C:SEN MIN 3-23-05Approved 4-13-05

Academic Senate

M I N U T E S

March 23, 2005

3:00 p.m. - BC214

Members Present: Blake Barron, Barbara Bell, Susan Broderick, Jim Chesher, Esther Frankel, Jack Friedlander, Tom Garey, Peter Haslund (Chair), Mary Lawson, Tom Mahoney, Petra Malinova, Kathy Molloy, Kim Monda, Marcy Moore, Elida Moreno, Kathy O’Connor, Peter Rojas, Jan Schultz, Sheri Shields, Laura Welby

Guests: M’Liss Garza, Jenny King-The Channels, John Romo

1.0Call to Order

1.1Approval of Minutes – March 9, 2005

M/S/C To approve the Minutes of the Academic Senate, 3-9-05 (Bell/Barron)

1.2Approval of Agenda – so approved

2.0Information

2.1Memorial Service for Richard Armstrong, March 20, 2 pm

The memorial service for our colleague Richard Armstrong was well attended. It was clear that he was adored and that he had made a significant impact on many.

2.2The Senate website has been updated. The Appendices to the Academic Senate Constitution and Bylaws are now available. Some research is needed: The previously approved updates for “rotation of senator” are not reflected in the current Bylaws.

2.3The election of Division Senators – handout

One third of the Senate is up for election this spring. The Senators up for election and in charge of their Division election are: Mary Lawson, Tom Garey, Tom Mahoney and Kathy O’Connor. The Division Senator will notify departments and faculty within their Division that nominations are being accepted. Once the election is completed, the results should be forwarded to the Academic Senate President-elect. Newly-elected Senators shall begin their three-year term in Summer 2005. The procedure for holding first and second Senator elections can be found in the Academic Senate Constitution Bylaws.

Note: Fine Arts may be electing a second Senator once the hiring process is complete and if the threshold for adding a second senator has been reached.

2.4 Letter from Franchesca Cleyet – handout

A letter to the Senate President about the proposed winter intersession was handed out. The senators were asked if this should be on a subsequent agenda.

2.4 The ASB representative spoke briefly about the American Student Association of Community Colleges (ASACC) conference in Washington, D.C. that was attended by students from all over the U.S. The best experiences included observing the whole political process and discussion in the Capital on the Schiavo bill. The major issues of the conference were the proposed budget cuts, and to advocate for Pell Grants by raising the qualifying maximum by more than the proposed amount.

3.0Hearing/Discussion

3.1Faculty Job Description (withdrawn from Agenda - not yet ready for discussion)

3.2College Plan: What role does the Senate want to play?

President Romo reminded the Senators that the current College Plan ends this academic year. Developing the next iteration of the three-year College Plan is underway. President Romo believes strongly that the College Planning Council should be the main consultative body and driving force for the College Plan development process. CPC’s directive will be to identify the key priorities the college should be focusing on for the next three years. He would like the plan to focus on the macro issues, possibly omit many of the low level operational items, and to continue with tracking measurable objectives as a way of monitoring our progress toward our goals. Input was provided to CPC via information from two planning forums (one on Education and the other on South Coast Issues), as well as the results of the CPP reports.

John Romo will also include his view for consideration on where the college should be going – some of his thoughts on the matter were presented during his In-Service presentation. The primary areas he identified were: 1) Access, which includes being creative in reaching out to underrepresented students, in addition to maintaining our enrollment caps, 2) Student Success (also helps in overall enrollment), and 3) Infrastructure.

President Romo reported that conversation about the possibility of a Bond campaign has begun. Selling programs would be the focus of the Bond campaign, not facilities per se. Programs such as ESL, SOMA, Global Studies, and areas such as the LRC, Drama/Music and the Wake Center (for credit and non credit use/development) could/would be the focus of the Bond campaign. The bond measure would also allow for equipment needs and parking.

3.3Library: What does a future Academic Library look like?

Jack Friedlander addressed the idea of looking toward other institutions to see if our library could better serve our SBCC community. Questions/issues that could be addressed include:

  • What is happening with undergrad libraries?
  • How is information generally accessed today?
  • The changing nature of how students research, learn, and use information
  • Rethinking new buildings/classrooms

3.4Resolution on Sustainability: Request for support from student coalition.

The Academic Senate could offer its general support for the Student Sustainability Coalitions’ proposed resolution and goals with the exception of any specific fiscal implications. Senators applauded the basic principles of the Coalition’s efforts and want to encourage the students on their leadership, enthusiasm and on being responsible citizens.

