CHABOT COLLEGE ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE
Board Room, Building 200
Thursday, October 12, 2006– 2:21 p.m. to 4:55 p.m.
A P P R O V E D M I N UT E S
Submitted by Sally Stickney and Chad Mark Glen
Senator Attendance: Applied Technology & Business (Michael Absher); Counseling (Sally
Stickney & Rachel Aziminia); Health, Physical Education, & Athletics
(Nancy Cowan & Vacant); Arts & Humanities (Diane Zuliani);
Language Arts (Francisco Zermeño & Vacant); Library (Norman
Buchwald); Science & Mathematics (Dave Fouquet & Ming Ho); and
Social Sciences (Barbara Ogman & Michael Thompson); Adjunct
Faculty (Anne Brichacek).
Guests:
Dr. Robert Carlson (College President); Dr. Ron Taylor (Vice
President, Academic Services), Dr. Carolyn Arnold (Institutional
Researcher and Grants Coordinator), Nolly Ruiz (Curriculum Chair),
Shari Jacobson (Faculty Association Representative); Robert Lu
(Vice President ASCC); Jane Church (Articulation Officer); and
Laurie Dockter (Institutional Planning and Budget Council- IPBC,
Chair).
Presiding Officers:
President Chad Mark Glen, Vice President Michael Absher.
ITEM
1.0 GENERAL FUNCTIONS
1.1 Call to Order: President Glen called the meeting to order at 2:21.
1.2 Approval of the Minutes: Ming Ho moved to approve the September
28, 2006 minutes and Nancy Cowan seconded. With minor revisions
from Mike Absher, the motion carried.
2.0 REPORT S
2.1 College President: Dr. Carlson reported that there are concerns about
the number of classrooms available, as buildings are taken out of
service. Some scheduling alternatives include afternoon, early morning,
and Friday classes in addition to other options. The building schedule is
as follows: Pool is going down in December. Buildings 800 and 900
down in Fall 2007. Buildings 400 and 700 down in Spring 2008.
Buildings 300 and 500 down in Fall 2008. It takes about a year of
construction when buildings go down. Dave Fouquet asked about fast
tracking of buildings awaiting funds contingent upon the current measure
on the state ballot. Dr. Carlson explained that if the measure doesn’t
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
pass other options will be discussed. The College Enrollment Management
Committee (CEMC) is looking at the final classroom scheduling options. Using
different time slots will help with space during the loss of buildings 800 and 900.
Portable classroom options would cost two million dollars, so going that route
would result in the loss of one building in the building project. Changing classes
to off site can be a problem and is not without costs. We are trying to keep
classes on campus. Cost of lost students needs to be considered as well. There
are no easy solutions and we’re looking at and considering the options. Ming Ho
believes the building program disruption will not be as big a problem if we
schedule classes on Fridays. Dr. Carlson agrees Fridays need be better utilized
and it’s a good idea/option to change block scheduling timelines of classes. Sally
Stickney wants to make sure the new class options are going to be marketed to
our students. Mike Absher suggested more weekend classes. This is good for
vocational programs and needs to be looked into for implementation. Dave
Fouquet suggested not just Friday only classes but a scheduling pattern that
includes Friday classes. At one point 80% of the 5 unit math classes were daily
math classes. This needs to be looked at during the block scheduling
discussion. Scheduling models should be looked at with regards to starting
classes on the hour. This is needed for each type of class. Room considerations
can change the schedule with vacancy gaps in scheduling time borders. Dave
feels there may be some problems. Nancy Cowan asked if having classes on
Sundays has been considered. Expanding the Nursing program would involve
the use of a Sunday. Dr. Carson doesn’t see Sunday classes as a viable option.
Nancy believes we need to look at offering classes on Friday evenings. Robert
Lu points out the student needs should be the first priority when scheduling
classes. Have students been consulted? CEMC has said we need to use
college hour for classes. Dr. Carlson believes the college should be using
afternoons for more classes. The time has come for more afternoon classes.
How will the student be best served is the question Robert Lu wants considered
as decisions are being made. College hour is important for student activities.
