SEN MIN 9-23-2009 APPROVED 10-14-09
Academic Senate
M I N U T E S
September 23, 2009
3:00 – 5:00 pm BC 214
Members Present: Ignacio Alarcón (President), Barbara Bell, Cindy Bower, Stan Bursten, Gary Carroll, Steve Davega, Stephanie Durfor, Esther Frankel, Jack Friedlander, Tom Garey, Atty Garfinkel (Student Senate), David Gilbert, Kathy Molloy, Marcy Moore, David Morris, Kenley Neufeld, Dean Nevins, Kathy O’Connor, Lou Spaventa, Ana María Ygualt, Oscar Zavala
Members Excused: Armando Arias
Guests: Kyle Rokes (The Channels), Jan Schultz
1.0 Call to Order
1.1 Approval of Agenda – so approved
1.2 Approval of Minutes, September 9, 2009
M/S/C To approve the meeting minutes of September 9, 2009 (Molloy/Bursten)
2.0 Information
2.1 Updates to Program Reviews are due October 15.
The information has been emailed to everyone.
2.2 Curriculum Workshop for Department Chairs, Designees, and interested Others.
October 2nd, 1:15 – 3:00 pm, BC Forum: AA/AS Degrees with Areas of Emphasis;
process for including SLOs in Course Outlines of Record (COR); review of
information required in COR: Changes in Title 5; plus hours; stand-alone courses;
CurricUNET overview. The EVP, chair and vice chair of CAC will be heading the
workshop to.
2.3 Committee on Teaching and Learning will review/update guidelines for assignment of
readers to classes, in the event that there is funding in the future. The committee will
be creating a scoring guide.
2.4 Facilities Project Update. Planning and establishment of times will take place for the
modernization projects: Campus Center, Humanities Building, IDC Building,
Alternative to SoMA Building, La Playa Stadium, LRC
Tom Garey said that based on the decision to postpone SoMA, there a need to schedule
alternate projects. The handout “Estimated Bond Spending Revised September 22 2009”
identifies how Measure V and state funding is to be allocated. The college has sold $47
million in bonds; 85% of that money needs to be spent by November 2011, as the law
requires, or the status of the bond changes relative to taxation.
The handout “Preliminary Estimated Deferred Maintenance Project Schedule for Measure V
Funded projects” lists all the projects that are in the pipeline with start and completion dates.
The projects are arranged according to scheduling, not necessarily priority. The timelines are
very tight and as the projects progress adjustments may need to be made.
The handout “Humanities Building Improvements” is the kick off meeting agenda and
outlines the project scope and budget. There was concern that too much of the budget for the
humanities building improvement would be spent on non construction costs.
2.5 Announcement: An Invitation to participate in celebration of David Wong, who is
being honored at the Board of Trustees meeting on Sept. 24, for 25 years of service.
3.0 Reports
3.1 President
Superintendent/President Andreea Serban will be at our next Senate meeting to talk about the Partnership for Student Success. She felt the last Senate meeting minutes did not accurately reflect her position on PSS.
3.2 CPC Liaison Report/IA Liaison Report (Tom Garey)
Some of the terminology normally associated with Fund 41 had changed and created some
confusion about the information in the handout titled “Description of the Utilization of the
Equipment Fund (known as “Fund 41”)”. For 2010-11 and beyond the change would be that
whatever is left in these funds line item allocations for each department should be created for
routine annual purchases of non-inventoried equipment, even if it is over $5,000.
Kathy O’Connor said that those allocations are to be used for any equipment item that has
been traditionally funded with Fund 41 money.
Jack Friedlander clarified that the dollar amount doesn’t matter. These allocations would be
for equipment that is needed every year.
Tom said that it may not be the same item needed every year.
Jack said that it could be for a category of items. Program Review would address brand new
items that may need to be ranked. Jack said that he had emailed everyone this morning stating
that the only items that go into the Program Review are new resource requests and if you are
asking for restoration. Restoration requests should only be made for what is essential to the minimal operation of your program. It was asked if an accurate record of where the cuts were made is available and Leslie Griffith would be sending out that information.
For computer related items (servers too): If you have a computer item on the refresh cycle you
do not need to make a formal request, it’s already in the cycle. If the item was bought through
a grant and needs to be replaced - this would be a resource request, a new item in your
program review.
David Morris asked if IT covers items such as DVD players, projectors, etc.? Will this be
resolved before the October 15 Program Review deadline?
Kathy O’Connor said there is a gap and there are ongoing discussions at DTC and ITC.
Classroom equipment does not always get upgraded. Departments should not have to be
responsible for their classroom equipment. This needs to be a campus wide initiative and this
will be discussed at ITC/DTC. A resolution of how classroom equipment will fall into the
replacement cycle should be ready by the October 15 Program Review deadline. This would
not be new for the Program Review anyway.
David Morris said this was unfortunately not in the original Program Review and as a consequence there is no record. Kathy responded that there is a record and Jim Clark will soon
provide that information when it is available.
Jack Friedlander said that this is the case, that the record exists, and that this is not a new
resource request.
3.3 Liaison Reports
3.3.2 Kenley Neufeld
AP did not meet; at their next meeting, P & R will be looking at College Priorities for 2009-
2010 and the Planning Agendas.
Facilities/Safety/Security meeting: 1) Purchased and are installing 50 hand sanitizing
stations at Labs and food service areas. 2) Safety training for committee members is ongoing.
Reminder to everyone: report any facilities/health/safety issues to your dean/department chair
first and report any security issues to Security. Marcy Moore asked if this committee had
any project to alleviate parking. A suggestion and something that could help would be to move the school vans to the lower beach parking lot.
