O F F I C E R S
Senate President
Kathy Kelley
Vice President
Jason Ames
Immediate Past
President
Kathy Kelley
S E N A T O R S
Applied Technology
& Business
Mike Sherburne
Counseling
Shirley Pejman
Health, Physical
Education & Athletics
Jeff Drouin
Jane Vallely
Language Arts
Stephanie Zappa
Library
Jim Matthews
School of the Arts
Rachel LaPell
Science &
Mathematics
Ming-Lun Ho
Laurie Dockter
Social Science
Christina Mendoza
Adjunct Faculty
Lisa Ulibarri
E X O F F I C I O
Associated Students of Chabot College
Luis Flores
Chabot-Las Positas
Faculty Association
Shari Jacobsen
th
MSC Zappa/Matthews: To add the election of a Senate Secretary to the Action
Item agenda. The item will be assigned to 3.5.
1.2 Review and Approval of Minutes
(MSC) Jim Matthews/Stephanie Zappa: To approve the minutes of November
8 th
2013.
1.3 Public Comments—None
2.0 REPORTS I
2.1 ASCC
Flores: We have had de-stress week and students have been appreciative of the resources provided which are free. The students have really enjoyed the free Scantrons and were surprised by the goody bags of treats for their finals.
We have recently revised our constitution and have shrunken it down to our basic mission as our constitution and the rest we have moved to the by-laws. I would like to be added to the faculty email list. We have changed our name to the SSCC: Student Senate Senate of Chabot College. We have changed our titles where senators will be known as representatives, currently we have
“representatives” working as interns. Things have been going very well.
2.2 CLPFA
Jane: I have not attended a recent meeting but will be attending the next meeting.
3.0 ACTION ITEMS
3.1 Passing Periods—Room Availability for students
Kathy: President Sperling suggested that we discuss this issue. There is worry that students have no place to go. Many buildings on campus have no place for students to ‘hang out, study’ due to remodels that have not been

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012 made to the cafeteria or library. The passing periods during peak times of 15 min classes between classes is short. Students need more places to
“ultimately chill”. In the past some classrooms remained open between classes which is not longer the policy. (Kathy presents a possible motion to change policy for review by the senate)
Zappa: In my mind it sends a horrible message to students that “we don’t trust you”.
Jim: Before the electronic cards system was adopted, were the rooms unlocked? So, we are proposing going back to that? So the only reason they were locked was a presumptive security issue.
Christina: I have only been on campus shortly so what is the history of locking the classrooms?
Kathy: One of the projects instituted under President Robert Carlson using district bond funds was to create an electronic door card system to enhance security on campus.
Ming: Previously there were not any smart classrooms so the classrooms were not locked.
Jane: Am I wrong? Were we not told this year by President Sperling to open these classrooms?
Luis: This came up to the SSCC at a meeting last week and we supported this request to open more classrooms to students and we agreed that students would appreciate this. From my understanding this will a trial run during the spring.
Jim: I like this and I would only change the wording on the possible motion to say “selected”
MSC: Matthews/ Ho to adopt the following motion:
Be it resolved that the development and creation of an Educational master plan as generated by the faculty should be under the purview of the Academic
Senate. Given the amount of time this effort will involve, we respectfully the support and assistance of the college and district administrations and that faculty stipends or reassigned time be allocated to the task.
3.2 Education Master Plan—Planning
Zappa: Passes out draft resolution for Ed Master Plan.
Kathy: Some of the history on this is that for almost 2 years I have been fighting with the board at public meetings that we had an Ed Master Plan which we did not approve or see. We got a paper that was not approved and do not have one that is approved by us faculty. We propose to give the authority to lead the way for having an EMP. Move to approve this resolution.
2

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012
MSC: ( Zappa/Matthews) to adopt the following motion:
Resolution for Senate regarding Passing Periods:
In light of our single Strategic Plan Goal for the coming year, to support students’ efforts to complete their educational goals in a timely manner and in their ability to make use of time on campus to study and progress in their programs,
Resolved:
We the Academic Senate of Chabot College fully support the availability of classrooms in passing periods during the peak teaching hours of 8am to 3pm. We strongly support open classrooms at times that students are between classes so that they might better prepare for class, have places to sit comfortably and to develop collegial relationships with peers.
3.3 Credit by Exam
Kathy: We have addressed this issue and there is board policy for Credit by
Exam and there is an administrative policy that we are dealing with this that includes the APR. The thing that we struggled with this before in APC is that students will have to enroll in the class in order to get credit by exam and disciplines will determine which classes will be included in the option for
Credit-by-Exam and those discipline instructors will determine what exams students will have to take. This is not a general apportionment issue. This came from an LPC incident where we do not want the faculty policy to be overlooked by a student if a clear policy is not in place and understood by everyone.
Jane: It is fee based and not community ed.
Ming: What I am saying is that if the course is taught and the curriculum committee approves this, what is the quality assurance of this? How do we document this in general in terms of process? For example, when we take credits from an accredited college?
Kathy: It is limited to 45-60 units. So if you have a fee based program and you have 5 people who want to take the course without the instructor they can do that without the expense of the college. But it cannot happen now.
Tabled
3.4 Urging students to apply for & complete certificates AAT’s &
AFT’s
Kathy: it helps our statistics and our students if they complete these AFTs &
AATs. We had a situation almost a year ago where the institutional researcher showed by that the ECD students aren’t getting nearly as many certificates as before. This affects the College’s production and success numbers. It turned out that the Professional Development Coordinators advising students were suggesting that students could skip the certificate step and suggested students get licensed without a certificate.
3