Certain clubs and programs use classrooms during college hour. Diane Zuliani
facilitates her class in the same room used by other clubs and wanted to know
who has been scheduling these rooms. President Glen indicated that the
scheduling of extra curricular activities happens after the classes have begun.
The first choice is classes and then clubs get in after that. Dave Fouquet
indicated that college hour causes gaps in scheduling classes. Gaps in
scheduling prior to block scheduling allowed for office hours to be utilized by
more students. If we are going to change blocks, when will it be done? Dr.
Carlson indicated that in the 2007-08 school year we need to have new
scheduling blocks. We are we going to look at it now. President Glen asked
Mike to help us keep the discussion of a particular topic during the College
President’s Report to 10 minutes. Glen asked Dr. Carlson about the changes
that may take place as a result of Chancellor Cota announcing her retirement at
the same time as LPC’s President Haliday. Dr. Carlson thinks it would be a
good plan to fill the Chancellor position first and then conduct the LPC
Presidential search. Dr. Carlson applauds Dr. Cota for her excellent job as our
chancellor.
2
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
2.2 Robert Lu, ASCC Report: ASCC report. The Club Day event went well
but did not have as many people as last year. A Halloween program is
planned for Halloween day. „ASCC would like to do donation toy drives for
the holidays in the near future. „We’re trying to get wireless internet
connection in the cafeteria, and upstairs in building 2300, and other places
where students can eat and have conversation.
President Carlson
commented that the college will have Wifi in the Cafeteria by the end of the
year. Wifi is already in building 200 and the library. Computer server security
is not a problem. Who the Internet Service Provider (ISP) provider needs to
be determined and in what key areas on campus Wifi will be available.
„We’re meeting with Melinda Matsuda about the Director of Student Life
position to replace the opening created when Anthony Gutierrez left.
Discussions are ongoing. Ideas have been put forth and an interim-position
has been announced. President Carlson responded that the college is
revaluating the administrative structure. The Director of Student Life position
may not be a replacement in the Student life area. A full time position is held
by Nina Kiger at this point and it’s only for Student Life. The president is
impressed with how Nina is doing in the current situation. The Administration
changes need a timeline for changes to the structure. It is time for
administrative restructuring ideas to come forth. „ASCC Senators to go to a
leadership conference in Los Angeles this semester. All first time senators
are to go to the training. „Mike Absher commended the ASCC on the things
being done and the wireless internet plan.
2.3 Chad Mark Glen, Senate President’s Report: There have been complaints
from divisions about the Unit Plan process. This is being discussed by an
IPBC Subgroup chaired by Ron Taylor. The group will meet next Wednesday
the 18th at 2:00 PM in room 402. Please e-mail Ron and copy Chad on any
suggestions on improving the Unit Plan process.
UNIT PLAN DISCUSSION: The Discipline Plan is now incorporated in the
Unit Plan. Dave Fouquet stated that the Faculty Association (FA) thinks the
discipline plan and the unit plan are separate. Discipline plan is contractual
because it comes from the FA negotiated CEMC. This committee allocates
FTEF, which is part of the discipline plan. Barbara Ogman asked for
clarification on the faculty’s responsibility for the discipline plan. Dave
Fouquet said that the contract gives the faculty the right to do the plan. If it is
not done by faculty, then it’s only done by administration (deans).
President Glen indicated that Las Positas (LPC) does not want to do another
Associate in Science (AS) degree survey. After our Senate has discussed
the State Academic Senate AA/AS degree information, we will look at sending
out a ballot to vote on what to do regarding the AA/AS degree distinction,
units, etc. LPC has proposed an AS degree GE Alternative that Nolly or Ron
will present later in the agenda.
3
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
The Curriculum’s Student Learning Assessment Cycles (SLOACs)
subcommittee met today to discuss developing Course Level SLO
recommendations. We’ll here from them later in the agenda. Carolyn Arnold
recently attended a Student Success conference in San Diego and will be
working with faculty on the college-wide SLOACs committee, most likely
focusing on reading. She and Rachel LePell will need to coordinate with each
other and avoid duplication of efforts.