EOPS/Financial Aid: Because they are receiving too many requests and because there is not
enough time to address them, the committee will no longer handle appeals for financial aid.
Of note some stats on last year vs this year: 26% increase in Financial Aid applications; 46%
increase in loan applications; 54% increase in Financial Aid students not meeting satisfactory
academic progress.
3.3.3 Kathy O’Connor
CAC: All new/modified courses appearing in the printed Schedule of Classes have been
approved. The Stand-Alone Course approval training was successfully given to all CAC
members. A Curriculum Workshop is scheduled at the BC Forum on 10-2-09 at1:10 p.m. The
CurricUNET training will begin November 4 through November 6 with times and location to
be determined.
ITC: Superintendent/President Andreea Serban discussion highlights: 1) How program review will be utilized to submit new technology requests 2) ITC ranking process and
timeline 3) Support infrastructure for distance education.
VP Information Technology Paul Bishop report highlights: 1) All campus classrooms are
now ‘smart’ classrooms 2) Upgrading the network infrastructure with Measure V funds
3) Developing disaster recovery plans.
Dean Ed Programs Technology Doug Hersh report highlights: 1) OIAs, tutors, categorical
cuts and how loss creates opportunity 2) Faculty evaluation pilot project 3) Moodle transition
and faculty training.
DTC: Banner upgrade has been delayed until April 2010
Matriculation: Backfill for 09-10 was approved. Need to start work on the next budget with
the anticipated budget cut of 52-64%.
COI: First meeting will be September 25
3.4 Partnership for Student Success Report (Kathy Molloy)
A meeting has been scheduled with Andreea Serban, Ignacio Alarcón, Dean Nevins and
Kathy Molloy to discuss the Partnership for Student Success. The handout identifies all the
programs that have benefited from the Partnership and the need for a more stable source of
funding.
Ms. Molloy reported the programs in the Partnership had all received a general fund cut of
67.5%; however, the Academic Achievement Zone received a 100% cut.
Ignacio and Dean will be working on a spreadsheet of the Partnership for Student Success
over the last two years, to be able to compare to the reported current budget. The information
should be ready for the next meeting when President Serban is scheduled to attend.
3.5 ASB Report (Student Senate)
Atty Garfinkel is a student senate representative and student senate state regional representative. Atty had a recommendation/suggestion about the restoration of tutors for the Gateway, Math Lab, LRC/Writing Center and Athletic Achievement Zone. Is there anything that would prohibit the establishment of an alternate program for tutors? Rather than getting paid, the student tutors could receive credit units in education or something similar. This could offset the finances for the college and still benefit students. There would of course be the one unit fee; a fee that could possibly be waived by establishing a scholarship and in lieu of being paid the student/tutor would receive units and have the enrollment fee waived.
3.6 EVP Report (Jack Friedlander)
The Moodle Symposium has been postponed. To be rescheduled for later in the Spring 2010
semester.
4.0 Action
4.1 Senate Report 2008-2009 to Board of Trustees
(Draft was distributed at the September 9 meeting)
M/S/C To approve the 2008-2009 year end Senate Report for submittal to the Board of
Trustees (Nevins/Frankel)
5.0 Hearing/Discussion
5.1 Process and Timeline for Replacement and New Full Time Faculty
Positions (pg. 10 and 11-15)
October 28 – hearing new position proposals;
November 18 – ranking of new position proposals.
The Academic Senate meeting timeline needs to be changed to accommodate hearings and
ranking.
Marcy Moore asked why spend the time on new positions process when there is no money.
Jack Friedlander said that the Board of Governors may waive the full time faculty obligation
again, but at this time it is an unknown. Oscar Zavala said that the hearings help him
understand the challenges of departments.
Ignacio said that we need to decide if we are going to rank new and replacement positions.
Dean Nevins mentioned that unless there is a significant change in a Department and/or
Program we should not rank replacements. Jack Friedlander said that in the event that there is
a workload reduction we could always come back and rank replacement positions. The
workload reduction is already happening; we have been cutting TLUs so we are not over our
funded FTEs. Esther Frankel said that what we have done in the past has been sufficient.
Departments have a choice to replace/not replace. The department knows what is best for that
department. Kathy O’Connor said that there is a caveat: if a department delays a replacement
position the department should not lose their replacement status.
Jack Friedlander said that departments can now articulate in greater detail their needs in their
Program Review.
M/S/C To hear proposals for new positions beginning 3:00 p.m., at the Wednesday, October 28, 2009 Academic Senate meeting (Nevins/Garey)
5.2 Academic Senate Bylaws Update (pg. 16-46)
Request to Senators: Please review the rotation list of Division elections. Request to Liaisons: Please review the current practices functions and responsibilities, of each committee. Please send corrections, suggestions, changes to Senate President.
Recommendation to add subcommittee: To keep the connection with the Academic Senate, make the Partnership for Student Success Steering committee a subgroup similar to the Faculty lecturer committee and zero TLUs.
5.3 Structure of Senate Discussion for Input in Building of Budget 2010-2011
The ranked information needs to be ready to go to the Superintendent/President by February 16, 2010. P&R and ITC committees will need to take this into account, so that feedback to Senate is received and acted on by February 10. Kathy Molloy recommended that the Senate has a meeting
on February 3, with only this item. That would give P&R and ITC some time during the first week
of classes in the spring. There was a consensus to do this. So, the 2010 revised Academic Senate meeting schedule February 3: Senate meeting (not Steering); February 10: Senate meeting.
6.0 Adjourn
Minutes 9-23-2009 Page 2 of 5
Academic Senate Meeting