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012
Vanessa: Are these required because they are asked by CSUs during the application process?
Kathy: They are urged but not required. However, they affect our productivity and success rates.
Mike: This would help a lot
MSC: Matthews/Ho: Urging faculty to promote AATs
3.5 Election of a Senate Secretary:
Nominations Opened. Zappa nominates Jim Matthews. Matthews elected.
4.0 DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.1 Dealing with “Academic Changes”
Kathy: I will bring up the cancellation of those 2 anthropology courses. What is happening is that things are vetted at meetings not attended by everyone, such as PRBC and CEMC.
Jim: It is my understanding from attending the Presidents Bag lunch forum meeting today that there were 3 classes that were cut out of about a thousand sections. The sections were cut to allow the college to add sections in bottleneck areas as these cut classes did not have enough enrolled students in them and this decision was made on Monday. These sections were part of the redlined potential cut sections as outlined in our Spring Schedule as the prop 30 possible cut. Three students attended the forum to fight for these class sections. Susan stated that the cuts were made under the CEMC rationales and under manager discretions.
Kathy: At CEMC there was a specific discussion about what classes would be added.
Zappa; That means that our promise to restore all sections if Prop 30 passed was broken.
(End of discussion)
Ming: Did you read the email about the curriculum committee and a psychology proposal concerning a proposed psychology statistics course to be taught by psychology faculty?
Kathy: It has been brought up. The fact that faculty have questioned other faculty’s ability and qualifications to teach in their disciplines and in their courses is disturbing. For instance, in order to get a Master’s degree in a social science you need competency, and maybe a class, in statistics as it relates to that discipline but how does that fact translate into whether that statistics class can be taught by an area (psychology in this case) outside of math? [Examples given of discipline specific applications of math and statistics to research, for example.
4

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012
Jim: This is about the AAT that Psych needs.
Kathy: Another thing questioned is the fitness of the psych teacher to teach bio psych. Biological psychology might pertain to brain function and brain development and addresses current brain research.
Jim: Which is also about the transfer degree.
Kathy: It never got voted on in the Curriculum Committee Meeting this week.
This business of being prevented from teaching to your own field is unacceptable.
Christina: I just want to say that we are urging students to get AATs but we are making it difficult for them to get the AATs. We are talking a lot about student success, and students taking a social science statistics course helps with success rates.
Jim: These interdisciplinary classes create a lot of friction between faculty.
Jane: The Psychology instructor was trying to accommodate the statewide minimum requirements for the psychology AATs and a statistics course is required.
Ming: I haven’t heard about this until after the meeting.
Christina: From my understanding is that this is tabled.
Christina: Because of that it is tabled for about a year
Jane: Could they not (Psych) put in for faculty service areas here?
Ming: The other FSA people are thinking about are those that create a riff.
Jane: All these people questioning the abilities of other instructors to teach this class now … are they on the curriculum committee? Or did they just come for the meeting?
Kathy: I am not clear on that. This can happen when there is complex discussion here that does not carry over to other committees and the committees are not represented at Senate.
Ming: Are they applying this to math general education requirements?
Jim: I don’t know what the transfer model degree said about this.
( Tabled in order to get more information )
Tabled 4.2 & 4.3
5.0 REPORTS II
5