There needs to be a faculty wide announcement sent out about these two
committees, with adequate advance notice, about the time, location, and
agenda for their next meetings. The committee needs to 1. draft their charge,
2. outline what SLOACs are and are not at Chabot, 3. create strategies for
implementing course level SLOACs, and 4. a timeline. These 4 items will
come back to Senate for us to provide input on and then have the committee
proceed with their work. Please have interested faculty contact Nolly or
Carolyn to get involved.
Nothing formal is being developed in Program Level SLOs at this time. The
Program Review Committee should encourage programs to develop program
level SLOACs.
Sally Stickney joined Chad for the eLumen SLOAC tracking software
presentation in the President’s office. Dr. Carlson was not at the meeting and
his office was used because the Board Room was already in use. This
software as created by faculty in Wisconsin after the new accreditation
standards were created. The software provides anonymity for faculty. This
means that no one can tell which faculty members did or did not submit SLO
data in the software. It was created so faculty do not have to spend an
inordinate amount of time trying to document and track SLOACs.
2.4 Public Comments: Mike Absher expressed his continued concerns about
the Facilities Committee. He sent a letter to Committee Chair, Tim Steele
regarding his worries about the lack of a person to go to have the committee’s
ideas heard. The implementation of the committee’s plans does not seem to
be happening and are being disregarded. He has deep rooted concerns
about the technology enhanced classrooms. No one is available to help on
technical problems. There are only four classrooms with technology and they
are not being handled well. So, if we have 400 rooms with technological
problems, who is going to address the problems? The Facilities Committee is
not able to follow up on some of the work done by the first committee. This is
a faculty issue. Faculty need to have some way to get the problems fixed.
It’s a bigger problem and Absher feels the Senate should take a stand on this
issue. President Glen stated that we need leadership in this area, asking Dr.
Taylor to be a clearing house to help on this matter. Dr. Taylor responded
that the lateness of rooms being ready at the beginning of the term was a
negative factor. In addition, training wasn’t adequate. There needs to be a
broader message to the faculty about scheduling of these rooms, which was a
4
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
problem as well. Dale Wagoner is the point person for getting scheduled into
these rooms. So send scheduling requests to Dale Wagoner and technical
concerns to Steve Piatetsky. President Glen said that faculty have indicated
that they do not want to rotate through the prototype rooms this semester. It
has been too trying on the students and faculty and they want to finish the
semester in the same room they started. Next semester would be better
suited for rotating classes through the four enhanced classrooms. Diane
Zuliani goes back to the original committee report that was not followed. This
further supports Mike’s concerns about committee recommendations not
being implemented. There is a need for the college to look at the plan
provided by this group. Dr. Taylor brought up Rachel LePell’s comments as
the last College Council meeting regarding the issue of what do we expect on
the part of the faculty in terms of expertise in understanding the technical
aspects of technology in teaching. Ming Ho indicated that faculty need to
have the support and know who supervises all of these changes and make
them priorities. If there are issues, can we prioritize it immediately?
3.0
ACTION ITEMS
3.1 AS Degree Recommendations: Deferred to address the discussion items
below.
4.0
DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.1 Program Introduction Process: This item was move to later in the agenda
to accommodate Laurie Dockter’s presentation.
4.2 2007-08 Draft Strategic Plan: Laurie Dockter distributed the 2007-08
Strategic Plan themes and objectives. It was discovered that the handout
was not the latest version of the strategic plan. Laurie agreed to send Chad
the correct version for distribution to the Senators.
Laurie said the
Institutional Planning and Budget Council (IPBC) creates a rolling three year
strategic plan and picked out the priority objectives that need to be addressed
this year. IPBC decided to review where they were, and decided on the
objectives. Unit plans should focus on these priorities. Governance groups
have been assigned responsibilities of varies priority objectives and are now
planning their work. IPBC has been reviewing internal and external data in
determining the priorities. The summaries of last year’s unit plans still needs
to be reviewed.
