CCLC template, WKCCD Equivalency Determination form, and the ASCCC’s resource on equivalencies were reviewed and discussed.
    • The use of equivalencies is a controversial topic.
    • Once equivalency is established the faculty member can then teach ALL courses in the discipline.
    • The HR hiring committee made up of discipline faculty members can decide.
    • Kanoe Bandy recommended removing the first three sentences under Equivalent Qualifications for Faculty and begin the section with the sentence starting Candidates not meeting . . .
  • On a motion from Mike Jiles, seconded by Debora Rodenhauser, AP 7211 was approved to move forward to Senate-of-the-Whole.

The meeting adjourned at 1:02 p.m.

Submitted by Candace Duron, Secretary.

Minutes approved November 15, 2017

Supporting Docs