Academic Faculty Senate
Feb 25, 2016, 2:30 – 4:30 pm
Board Room, Building 200
Minutes
Attendees:
Mike Sherburne, Kim Morrison, Donna Gibson, Laurie Dockter,
OFFICERS
Senate President
Laurie Dockter
Vice President
Ming-Lun Ho
S E N AT O R S
Applied Technology
& Business
Mike Sherburne
Counseling
Frances Fon
Jeff Drouin, Ming-Lun Ho, Frances Fon, Lisa Ulibarri, AJ Assef
Absent:
Elaine Baiardi
Minute Taker:
Christine Herrera
1.0 GENERAL FUNCTIONS
Health, Kinesiology
& Athletics
Elaine Baiardi
Jeff Drouin
•
Call to Order – 2:46
•
Public Comments – No Public Comments
Language Arts
Vacant
vacant
•
Approval of the minutes- Jan 28, 2016 and Feb 11, 2016
•
Library
Kim Morrison
Arts, Humanities &
Social Studies
Vacant
Vacant
2.0 REPORTS –
•
Science &
Mathematics
Donna Gibson
Ming-Lun Ho
Adjunct Faculty
Lisa Ulibarri
FA rep
Jeff Drouin
EX OFFICIO
Student Senate of
Chabot College
Ming-Lun Ho motioned to approve the minutes from January 28th
and February 11th, 2016, Donna Gibson seconded the motion,
minutes approved.
•
SSCC Vice President report – AJ Assef
•
Student Senate is currently working on more events for students
•
There was recently a literacy drive with reading partners
•
Student Senate will be holding a town hall meeting for this
semester, more information to follow
Senate Presidents report- Laurie Dockter
•
CEMC/DEMC numbers are up, what was said we will make is what
we are making. All money did not flow through the model the way
it should district is keeping a portion of the funds. If numbers stay
Chancellor may give 1% more.
•
District is holding onto four to eight million dollars for future
expenses for things three to four years out for example: raises, STRS
& PERS. Campus earned it but district is keeping.
1
•
What recourse do we have? Senates can talk to board directly,
facutly senate presidents together should talk to Chancellor ask her
to come to DEMC meeting and let her know the two senate
presidents will be presenting to the board.
•
Allocations are given to colleges and it is the colleges’ decision as to
how funds are to be allocated for each college.
•
Stability 2017-18 will be funded at a certain amount, want to be
high so we earn for the current year and spend for the current year
this will avoid rolling back summer enrollment.
•
Accreditation results we did well! One recommendation was that
we have more of a college-wide discussion on SLO’s.
•
A committee was formed at the district that were charged with
looking at software to replace Blackboard. The OEI Taskforce which
has faculty representation wanted to study Canvas to see if it would
be a good replacement for Blackboard. Taskforce indicated decision
was made but do not know who or how decision was made. One
concern with Canvas there is an average 65% conversion rate. There
was no discussion, no pilot between Blackboard verses Canvas there
was no process for the task force. There is pressure from the state
and there has been no comparison of the cost. This system affects
instruction directly so faculty should be involved in the decision.
•
Statement created by Faculty Senate to be submitted to district
regarding the Blackboard and Canvas decision without discussion.
Statement will be sent to LPC Faculty Senate.
•
Shared Governance update - Mike Sherburne
•
What is this Friday’s deadline?
•
IEPI or VP Walter requesting Faculty Senate to submit a shared governance
document
•
Need clarification as to what is being requested
•
Suggestion to give the organizational chart, members, statements,
committee structures, submitting a representative document
•
Clarifying that documents have not been vetted and are still in rough draft
form
•
Need to get back to meeting in order to continue the shared governance
work to get the document done
•
Curriculum - Kim Morrison
•
Curricunet process when lodging a class, new proposal or revision the dean
is to send it forward once approved but curriculum is not moving forward
for articulation or review of curriculum committee until dean has checked it
2
off. The curriculum committee voted to have the dean’s check-off not
required, they can respond or comment which will keep proposal from
being held up in the dean’s office
•
Recommendation change should have come to senate to issue a statement
so there is support behind a change in the process
•
Curriculum is and should be faculty driven
•
Someone has to manage, which should be the dean
•
Curriculum committee should manage workflow, bring back the checklist
process
•
Fix the problem don't do a workaround, don't add more work onto faculty
3.0 ACTION ITEMS
• Recommendations on shared governance - Work and IEPI visit - Shared
Governance Vision 2016
o Submit to VP Walter by Friday organizational chart, statement,
members and committee structures
• Recommendations on committee memberships
• Recommendations on hiring procedures
• Recommendations Statement to district, Blackboard verses Canvas will be
sent to LPC and district
o Donna Gibson moved to adopt resolution as written, Kim Morrison
seconded, approved (resolution attached)
4.0 DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.1
Plan for Review of Faculty Handbook
4.2
Process of producing next two year Catalog
4.3
Institutional Effectiveness committee/IEPI visit
4.4
Hiring procedures for Faculty, Classified and Administrators.