Go to IPBC website to review the minutes of meetings and where IPBC is
looking at their objectives. Some plans are ongoing and others need more
work. More Distance Ed classes are in the works. The SLOACs priority is
the biggest thing now. Mike Absher stated that funding and how it affects the
plans in a direct way has not happened yet in IPBC. Laurie Dockter
indicated that IPBC looked at hiring faculty and setting priorities, which links
planning and budget. Mike Absher felt that IPBC was more reactionary and
5
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
needs to work in collaboration with the budget committee. Laurie Dockter
asks the question of where this should be discussed. Dr. Taylor says it
needs to be discussed in the Oct. 18th Unit plan meeting. President Glen
commends Laurie on how IPBC has made discernable themes, delegated
objectives, and asked for feedback. Diane Zuliani questioned a college wide
acceptance of student learning outcomes. Diane is concerned that there is
no college wide discussion. Dr. Taylor indicated that there has been college
wide discussions, citing the flex day activities and convocation discussions.
Diane Zuliani feels that more discussion needs to take place and asked if it
can be done on a flex day.
4.1 Program Introduction Process: Dr. Taylor provided handouts of the
Program Introduction Process. He apologized that it has LPC on the heading.
LPC and Chabot have worked on this process together. It should say
Chabot-Las Positas. There was fundamental streamlining of the process by
LPC. Chabot can do the final cosmetic version. The flow chart represents
what the Chabot Senate looked at before. President Glen suggested we look
at our May minutes to see if what we wanted changed is reflected in the
document. If the changes have been made and just small clean up is needed
then it can go forward as an action item.
4.3 AS Degree State Senate Recommendations: LPC drafted an AS degree
proposal that was discussed at the District Curriculum Council. Nolly Ruiz
presented the following proposal.
AREAS OF GENERAL EDUCATION
ASSOCIATE IN SCIENCE DEGREE
Area
Title 5 Area Units
Language and Rationality
D.
English Composition
D. 1.
3
Communications and Analytical Thinking
D. 2.
3
Natural Sciences
A.
3
Humanities
C.
3
Social and Behavioral Sciences
B.
3
Physical Education
E.
1
E.
3
Program-based GE*
American Cultures
0
Mathematics (proficiency)
0
19
TOTAL
*Associate in Science Degree Program-based GE (Title 5 Area E):
Subject to Curriculum Committee review and approval, the faculty in the
discipline containing the degree program determine, based on program
needs and a clearly defined program level learning outcome, which
course or courses will satisfy this area. The discipline may require a
specific course, or allow students to choose from a list of courses or GE
area(s). Any courses allowed to satisfy this area must be chosen from
the areas defined by Title 5.
6
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
These are the areas defined by Title 5.
Area
Number of units required by Title 5
A. Natural Science
3
B. Social Science
3
C. Humanities
3
D. Language and Rationality
1. English Composition
3
2. Communications and
3
Analytical Thinking
E. Local Option
Minimum of 3 units
In the CLPCCD this area consists of
in this area.
Writing and Critical Thinking
American Institutions
Areas of Health
Physical Education
TOTAL
18 (minimum)
In addition, Title 5 mandates minimum standards for English and
mathematics. The current standard is eligibility for English 1A and
mathematics proficiency at the level of Elementary Algebra.
Nolly Ruiz stated that AA account for about 80% of degrees awarded. AS
degrees make up about 20% of the degrees awarded. The Curriculum
Committee will be discussing this proposal as well. President Glen indicated
there are pros and cons. One of the advantages is that discipline faculty can
direct students to determine what class they think would be appropriate. A
draw back may be that some faculty do not want to try to figure out the GE
recommendations for their degree. Ming Ho stated that prior to doing this, we
need to decide what an AA or AS is and means. Diane Zuliani commented
that the local option AA is seen as a breath of competency, and the AS is more
focused. Both degrees need the critical thinking aspect. Nancy Cowan
commented that not all students need the curriculum that leads to transfer. But
that is why Nursing keeps their degree an AA rather than an AS. Sally
Stickney noted that the AS/AA degree is confusing to students. President
Glen asked Senators to poll their divisions to see what their colleagues think
about the above proposal. Barbara Ogman said she did not care about MA or
MS and that it’s not an issue. Maybe we should look at what the students need
and how it affects them. What is the vision for our students college wide?
President Glen asked Senators to post and/or distribute the above proposal to
there divisions and get feedback various disciplines for next week’s Senate
meeting.