The ASB representative stated that the Student Senate voted to approve the resolution. Support of the resolution represents the goal of a cleaner environment and the use of more clean energy in general.

Suggestion: In an effort to foster continued student engagement have the EVP of Business Services reach out to the group to discuss what is already being done and work with them about the normal process of how a plan can be developed and implemented.

3.5The proposed FPDC guidelines -dated 3/3/05.

The procedure on how to include and/or revise information in the FPDC guidelines was discussed. Conclusion: All recommendations should be submitted directly to the FPDC. Suggestion: Have the FPDC invite those with recommendations to a meeting to review/discuss the proposal.

3.6Faculty Lecturer sub-committee change.

Request: To change the current requirement that three Academic Senate members be on the Faculty Lecturer Sub Committee. The issue: A Senate member appointed to serve on the Committee becomes ineligible to be nominated as Faculty Lecturer for one year. Recommendation: Maintain the Senate liaison on the committee and eliminate the requirement for the additional two Senators.

Suggestions:

  • Have the FLC submit the proposed change
  • Have the sub committee submit the procedures for selecting the Faculty Lecturer
  • For the first of approximately two meetings, beginning in April, keep the current requirements and appoint the two additional Senators.

4.0Action

4.1Policy 1900 re: Faculty Load

M/S/C To approve the recommended revision for section #1910 of Policy #1900 with recommended paragraph changes (Garey/Chesher)

M/S/D To amend the motion on the floor and strike the last clause in the new Paragraph B (Frankel/Moreno)

4.2AAUP Statement

This was brought as a counterpart to the Academic Freedom Policy – if faculty are granted certain freedoms, faculty also have a responsibility to conform to certain standards and ethics. This statement is a general definition of ethical standards of academic behavior. Suggestion: Reference it at the end of the Academic Freedom Policy with a phrase identifying this as the corresponding responsibility of academic freedom.

Comments:

  • Document represents principles of conduct, not rules to be enforced.
  • If endorsed as either policy or a general principle document, where

would it go and how would it be distributed?

  • If it goes to BOT would it become policy? (Not if sent as a statement

of philosophy).

  • Give every faculty member a copy?
  • If policy, how would such things be measured?
  • Could this be attached to the job description?

If endorsed as a statement of philosophy – a request was made to also endorse a statement/directive as to what should be done with this document. The matter will be taken up at a subsequent meeting.

M/S/C To endorse the AAUP statement as a statement of philosophy (Chesher/Molloy)

5.0Reports

5.1President’s Report

A)Meeting with Committee Chairs

The organizational restructuring was discussed. The dialog was positive and there were legitimate concerns brought up and from the discussions a better structure should emerge.

B)Reorganization status

see item A above

C)Grievance Policy (possibly a future discussion item)

Progress is being made. Two meetings have been held - one with Senate members, and the other with Senate members and I.A. Another meeting is scheduled for this coming Friday, and all are welcome.

D)Academic visits: Robert O. Collins and Richard Falk

A student group from Global Studies wanted to know more about the Sudan and invited Professors from UCSB who are area experts on the situation to lunch prior to them addressing the entire class.

5.2EVP Report

The EVP reported the faculty hiring process is going extremely well. He also reported the reception for newly tenured faculty revealed to him how much each of them had contributed to the vitality of the college in such a short amount of time. He also commented on:

  • The robust and extremely good SIS demonstrations being held on campus this week as well as several weeks ago.
  • Based on the theme College Life – that results have exceeded expectations for how this institution is becoming transformed into a more student-centered campus – a model of what a community based institution can be – where faculty has taken the lead by supporting programs and promoting campus life

A)6-week Winter Intersession: Status Report

Avoiding crisis management, according to the EVP, is one of his most important roles. The six-week intersession was an idea - a beginning for serious dialog on how to approach some of the long-term future needs of the institution. What is important is that we give it serious attention and allow for real dialog to finding possible variations or better use of our facilities to counteract the fact that there is a great deal of underutilization of our facilities. The earliest any new intersession would be considered – Spring 07.

Comments/Suggestions:

  • Cost/benefit analysis needed
  • Other options for increasing enrollments should be explored
  • P&R has collected division input, and is finalizing a report on the proposed intersession for the Senate

B)SBCC Bond Measure

see 3.2 college plan presented by President/Superintendent J. Romo

5.3Committee Liaison Report

A)CPC Report (Tom Garey)

No report given. To be placed first on next agenda.

B)Other

6.0Adjourn

Minutes -March 23, 2005 Page 1 of 5

Academic Senate Meeting