4.5
Ming-Lun Ho •
Proposed a process to resolve policy issues brought forward to
senate without forming a committee to go to faculty and staff who have
the knowledge and expertise with the certain policy.
•
Example of process attached
5.0 GOOD OF THE ORDER•
Adjournment – 4:35
3
Resolution on Online Platform Adoption
Whereas, no comparison between Blackboard and Canvas has been
studied by the OEI Task Force,
Whereas, the OEI Task Force has been told that Canvas was selected in
the absence of such comparison and without identifying who has made that
decision,
Whereas, such unilateral decision without studying both Blackboard
and Canvas carefully violates the spirit of shared governance, especially
when the adoption of an online learning platform has a direct impact on
instruction,
Be it resolved that the Academic Senate request that the District cease
and desist on adopting Canvas as the online learning platform and let the
OEI Task Force complete its work and make its recommendation.
4
Cross Enrollment UCB
Issue to consider
Update the policy for concurrent enrollment with UC Berkeley to allow students to take upper division course. The
policy is posted at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/admissions/partnerships.asp
Background
A student applied to take an upper division course at UCB with the help of our counselor Frances Fon. UCB has no
issues, but our A&R rejected the application, citing the current policy.
The cross enrollment program with UCB in the policy was refers to the pre-Fall 2015 program that gave Chabot
students the opportunity to take a class at UC Berkeley. UCB Concurrent Enrollment was free for students (UCB didn’t
charge any fees; not sure about Chabot), limited to lower-division classes, and we were provided a list of restricted courses,
meaning courses that weren't available for UCB Concurrent Enrollment students to take. Since that ended in Spring 2015,
Francis looked to establish UC Berkeley Cross Enrollment. UC Berkeley Cross Enrollment follows the provisions found under
Intersegmental Cross Enrollment:
Intersegmental Cross-Enrollment
This programs enables undergraduates who meet certain eligibility criteria AND are enrolled at any campus of the
California Community College, California State University, University of California systems to enroll without formal
admission in a maximum of one course per academic term at any campus of either of the other systems on a spaceavailable basis and at the discretion of authorities at both campuses. CSU and CA Community College students
participating in this program at UC Berkeley will be assessed a nonrefundable administrative fee of $46 per unit,
which is based on the per unit fee at CA Community colleges and is subject to change.
For more information, contact D'Nean Perkins at 510-642-9660 or visit the Office of the Registrar in 123 Sproul Hall,
Monday - Friday, 9 a.m. - noon and 1 p.m. - 4 p.m.
Both programs before and since Fall 2015 require that the UCB course be posted onto Chabot's transcript. UCB doesn’t
provide a list of restricted courses now, but Frances has already received feedback from past students attempting to take a
course through this program that the instructor wasn’t admitting Cross Enrollment students, so there are restricted courses
even if it’s not officially published anywhere. Additional eligibility requirements include:
• completed at least one term at the home campus (Chabot College) as a matriculated student
• enrolled in a minimum of six units for the current term (This means you must be enrolled at Chabot College in a
minimum of 6 units during the same semester you wish to do cross enrollment at UC Berkeley.)
• earned a grade point average of 2.0 (grade of C) for work completed at Chabot College
• paid appropriate tuition and fees at home campus (Chabot College) for the current term
5
•
•
completed appropriate academic preparation as determined by UC Berkeley (This means, as applicable, you must
meet UC Berkeley course prerequisite(s))
California residency based on the guidelines set forth by the home campus (Chabot College)
Pending issues
•
Can upper-division coursework be posted on a community college transcript?
•
Can upper-division coursework be used for unit credit? (e.g. apply 3 upper division units to the 60 required
for an associate's degree)
•
Can upper-division coursework be used to course credit? (e.g. use a substitution petition and petition for
an upper division class to meet a major, course, or GE area requirement for the AA/AS) My understanding
is, in some cases, upper-division courses may be used to certify areas on the CSU GE or IGETC.
There are no upper division course issues with cross registration at CSUEB because CSUEB provides a visiting
student transcript, instead of requiring that their course be posted on Chabot transcript.
6