Articulation Officer, Jane Church and Curriculum Committee Chair, Nolly Ruiz
provided the answers to following State Academic Senate Survey:
(This was used as the basis for our discussion.)
1. Does your college offer an associate degree based solely on a general
education pattern? Such degrees may carry the name of “university
studies,” “transfer studies,” “liberal arts,” or something similar.
7
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
Yes (page 92 of Catalog)
No
2. If you answered “no,” skip this question. If you answered “yes” to
question above, what general education pattern is used as the basis
for the degree? (Check all that apply.)
IGETC
CSU GE Breadth
A locally determined GE pattern
Other (Please specify below)
•
•
Selected Studies where the student selects 18 units based on
person or vocational need.
Currently offered as Liberal Studies, but are requesting name
change to Liberal Arts.
3. At the current time, Title 5 regulation and system guidelines are not
clear about the permissibility of offering degrees based on a general
education pattern, and as a result, practice varies considerably across
the system. Title 5 states that an associate degree requires an area of
emphasis comprising “at least 18 semester or 27 quarter units of
study taken in a single discipline or related disciplines” as well as
completion of general education requirements (section 55806). The
Curriculum Handbook explicitly states that completion of IGETC or
CSU GE Breadth fulfills the requirement for an area of emphasis. What
action would your faculty like the Academic Senate to pursue in
revisions to Title 5?
Clearly state that degrees based on any general education pattern are
acceptable (IGETC, CSU GE Breadth, locally determined GE pattern).
Clearly state that degrees based only on IGETC or CSU GE Breadth are acceptable.
Clearly state that degrees based on any general education pattern are NOT
acceptable.
4 At the current time, use of the terms Associate of Arts (AA) and
Associate of Science (AS) is not standardized among California
community colleges. An issue raised in the Senate’s review of the
AA/AS degree is the potential value of standardization of the terms for
communication with students and those outside the community
college system. With that in mind, do your faculty think that a
standardization of the usage of these terms would be beneficial?
Yes
No
5. What type(s) of associate degree does your college currently offer?
Both the AA and AS
A single associate degree (either the AA, AS, or other designation)
8
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
6. If you answered "both the AA and AS", are your GE requirements,
including options, for the AA and AS exactly the same?
Yes
No
7. Briefly describe how you determine which programs are offered under
an AA vs. an AS.
AA = 25 GE units
AS = 19 GE units
Discipline faculty determine whether their degree will be an AA or
AS.
8. Is there a clear distinction between which majors are awarded under
an AA versus which majors are awarded under an AS at your college?
Yes
No
9 Should the Academic Senate pursue a statewide standardization in the
use of the terms Associate of Arts and Associate of Science since
there is no current standard?
Yes
No
President Glen commented that Chabot is poised to contribute to the state wide
discussion on the Associates degree because of the work we have been doing
in this area. The state academic work on this topic will inevitably shape some
of what we do locally regarding our degree philosophy.
4.4 eLumen Overview: Tabled until the 10/19/06 Senate meeting.
4.5 Accreditation Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Cycle:
5.0
REPORTS II
5.1
CLPFA: Dave Fouquet will give a report at the 12/19/06 Senate meeting.
5.2 Senate Committees: No report.
5.3 Senators: No report.
6.0
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
At-Large Faculty Vote on Senate Constitution Changes— Chad Mark Glen;
District Faculty Hire Procedures— Chad Mark Glen;
Administrator Evaluations— Stephanie Zappa;
Minimum Qualifications Equivalencies for Faculty— Chad Mark Glen;
General Education Reciprocity Program Certification— Jane Church;
9
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
October 12th, 2006
6.6 Counselors Assigned to Divisions— Mike Absher;
6.7 Online Instruction— Jan Novak.
6.8 LDTP (CSU Lower Division Transfer Project) — Jane Church
Meeting adjourned at 4:55
Next Meeting— October 12, 2006
Fall Meetings— 2nd & 4th Thursdays: 10/19* 11/9, and 11/30*.
(*Special Meetings— not on 2nd or 4th Thursday).
SS/CMG
10