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012
5.1 PRBC Chair
Jan Novak PRBC Chair: Here today to provide an overview of our Academic
Program Review process for this Spring. We established several improvement goals. One of the things we want to do is have program review reflect our new strategic plan. Another goal was to more closely link program review and resource allocation decisions, and to do that with a lot more transparency. We want to streamline the forms to focus on the reflection piece that engages faculty in really thinking about student learning.
We have discussed how resources are allocated and how to provide feedback on this. We have thought about having a program review of the year award.
The revised forms will be split up between years 1, 2, & 3. The detailed data sections have been pulled out and are now appendices, and the meaty reflection section is a narrative. We will be adding a new appendix to request modest facilities projects. A budgetary history appendix has been added to value the past requests and achievements. The narrative is in three sections.
The older form had a lot more questions. We now have broader prompts for people to frame their discussion.
In years 2 and 3, the form is similar to the first year as far as appendices, but the questions change to reflect the stage of the program review cycle.
All of the deans attend PRBC, so they have already reviewed this. Our timeline includes devoting Flex days to program review and the deadline with be shortly following the February Flex days. This will give everyone involved plenty of time to work on it.
Rachel: What is the potential timeline for this?
Christina: When is this due?
Jan: Late February.
Jim: I would suggest that the basic questions asked in Program Review be used to also evaluate committees. So, the PRBC could fill out their own program review for the PRBC itself in order to help in its own evaluation. The questions reflect the continuous improvement that accreditation demands.
Kathy: I think it would be great to have a program review for all of the leadership groups fill out.
Kathy: I wonder if it would be helpful to say: have you made satisfactory progress to your goals and what were your obstacles?
Jan: I think we included that in the “Where you’ve been” and included the resource obstacles. Does that work if I add to the “Where we’ve been” portion?
And possibly ask what the “other factors are.”
6

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012
Jane: Did the program review ask what happens to programs? Who is going to make those decisions?
Jan: I don’t think decides what happens to a program, but program review provides input to decisions on whether to grow or cut a program. That information is shared with the committees who make those decisions, like
CEMC.
Jan: The deans have agreed that you will submit your program review to them and PRBC simultaneously. They will then review them and submit a Dean’s summary for each division. One thing we could do is before posting the summaries, we could also send them out to faculty and student services for input.
Rachel: If deans are getting them at the same time as the college, then why are the deans getting them in the first part?
Jan: The Dean’s summaries could be useful, as the Deans have a broader perspective.
Kathy: The concern is a level of censorship on the behalf of the deans and what they submit.
Jim: They also look at their divisions and they see what fits to their own viewpoint as deans. We should really call the summary something else since they are not just summarizing but rather adding their unique viewpoints.
Jane: What if you worked hard on your program and wrote a program review and then the dean has other things in mind and tweaks it.
Kathy: That is the censorship piece.
Zappa: I hear what has been said about unintentional censorship, but it can also be a concealment of the faculty voice. I would recommend that if the deans write a summary they give it back to the faculty to read.
Ming: I was thinking that the danger would be if the dean’s summaries are the only thing read, the only piece of information, so that they aren’t just a shortcut for those that review Program Review documents. I don’t feel worried as it promotes healthy conversation but maybe it could be referred to as a “dean’s response,” as they are responding to what they see as administrators.
Rachel: A question in my mind is what PRBC wants to respond to. I would be comfortable to let the deans do the entire Program Review because I trust my deans and it lets the PRBC do less work. This is management.
Jan: One thing we will say is you might not want to do this with just your own discipline but with others as well.
Laurie: I think we are not doing a program review but rather a discipline review. You need all of it put together to have a real “program” review.
7

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012
Jan: That is an option for you but I don’t think as a college we know how to do that yet.
Laurie: Do any other schools do both?
Jim: I have seen a GE program review at another college.
Vanessa: How does the dual attendance at meetings impact the review and would it be just as much of an impact to have them at the PRBC meetings since they will be providing their own summaries?
Kathy: The fact is that the deans are still human beings who have relationships with faculty members
Jane: I have an accredited program, I have had to do student surveys and reflection and even SLOs where it doesn’t always get us anywhere. If you have an accredited program this (program review) doesn’t always get us anywhere.
Luis: Going back to the deans’ summary and the faculty, it would be best as a student rep, if the faculty would trump the dean’s summary and be just a dean’s response.
Rachel: I want to clarify that in no way are the reviews written by the deans and not the faculty … but what I hear a lot is the murky role of deans. I mean we have shared governance here and they are paid to manage. It is the model of what a manager does. The deans are supposed to manage despite the faculty knowing best about their classrooms. That is why I am for less work as it would be the most efficient of results. We are weighting ourselves with more paperwork instead of less.
Mike: We know what is best with our discipline and not our division. The way I look at it, the only people that are secure around here are the faculty and if there is an issue with the dean, you ought to do something about it. If faculty and management get along then it works. There are some things that need to be done without rebellion.
Jane: I feel now that the term “manager” is interesting because right now we have 3 deans and additional “coordinators.” That is why I brought up the summary thing.
Lisa: The summary thing is problematic, because it is a manager thing for us, especially when it comes to dean’s issues where they had no idea what we do and their interpretation is skewed.
Jane: Are the PRBC and CEMC looking at how to cut classes for spring?
Jan: The answer is “no”. At yesterday’s PRBC meeting Susan shared with us that on Monday the college added 10 FTEF of new classes to the schedule.
8

Chabot Academic Faculty/Senate Minutes of December 13, 2012
Susan also added 3 classes to replace the 3 classes that were cut. But that is not a PRBC decision—it’s a CEMC and administrator decision.
(End of Discussion)
Senate meeting ended at 5:05 pm
9